determining a standardized milling protocol for domestic...

36
DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES· Allen W. Sturdivant H.L. Goodwin, Jr. Lori A. Koop M. Edward Rister Bill D. Webb" TAMR C Consumer Product Market Research Report No. CP 3-96 August 1996 Research conducted and reported herein funded by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Advanced Technology Program (project # 99902-25, 1992-93), the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (projects H3807 and H3914), and the United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Southern Region. The authors are former Research Assistant, Associate Professor, Research Assistant, and Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University; and Research Chemist, Rice Quality Lab, USDA-ARS, Beaumont, Texas.

Upload: trinhhanh

Post on 28-Mar-2018

219 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIESmiddot

Allen W Sturdivant HL Goodwin Jr

Lori A Koop M Edward Rister

Bill D Webb

TAMR C Consumer Product Market Research Report No CP 3-96

August 1996

Research conducted and reported herein funded by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Advanced Technology Program (project 99902-25 1992-93) the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (projects H3807 and H3914) and the United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service Southern Region

The authors are former Research Assistant Associate Professor Research Assistant and Professor Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University and Research Chemist Rice Quality Lab USDA-ARS Beaumont Texas

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

Texas Agricultural Market Research Center (TAMRC) Consumer Product Market Research Report No CP 3-96 August 1996 by Allen Sturdivant formerly of the Department of Agricultural Economics Dr HL Goodwin Jr Texas Agricultural Market Research Center LA Koop and Dr ME Rister all of the Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University and Dr BD Webb of the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

The Texas Agricultural Market Research Center (TAMRC) has been providing timely unique and professional research on a wide range ofissues relating to agricultural markets and commodities ofimportance to Texas and the nation for more than two decades TAMRC is a market research service ofthe Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and the Texas Agricultural Extension Service The main TAMRC objective is to conduct research leading to expanded and more efficient markets for Texas and US agricultural products Major TAMRC research divisions include International Market Research Consumer and Product Market Research Commodity Market Research and Contemporary Market Issues Research

PREFACE

This paper documents the development of a standardized milling protocol for the Texas Advanced Technical Research Program (TA TRP) Aromatic Rice Project (project 999902-25) The focus of this study was to evaluate the effects of numerous production and post-harvest handling techniques upon qualitative factors of raw and cooked rices To avoid undue distortion of study results occurring as a consequence of varying the milling procedures across samples a standardized protocol was developed for all sample treatments That is adjustments to mill settings for individual treatments to account for differences in the rices (ie moisture bran layer thickness kernel size age variety etc) would not be allowed so the true differences between samples could be attained The adopted protocol had to be suitable thus for a wide range of rice types even though it is recognized that a given milling procedure is not optimum for all rice types Further the method used needed to remain within the realm of industry milling reality The Jasmine cultivar planted on the recommended planting date and grown with advised nitrogen levels and application timings (and with all other variable inputs at advised levels for the Beaumont area) was used for all of the samples evaluated in determining the preferred milling protocol

Funding for the T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project was provided through the State of Texas competitive grants Advanced Research and Advance Technology Program for CY 1992-93 Additional support was forthcoming from other sources including several members of the rice industry and other agencies The T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project team consisted of two groups the College Station project team and the Beaumont project team The College Station project team consisted of Dr HL Goodwin Jr (principal Investigator) Dr Edward Rister (CoshyPrincipal Investigator) Allen Sturdivant (Research Assistant) Lori Koop (Research Assistant) and Jim Bob Ward (Systems Analyst) all of the Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University The Beaumont project team included Drs James Stansel and Bill Webb (both CoshyPrincipal Investigators) Janice Delgado Naomi Gipson and Shari Williamson Dr Stansel is Professor and Resident Director of the Texas Agricultural Research and Extension Center (TAREC) at Beaumont Dr Webb is project leader for the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab at Beaumont and Ms Delgado Ms Gipson and Ms Williamson are Lab Technicians at the Beaumont USDA-ARS facility

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several individuals provided equipment milling expertise and other insights to the project team bull Steve Rocca of Satake-USA Inc and Biki Mohindra and Dr John Kendall of Riviana

Inc were instrumental in providing the new Satake mill for milling experimental samples

bull Ted Klimski and Jerry Freymuth of Riviana Foods Inc and Mickey Haramoto and Kazuyuki Izumo of Satake Inc provided invaluable engineering expertise in constructing the mill and making the mill operational

bull Dr John Kendall Director of Quality Assurance with Riviana Foods Inc provided input regarding Thai milling protocol and aid in developing the project milling protocol

bull Robert Freeman and Gene Markwood provided operational and maintenance support during the various milling periods associated with the project

bull Riceland Inc Satake Inc and Riviana Foods Inc cooperated with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station in funding the costs associated with constructmg shipping and installing the Satake mill at the Beaumont T AREC

bull Robert Laborde Cyndi Fazzino and Sheila Hawley assisted in financial administration of the project

bull Anna McClung USDA-ARS Beaumont research geneticist provided rice samples for the proJect

bull BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM University Geosciences Department assisted with developing rice milling experiment protocol

bull Jocelyn Cook Davee Crowell and Teco Johnson of the USDA-ARS Beaumont office provided substantial administrative and logistical assistance with coordinating day-to-day operations and acquiring supplies for the aromatic rice project

bull Many others at the Beaumont Agricultural Research and Extension Center too numerous to mention provided support throughout the project duration

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Preface bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bullbull 11

Acknowledgements 111

List of Tables v

List of Exhibits v

List of Figures vi

Milling Equipment 3

Preliminary Milling Trials 4

Mill Settings 4

Potential Milling Combinations 5

Preliminary Milling Results 6

Final Milling Results 6

References 7

Appendix A Schematics of Satake Milling Machine 14

Appendix B Graphical Representation of Milling Trial Data 19

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 2: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

Texas Agricultural Market Research Center (TAMRC) Consumer Product Market Research Report No CP 3-96 August 1996 by Allen Sturdivant formerly of the Department of Agricultural Economics Dr HL Goodwin Jr Texas Agricultural Market Research Center LA Koop and Dr ME Rister all of the Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University and Dr BD Webb of the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

The Texas Agricultural Market Research Center (TAMRC) has been providing timely unique and professional research on a wide range ofissues relating to agricultural markets and commodities ofimportance to Texas and the nation for more than two decades TAMRC is a market research service ofthe Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and the Texas Agricultural Extension Service The main TAMRC objective is to conduct research leading to expanded and more efficient markets for Texas and US agricultural products Major TAMRC research divisions include International Market Research Consumer and Product Market Research Commodity Market Research and Contemporary Market Issues Research

PREFACE

This paper documents the development of a standardized milling protocol for the Texas Advanced Technical Research Program (TA TRP) Aromatic Rice Project (project 999902-25) The focus of this study was to evaluate the effects of numerous production and post-harvest handling techniques upon qualitative factors of raw and cooked rices To avoid undue distortion of study results occurring as a consequence of varying the milling procedures across samples a standardized protocol was developed for all sample treatments That is adjustments to mill settings for individual treatments to account for differences in the rices (ie moisture bran layer thickness kernel size age variety etc) would not be allowed so the true differences between samples could be attained The adopted protocol had to be suitable thus for a wide range of rice types even though it is recognized that a given milling procedure is not optimum for all rice types Further the method used needed to remain within the realm of industry milling reality The Jasmine cultivar planted on the recommended planting date and grown with advised nitrogen levels and application timings (and with all other variable inputs at advised levels for the Beaumont area) was used for all of the samples evaluated in determining the preferred milling protocol

Funding for the T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project was provided through the State of Texas competitive grants Advanced Research and Advance Technology Program for CY 1992-93 Additional support was forthcoming from other sources including several members of the rice industry and other agencies The T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project team consisted of two groups the College Station project team and the Beaumont project team The College Station project team consisted of Dr HL Goodwin Jr (principal Investigator) Dr Edward Rister (CoshyPrincipal Investigator) Allen Sturdivant (Research Assistant) Lori Koop (Research Assistant) and Jim Bob Ward (Systems Analyst) all of the Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University The Beaumont project team included Drs James Stansel and Bill Webb (both CoshyPrincipal Investigators) Janice Delgado Naomi Gipson and Shari Williamson Dr Stansel is Professor and Resident Director of the Texas Agricultural Research and Extension Center (TAREC) at Beaumont Dr Webb is project leader for the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab at Beaumont and Ms Delgado Ms Gipson and Ms Williamson are Lab Technicians at the Beaumont USDA-ARS facility

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several individuals provided equipment milling expertise and other insights to the project team bull Steve Rocca of Satake-USA Inc and Biki Mohindra and Dr John Kendall of Riviana

Inc were instrumental in providing the new Satake mill for milling experimental samples

bull Ted Klimski and Jerry Freymuth of Riviana Foods Inc and Mickey Haramoto and Kazuyuki Izumo of Satake Inc provided invaluable engineering expertise in constructing the mill and making the mill operational

bull Dr John Kendall Director of Quality Assurance with Riviana Foods Inc provided input regarding Thai milling protocol and aid in developing the project milling protocol

bull Robert Freeman and Gene Markwood provided operational and maintenance support during the various milling periods associated with the project

bull Riceland Inc Satake Inc and Riviana Foods Inc cooperated with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station in funding the costs associated with constructmg shipping and installing the Satake mill at the Beaumont T AREC

bull Robert Laborde Cyndi Fazzino and Sheila Hawley assisted in financial administration of the project

bull Anna McClung USDA-ARS Beaumont research geneticist provided rice samples for the proJect

bull BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM University Geosciences Department assisted with developing rice milling experiment protocol

bull Jocelyn Cook Davee Crowell and Teco Johnson of the USDA-ARS Beaumont office provided substantial administrative and logistical assistance with coordinating day-to-day operations and acquiring supplies for the aromatic rice project

bull Many others at the Beaumont Agricultural Research and Extension Center too numerous to mention provided support throughout the project duration

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Preface bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bullbull 11

Acknowledgements 111

List of Tables v

List of Exhibits v

List of Figures vi

Milling Equipment 3

Preliminary Milling Trials 4

Mill Settings 4

Potential Milling Combinations 5

Preliminary Milling Results 6

Final Milling Results 6

References 7

Appendix A Schematics of Satake Milling Machine 14

Appendix B Graphical Representation of Milling Trial Data 19

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 3: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

PREFACE

This paper documents the development of a standardized milling protocol for the Texas Advanced Technical Research Program (TA TRP) Aromatic Rice Project (project 999902-25) The focus of this study was to evaluate the effects of numerous production and post-harvest handling techniques upon qualitative factors of raw and cooked rices To avoid undue distortion of study results occurring as a consequence of varying the milling procedures across samples a standardized protocol was developed for all sample treatments That is adjustments to mill settings for individual treatments to account for differences in the rices (ie moisture bran layer thickness kernel size age variety etc) would not be allowed so the true differences between samples could be attained The adopted protocol had to be suitable thus for a wide range of rice types even though it is recognized that a given milling procedure is not optimum for all rice types Further the method used needed to remain within the realm of industry milling reality The Jasmine cultivar planted on the recommended planting date and grown with advised nitrogen levels and application timings (and with all other variable inputs at advised levels for the Beaumont area) was used for all of the samples evaluated in determining the preferred milling protocol

Funding for the T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project was provided through the State of Texas competitive grants Advanced Research and Advance Technology Program for CY 1992-93 Additional support was forthcoming from other sources including several members of the rice industry and other agencies The T A TRP Aromatic Rice Project team consisted of two groups the College Station project team and the Beaumont project team The College Station project team consisted of Dr HL Goodwin Jr (principal Investigator) Dr Edward Rister (CoshyPrincipal Investigator) Allen Sturdivant (Research Assistant) Lori Koop (Research Assistant) and Jim Bob Ward (Systems Analyst) all of the Department of Agricultural Economics Texas AampM University The Beaumont project team included Drs James Stansel and Bill Webb (both CoshyPrincipal Investigators) Janice Delgado Naomi Gipson and Shari Williamson Dr Stansel is Professor and Resident Director of the Texas Agricultural Research and Extension Center (TAREC) at Beaumont Dr Webb is project leader for the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab at Beaumont and Ms Delgado Ms Gipson and Ms Williamson are Lab Technicians at the Beaumont USDA-ARS facility

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several individuals provided equipment milling expertise and other insights to the project team bull Steve Rocca of Satake-USA Inc and Biki Mohindra and Dr John Kendall of Riviana

Inc were instrumental in providing the new Satake mill for milling experimental samples

bull Ted Klimski and Jerry Freymuth of Riviana Foods Inc and Mickey Haramoto and Kazuyuki Izumo of Satake Inc provided invaluable engineering expertise in constructing the mill and making the mill operational

bull Dr John Kendall Director of Quality Assurance with Riviana Foods Inc provided input regarding Thai milling protocol and aid in developing the project milling protocol

bull Robert Freeman and Gene Markwood provided operational and maintenance support during the various milling periods associated with the project

bull Riceland Inc Satake Inc and Riviana Foods Inc cooperated with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station in funding the costs associated with constructmg shipping and installing the Satake mill at the Beaumont T AREC

bull Robert Laborde Cyndi Fazzino and Sheila Hawley assisted in financial administration of the project

bull Anna McClung USDA-ARS Beaumont research geneticist provided rice samples for the proJect

bull BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM University Geosciences Department assisted with developing rice milling experiment protocol

bull Jocelyn Cook Davee Crowell and Teco Johnson of the USDA-ARS Beaumont office provided substantial administrative and logistical assistance with coordinating day-to-day operations and acquiring supplies for the aromatic rice project

bull Many others at the Beaumont Agricultural Research and Extension Center too numerous to mention provided support throughout the project duration

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Preface bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bullbull 11

Acknowledgements 111

List of Tables v

List of Exhibits v

List of Figures vi

Milling Equipment 3

Preliminary Milling Trials 4

Mill Settings 4

Potential Milling Combinations 5

Preliminary Milling Results 6

Final Milling Results 6

References 7

Appendix A Schematics of Satake Milling Machine 14

Appendix B Graphical Representation of Milling Trial Data 19

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 4: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several individuals provided equipment milling expertise and other insights to the project team bull Steve Rocca of Satake-USA Inc and Biki Mohindra and Dr John Kendall of Riviana

Inc were instrumental in providing the new Satake mill for milling experimental samples

bull Ted Klimski and Jerry Freymuth of Riviana Foods Inc and Mickey Haramoto and Kazuyuki Izumo of Satake Inc provided invaluable engineering expertise in constructing the mill and making the mill operational

bull Dr John Kendall Director of Quality Assurance with Riviana Foods Inc provided input regarding Thai milling protocol and aid in developing the project milling protocol

bull Robert Freeman and Gene Markwood provided operational and maintenance support during the various milling periods associated with the project

bull Riceland Inc Satake Inc and Riviana Foods Inc cooperated with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station in funding the costs associated with constructmg shipping and installing the Satake mill at the Beaumont T AREC

bull Robert Laborde Cyndi Fazzino and Sheila Hawley assisted in financial administration of the project

bull Anna McClung USDA-ARS Beaumont research geneticist provided rice samples for the proJect

bull BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM University Geosciences Department assisted with developing rice milling experiment protocol

bull Jocelyn Cook Davee Crowell and Teco Johnson of the USDA-ARS Beaumont office provided substantial administrative and logistical assistance with coordinating day-to-day operations and acquiring supplies for the aromatic rice project

bull Many others at the Beaumont Agricultural Research and Extension Center too numerous to mention provided support throughout the project duration

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Preface bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bullbull 11

Acknowledgements 111

List of Tables v

List of Exhibits v

List of Figures vi

Milling Equipment 3

Preliminary Milling Trials 4

Mill Settings 4

Potential Milling Combinations 5

Preliminary Milling Results 6

Final Milling Results 6

References 7

Appendix A Schematics of Satake Milling Machine 14

Appendix B Graphical Representation of Milling Trial Data 19

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 5: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Preface bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bullbull 11

Acknowledgements 111

List of Tables v

List of Exhibits v

List of Figures vi

Milling Equipment 3

Preliminary Milling Trials 4

Mill Settings 4

Potential Milling Combinations 5

Preliminary Milling Results 6

Final Milling Results 6

References 7

Appendix A Schematics of Satake Milling Machine 14

Appendix B Graphical Representation of Milling Trial Data 19

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 6: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1 Calculation of Force on Milling Chambers in GramInches 8

2 Final Force Settings and Those Selected for Milling 8

3 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16 9

4 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 10

5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 11-16c 11

6 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c 12

7 Summary of T A TRP Milling Protocol Determination 13

LIST OF EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT TITLE

A-1 Illustration of Laboratory-Scale Friction Mill 15

A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill 16

A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice 17

A-4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System 18

v

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 7: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Sensory Lab at Texas AampM University in College Station Texas To evaluate the effect of growing conditions production and post-harvest handling practices on Jasmine 85 traditional practices were altered considerably The factors hypothesized to potentially influence quality included

bull different growing environments bull changes due to grain age and temperature levels bull grain moisture at harvest bull grain drying techniques and temperature levels bull rough rice storage environments bull different rice production practices and bull post-milling packaging and storage conditions

The project was designed to compare the different experimental treatments (above) with other domestic aromatic and non-aromatic varieties imported Thai Jasmine and a baseline treatment grown and handled under the following set of conditions 1) Jasmine 85 2) Texas main crop grown at Beaumont 3) planting date of May 7 1992 4) 67 of the recommended nitrogen rate of 120 lbsac 60 applied at preplant - 40 applied at panicle differentiation 5) harvest at 20 field moisture 6) ambient air drying with supplemental heat at 2 75 humidity conditions 7) air conditioned (70-75 OF) warehouse-like storage for 90 days 8) a set milling protocol 9) packaging in a 25 pound poly-woven bag with liner and 10) a 30 day post-milling and packaging air-conditioned storage period In total in excess of 250 different treatments were planned for evaluation Jasmine 85 experimental treatments are compared to the baseline rice treatment to isolate superior cultural and post-harvest handling methods for aromatic rices Those experimental treatments in conjunction with a thorough evaluation of Thai Jasmine and other aromatic rices provide a valuable knowledge base to use in developing new aromatic rice vanetles

More information about the Texas AampM Aromatic Rice Study may be obtained from

Dr M Edward Rister Texas AampM University Department of Agricultural Economics College Station TX 77843=2124

Telephone 409845-3801 Fax 409845-4582 E-mail E-RISTERTAMUEDU

2

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 8: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16 20

B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16 21

B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16 22

B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 23

B-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16 24

B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16 25

B-7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to T ri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 11-16c 26

B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c 27

B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c 28

B-10 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 29

B-11 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11-16c 30

B-12 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 11-16c 31

vi

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 9: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Satake Inc and shipped to Satake-USA in Houston Texas Engineers at Riviana constructed the mill at their facility in Houston to ensure that all parts had arrived and were functionaL This was indeed a fortunate precaution because the mill arrived in Houston essentially un assembled and needed extensive scaffolding skids and elevator engineering before it could be moved to Beaumont (the designated milling site) and brought on-line

The new mill was Satake model BA-3 type consisting of cwo rice whiteners configured in a successive sequence design (see Exhibits A-2 through A-4 in Appendix A) This model setup could mill a 40-55 pound test sample of rough rice (including 4 regular milling passes and 2 water mill passes) in approximately one hour and fifteen minutes The mill consisted of several components including a feeding hopper a bucket elevator a paddy husker with a separator the friction mill (first BA-3) the water mill (second BA-3) a bran suction fan a bran cyclone and a compressor (see Exhibit A-3 Appendix A)

Preliminary Milling Trials

Prior to the final milling of all rices to be evaluated by physical chemical and expert sensory analyses it was necessary to establish a suitable protocol for milling A suitable protocol must incorporate both quality and practicality concerns That is the milling protocol agreed upon must not only achieve some acceptable level of quality in milled rice but also be practical in commercial applications A priori certain physical quality attributes were set based upon industry standards and concerns with respect to maintaining the maximum aromatic quality possible in the milled rice The physical quality criteria included (1) Satake whiteness reading of 420 or greater (2) broken kernels less than 20 (3) bran removal in the 8-10 range l

(4) surface lipids of 4 or less and (5) reasonable maintenance of aroma as determined by parts per billion of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP)(500-800 ppb is an average range for the industry) These criteria are used routinely at the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas

Mill Settings

Determination of mill settings involved combinations of (1) number of friction andor water passes (2) amount of force applied in each BA-3 chamber as calculated by the amount of weight on the mill lever arm and the distance of the weight from mill orifice and (3) mill flowshythrough Both chamber pressure and mill flow-through was determined for both the upper and lower mill chambers (The upper BA-3 chamber is a friction mill only while the lower BA-3 chamber has water-milling capability)

After preliminary on-site milling done by Satake and Riviana engineers as well as Riviana consultants the project team decided the initial milling pass should apply approximately three time the force of subsequent millings Appropriate rice kernel flow rates were determined as follows

bran removal was calculated as a percentage of brown rice weight

4

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 10: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC AROMATIC RICE VARIETIES

For a number of years domestic rice producers and millers have been concerned with the rising influx of imported Thai Jasmine rice entering the United States It has been estimated that imported Thai Jasmine now comprises between 20-30 of the milled white long-grain market (Haines) or over 300000 tons (Schnepf) Currently imported Thai rices do not seem to be competing with traditional non-aromatic Us long-grain varieties This is evidenced by the fact that US per capita consumption of rice has grown at an annual rate in excess of 3 since 19901991 The increase in imported Thai Jasmine has been attributed in part to the increase in the number of Asian immigrants to the United States and their strong preference for aromatic imports over domestic long-grain varieties Yearly consumption of rice by Asian Americans is 150 pounds per capita (VIIailes and Livezey) Should preference for the import also increase in the non-Asian community the domestic rice industry could be affected In an attempt to compete with the imported Jasmine rice US breeders released a domestic aromatic variety Jasmine 85 in 1989

Jasmine 85 along with other aromatic and non-aromatic domestic varieties were compared with imported Jasmine in a 1990-1991 Texas AampM aromatic rice study of over 250 Asian-American households in Houston Texas (Goodwin et al) Although Jasmine 85 rated favorably in the study the imported Thai rices were clearly preferred Study interviews with Asian-American consumers indicated their preferences for rice were due to very complex factors including raw and cooked grain appearance (ie color or whiteness) aroma level taste and texture Imported Jasmine has an aroma which has been described as popcorn-like particularly during cooking Cooking quality of the imported Jasmine also exhibits characteristics more closely associated with medium-grain rices (ie the grains while being separate still adhere to one another) Both raw and cooked forms of the imported Jasmine are whiter than domestic milled long-grain rices

Consequent to the Goodwin et at project the State of Texas Advanced Technology Program funded a follow-up aromatic rice study at Texas AampM in 1992-1993 Focus of this ATP project was to compare domestic Jasmine 85 grown and handled under various conditions to imported Thai Jasmine in order to identify and quantify those characteristics for which Jasmine 85 is either deficient or superior Emphasis was on identifying those elements of quality which are controllable by management as opposed to those which are genetically inherent in the respective varieties Quantitative assessments of physical and chemical rice quality parameters were conducted by the USDA-ARS Rice Quality Lab in Beaumont Texas East Bernard Rice Marketing Inc in East Bernard Texas and Riviana Foods Inc in Houston Texas Expert sensory panel evaluations of rice samples were also conducted at the USDA Southern Regional Research Center in New Orleans Louisiana as well as the Department of Animal Sciences

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 11: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

This yielded the force combinations shown in Table 1 page 9 Force is shown in graminches similar to footlpounds The force combinations were grouped according to naturally occurring gaps in the forces (as calculated) as shown in Table 2 page 9 The mean and standard deviation for all force combinations were x = 53145 and s- 334 Forces near the mid-point of the groupings were selected for final evaluation and are shown in bold type in Table 2 The two heaviest settings were omitted from final evaluation based upon the low aroma observations and from excess breakage observed during practice milling (during mill set-up and calibration) Resultant final milling scenarios included four milling pass combinations (3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and four force settings (173 gin 277 gin 377 gin and 580 gin) A summary of the sixteen milling combinations and force settings for the first friction pass and all subsequent milling passes is shown in Table 3 page 10

Preliminary Milling Results

Results of the milling scenarios are shown in Table 4 page 11 This data includes (1) Satake whiteness readings (2) Hunter Tri-stimulus Colorimeter readings (3) bran removal (4) lipids (5) 2-AP levels by gas chromatography (6) brokens and (7) rice temperature readings during milling For more information about the above tests please consult tiTATRP Aromatic Rice Project - Objectives Design and Implementation (Rister et al) In general greater force and additional milling passes were associated with increased (a) whiteness bran removal and brokens and (b) decreased lipids and 2-acetyl-l-pyrroline (2-AP) These relationships are more easily identified graphically and are shown in Figures B-1 through B-6 in Appendix B Each of the pertinent milling quality criteria are paired with whiteness considered to be a primary factor of concern in this milling experiment

Sample numbers evaluated are shown by squares in one of four quadrants of each figure Essentially samples which exceeded minimum milling criteria were judged to be superior to others Only sample 15 exceeds the whiteness 1 brokens criteria Samples 8 11 12 and 15 exceed the whiteness 1 bran removal criteria while samples 8 11 12 15 and 16 exceeded the whiteness 1 lipids criteria These same samples exceeded the whiteness 1 2-AP criteria

Final Milling Results

Based upon these results meetings were held with John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc to determine a potentially appropriate milling regime for the subsequent T A TRP research project After lengthy discussions it was decided that an additional more refined set of milling scenarios be evaluated with the principal focus on varying the force settings in an attempt to fine-tune milling procedures Twelve additional milling scenarios were identified as shown in Table 5 page 12 Results of the milling scenarios are summarized in Table 6 page 13 which indicates data of the same type as that in Table 4 Differences in milling quality criteria are less apparent in these more concentrated evaluations than in the preliminary milling trials Once again graphically representation of the milling scenarios results assist in evaluating the alternatives based upon the previous criteria Scenarios 11 11b 11c 13 13b and 15 exceed the minimum quality criteria for whiteness 1 brokens All scenarios except 13c exceeded the minimum

6

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 12: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Milling Equipment

At the beginning of the A TP study it was recognized that milling protocol was a significant part of the post-harvest handling process and eventual milled rice quality Milling protocol had to be standardized across all treatments and varieties to avoid adding variation into the analyses of color and texture The Thais milling procedures include use of a combination of carborundum (abrasive) friction and water milling protocol for much of the aromatic rice shipped to the US At first thought it was perceived a similar milling protocol should be used in this project to realize similar final milled rice quality But a major issue involved identifying suitable lab-type equipment capable of timely processing the large quantities of rice associated with this projects various treatments

At this projects onset the only abrasive mill available for project use was the small-scale (250 gram capacity) laboratory batch-type TM-05 Grain Testing Mill (Satake Engineering Co Tokyo Japan) This mill would complete one pass of a 25-30 lb sample of brown rice in slightly more than an hour with one person constantly in attendance Obviously this was not an efficient milling method for the 250+ project samples to be multiple-pass milled over the course of the project The other available alternative was to use a laboratory-scale friction mill (Satake Model SB-2B) which could be converted to a water mill for the final finishing milling passes of an experimental sample (see Exhibit A-I Appendix A) The project team worked on milling protocol with the friction mill for a week managing in that time to mill 15 samples using a protocol of 4 friction passes and 2 water passes for a total of 6 passes Many time-related problems were encountered during these initial millings The mill required extensive cleaning and setup time before each sample could be milled Each pass took an average of 30-45 minutes to complete The friction element and screens had to be thoroughly cleaned after each water pass and the entire mill had to be cleaned and vacuumed prior to milling a new sample The minimum time to completely multiple-pass mill one sample was approximately 4h hours with one person continuously in attendance

Related to the choice of milling protocol is the transferability of that protocol to US commercial rice processing The US milling industry has a substantial investment in both abrasive and friction milling capital equipment however the inadequate capacities associated with the lab equipment of both types available for use on the project contributed to further searching for another approach Simultaneously it was recognized that the use of abrasive milling and multiple break milling generates lower levels of heat during the milling process probably contributing to the greater relative whiteness of the imported aromatics Also since much of the Thai rice is water polished to produce a pearl-like luster on the rice experimentation into water milling techniques was also deemed necessary

Subsequently project investigators began informing rice industry millers of the projects objectives and protocol Upon hearing of the potential milling dilemma Biki Mohindra and John Kendall of Riviana Foods Inc suggested Riviana could assist in providing a much larger Satake friction mill which would more closely replicate a commercial milling machine but could still effectively (time-wise) mill the small samples (55 Ibs of rough rice per replicate) involved in the project Steve Rocca of Satake-USA coordinated design of the milling equipment and relayed the information to Satake Inc in Japan The mill components were manufactured in Japan by

3

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 13: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

C

Table 1 Calculation of Forcea on MillinS Chambers in GramInches

WEIGHT NOTCH SETTINGSb

WEIGHTS NOTCH 1 NOTCH 4 NOTCH 8 NOTCH 12 NOTCH 15

2 4 5200g 103 173 267 360 430

6 7 9 10320g 165 277 427 576 688 11 12 13 14435g 225 377 580 783 15 935

16 17 18 19 20635g 378 600 823 1120 1342

a Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice) x weight

b Small numbers appearing in the upper left-hand corner of the cells corresponds to Column 3 in Table 2

Force measurements stated in graminches

Table 2 Final Force SettinK~ and Those Selected for Millini

GROUP DEGREE OF MILLING TABLE 1 CELL b FORCE (gins)

A very light 1 6 2 11 103 165 173225

B light 37 267277

C medium 4 12 16 8 5 360 377 378 427 430

D heavy 9 13 17 576580600

E very heavy 10 14 18 688783823

F extremely heavy 151920 935 1120 1342

bull Selected forces shown in large boldface type

b Refers to the small number appearing in the top left corner of the cells in Table 1

8

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 14: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

(1) Paddy husker and separator - set at 3 (of 8 settings) for z 95 hulling (2) Mill chamber 1 - set at 134 (of 3)2 and (3) Mill chamber 2 - set at ps (of 3)

Potential Milling Combinations

Based upon the foregoing process an estimate of the total potential number of reasonable milling combinations was made If the flow rates and the initial z 31 upper (1) to lower (2) chamber force ratios are assumed the following possible milling scenarios existed

bull 2 chambers (upper and lower) bull 4 weights (200g 320g 435g and [200+435]g) bull 6 pass combinations (2FIW3

2F2W 3FIW 3F2W 4FIW 4F2W) and bull 15 distance settings (on notched lever arm)

The 2FlW and 2F2W passes were eliminated from further evaluation when (after initial milling trials) it was observed that utilizing only two friction milling passes was not producing a high enough whiteness reading in the resulting milled rice Also according to Harampto and Izumo of Satake multiple passes with lighter weights would probably retard loss of aromatic properties (an important quality consideration) thereby more closely approximating the multiple passes utilized in Thailand on the rice being imported into the US Five space settings (notches 1 4 8 12 and 15 counting from the mill orifice) were selected for further evaluation Therefore the number of potential milling scenarios was 2 x 4 x 4 x 5 or 120 Such a large number of possibilities far exceeded the number of milling scenarios possible to be evaluated within the time available for this experiment Therefore a reasonable method for reducing this number was required

Goodwin in consultation with BL Turk Jr of the Texas AampM Geosciences Department pursued the following mathematical approach to focusing on several options representative of the total range of possibilities Force applied to each milling chamber by the plate covering the orifice was calculated by means of a simple lever-arm formula as follows4

Horizontal Distance (weight to orifice) --------------------- x weight Vertical Distance (pivot point to orifice)

2 The dial settings on the milling chambers control rate of flow of rice from the feeding hopper into the chamber and are in intervals of 1fs up to 3 with 1s being the lowest rate of flow

3 F = Friction mill chamber W = Water mill chamber 4 Notches on fulcrum arm = 2916 inches apart

Distances from first notch to fulcrum = 1 inch and Length of fulcrum arm = 25 inches

5

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 15: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Table 4 Determination of TATRP Milling Jgtrotocol Resultant Data Samples 1-16 Sample Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water 3825 4105 4004 414 399 411 414 437 410 414 425 426 416 409 432 435

2 Transparency after last water mill 364 387 396 393 384 370 424 429 355 414 408 406 372 370 400 357

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 94 108 106 110 102 107 112 123 105 111 116 116 109 106 118 117

rTrimiddotStimulus ~Ior 1 Lightness after last water mill 6687 686 6857 6923 6804 6897 6913 6973 6823 691 6963 6926 686 685 6956 6934

2 Hunter A after last water mill 133 667 -1 -234 -2 -3 -4 -4 -046 -2 -13 -26 -1 -103 133 -4

3 Hunter B after last water mill 13 1237 1257 1253 1297 1206 1263 1236 1213 1236 1243 12 1196 1183 1236 116

after last water mill 718 813 574 718 718 1053 670 813 1053 861 670 909 670 134 766 1100

ILipids

Total lipids () 52 48 51 45 55 32 32 29 34 34 35 29 Al 37 31 30

39 33 34 31 27 24 27 31 46 30 38 34 44 33 34 28

8228 7011 7413 7114 7392 6180 6693 6422 6354 6614 5866 5730 7952 5799 7098 5697

I Brokens

based upon brown 160 229 159 191 160 201 177 243 175 212 223 246 156 202 155 322

nee

re-friction base 65 0 ere-water base 64 0 J

after 1st friction 80 82 83 86 78 81 82 84 79 84 84 85 83 82 85 85

after last friction 86 92 91 93 88 90 91 94 92 91 93 94 92 94 88 95

75 72 72 73 76 78 74 74 72 74 72 76 75 76 76

I I I I I

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 16: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

criteria for whiteness bran removal and all scenarios except 11 lIb 13 and Dc exceeded the minimum exceeded the whiteness lipids criteria

Results of all the milling scenario evaluations are summarized in Table 7 page 14 As indicated scenarios 11 and 15 performed positively in all predetermined criteria Based upon this summary and an apparent marginal superiority of scenario 15 (as gauged by better scores in whiteness) this combination was selected for use as the milling regime in the final TATRP experiment Therefore using the Satake BA-3 equipment as engineered for this experiment milling was performed using 4 friction and 2 water polishing milling passes with 377 glin of force on the first milling pass (435g weight on the 4th notch counting from the orifice) and 165 gin of force on the five subsequent milling passes (320g weight on the 1st notch counting from the orifice)

This milling regime is more time consuming than that typically employed in commercial milling in the United States which generally involves 2-3 friction passes and no water polishing except on premium brand name products However the purpose of the exercise was to approximate the grain appearance and quality characteristics present in Thai Jasmine imported rice Alterations in normally employed milling protocol were therefore deemed necessary

REFERENCES

Goodwin HL Jr ME Rister RE Branson JW Stansel BD Webb lB Ward and KKunz Market Potential for Domestic Rice Varieties Among Asian Americans Technical Report Texas Agricultural Market Research Center Report No CPM-1-92T November 1992

Haines Kit Personal communication October 1992 Houston Texas

Rister ME LA Koop AW Sturdivant and HL Goodwin Jr TATRP Aromatic Rice Project Objectives Design and Implementation Faculty paper forthcoming in December 1996

Schnepf Randall D US Rice Import Update Rice Situation and Outlook USDA-ERS RCS-1995 November 1995 pp 28-34

Wailes E and] Livezey US Rice Imports and Domestic Use Rice Situation and Outlook USDAshyERS 62 October 1991

7

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 17: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Table 6 Determination of TATRP Protocol Resultant Data Samples 11-16c

Sample Number 11 13 15 11b 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c

Satake Whiteness Meter

1 Whiteness after last water mill 422 421 426 420 428 422 422 432 431 428 434 419 422 435 437

2 Transparency after last water mill 337 403 435 407 422 378 437 441 428 391 403 414 394 433 413

3 Milling Degree afterlast water mill 110 114 118 114 118 112 117 121 120 116 120 114 114 122 122

ITri-Stimulus Color

1 Lightness after last water mill 6943 6933 6980 6967 7047 6940 6990 7040 7063 7007 7020 6963 6987 70040 7050

2 Hunter A after last water mill -23 -67 07 -13 middot43 -10 -07 -37 -37 middot40 -07 -10 middot13 17 -30

3 Hunter B after last water mill 1287 1280 1263 1283 1253 1303 1273 1250 1260 1263 1230 1293 1273 1283 1233

after last water mill 993 704 909 719 688 921 607 693 786 657 700 678 769 893 619

ILipids

Total lipids () 36 43 33 41 34 53 46 34 30 39 33 49 49 36 32

30 31 22 29 26 26 28 18 18 28 28 29 27 18

917 822 832 845 828 752 801 757 749 814 771 740 807 925 740

I Brokens

l Ifre-friction base 65 0

160 175 185 190 305 153 235 290 285 193 230 170 248 248 355

ere-water base 64 0 J

after lst friction 84 88 84 86 91 87 90 86 91 90 95 86 90 90 95

after last friction 83 82 81 84 84 84 84 84 85 83 83 85 86 83 86

after last water 94 96 97 101 100 104 102 101 105 98 103 101 102 102 104

14

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 18: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Table 3 Determination of TATRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samples 1-16

02erational Data Sam2le Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

1 Number of Passes --------3 F 1 W ----------shy ------------3F2W ---------shy --------4F2W----------shy ---------AF2 W ----- shy

Friction Mill 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

2 Weights Used (g)

1st break 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435 200 320 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435 200 200 320 435

3 Weight Settings3

1st break 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

4 Physical Force Appliedb

1st break 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580 173 277 377 580

2nd break and thereafter 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225 103 103 165 225

bull Notch position counting out from friction chamber b Force on milling orifice calculated in graminches

9

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 19: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

APPENDIX A

14

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 20: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Table 5 Determination of T A TRP Milling Protocol Operational Data Samoles 11-16c

SamEle Number

11 13 15 11b 12b Db 14b 15b 16b lic 12c Dc 14c 15c 16c

Number of Passes 4 F 1 W ---4F2 W ----shy --4F 1 W -----shy ---------------4 F2 W ----------------shy -----4F 1 W ---shy --------------4 F2 W ---------------shy

Friction Mill 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Water Mill 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

Weights Used (g)

1st break 435 200 435 435 435 200 320 435 435 435 435 435 435 435 435

2nd break and thereafter 320 200 320 200 320 200 200 200 320 200 435 200 200 200 435

Weight Settings

1st break 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 6 12 1 4 6 12

2nd break and thereafter 1 1 1 5 4 2 2 5 4 4 1 1 2 4 1

Physical Force Applied

1st break 377 173 377 377 580 173 277 377 580 478 783 225 377 478 783

2nd break and thereafter 165 103 165 198 277 103 126 198 277 173 225 103 126 173 225

11

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 21: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Exhibit A-2 Top and Side View of New Satake Mill

OJCD CD r--

D~F JI Ti-

J ~~~

~ a~- li

r - l4 Uf --l --1 - -7

I--

m m

--

OJ

CD bbPit ~

~ ~

lM

I I I 1

~ I J M CD-

JA

n

(uJ ~e (Qc ~ 4 ltC~

f~uJer 10

r

-r~~~ pq~ ~tlzr ~ ~~ rty rlMJAS

-shy

bull I bullJS----I bullbullJ J-I- I h

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill Manual

16

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 22: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Table 7 Summary of TATRP Milling Protocol Determinationabull

Criteria I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Sample Numberb

14 15 16 11 12 13 14 15 16 11c 12c 13c 14c 15c 16c b b b b b b

Brokens + + + + +

Bran I + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Removal

Total Lipids + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Surface + + + + + Lipids

2-AP Levels + + + + +

All Criteria + + Met

a Note Sample 11 failed to qualify under the 1st round of milling based upon brokens but passed on the 2nd round

b These sample numbers correspond to the information presented in Tables 3 and 5

13

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 23: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Exhibit Amiddot4 Illustration of the Husk Collection System

ApS 2ljA

~1(j1~

-t)OeuroS JOf Q1gt 11fO~ tr1middot

Source Satake Model BAmiddot3 Type Mill Manual

18

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 24: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Exhibit Amiddott Illustration of Laboratorymiddotscale Friction Mill (Satake Model Sbmiddot2B)

PADDY

WHITE RICE

Source Satake Onepass Rice Pearler (Model SB-2B) ManuaL

15

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 25: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Reading

80

70

60

50

40

30

20 Milling Scenarios

I

Lightness -166

~ bullbullbullbullunmiddot~III bullbullbull

~ ~ ___ juu_~u_ut---=n~ ---t ~u bull

-- - ~

4 5 6 7 8 9 1 10 13 14 15 i 16

87f6860 685716923 684016897 691316973168231691016911316926168601685016956 6934

Whiteness +1382514105404041403990411041401437014100 4140 4250 4260i416014o901432014350

I I I I I ILightness-Whiteness12862Ii2755128172783 2850 2787 27731260312723 2770 2713 266611270012760 263612584

I Ii

Whiteness = Satake reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus reading

Figure B-1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tn-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1-16

20

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 26: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Exhibit A-3 Flow Chart Labeling Parts of the Mill and Indicating Appropriate Flow of Rice

1I I I I

I I

I

~ 1I

C1f~aJ - ~

m I Pw1

1FL ow CHART

lINO I z

~-4

5

bull7

bull t

aEIiCRP1IOH ~ )(11

HEDl~ IoCPPU ~ 009 e~t S1iVaTOA mil 009

~llXIy riUSIceurolf VDi sePARTat S~A I 111(5 cITpoundNIIG NACq~ 8A3A 16 Wf t PaISHZHCI IltACHt~t QAJA IS est SIlCUCM ~eyo~ shyCtJdlQllSIlR C~TlClLJ

pn P(JoUAI(S

I 1 I ~ ~_J I 1 t l lQ bullbull111-~ -shyI-I 75 I

Source Satake Model BA-3 Type Mill ManuaL

17

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 27: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44 I I 8 16

15 I l I 43

[JII 12

42 4 ] 0

6

41 7 j 142

9 I J

I 3 I

40 5

39 Ut

~-38

1 _L_ I 137 4 6 8 10 12 14

Bran Removal Figure B-3 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Bran Removal for Milling Methods 1-16

22

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 28: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

APPENDIXB

19

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 29: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

l -I 8 116

15 I

I 12 lin

1310 I I1--1 7 i I I

4

2

16 I 19

14

I I 3

5

I

1

J I I I _____l I

02 025 03 035 04 045 05 Surface Lipids

Figure 8-5 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

24

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 30: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44 [18

15 I 16

43 11 12

42 13 47 10

[-I ~ J I I IJ

41 t- 6 ~ l J 2j9

14

3

40 5

39

38

37 i I I

10 15 20 25 30 35 Brokens

Figure B-2 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent Brokens for Milling Methods 1-16

21

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 31: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Satake vs Tri-Stimulus Whiteness

80

70f~ ~- bullbull bullbullbull bull ~ bullbullbullbullbull bull -

60

50

40

30

20

bullbullbull + + bullbull- bullbullbull +-- - bullbull

bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull bull

1Milling Scenarios 11 113 15 lIb 14b 12c 13c 14c I 15c 16c12b i 13b 15b II I I I 1

lightness bull 69431693316960 [6967 7047 6940 16990 17040 7063roo07 70201696316987 704017050 1 1I 1 I I I Whiteness +422deg 1421042604200 4280 4220 4220143201431014280434deg1419014220 435014370

f I I 1 1 I I I Ughtness-Whiteness2723 12723 12720 12767 27671272012770 2720 2753 27271268012773 2767 2690 2680

Whiteness = Satake Reading Lightness = Tri-Stimulus Reading

Figure Bmiddot7 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Tri-Stimulus Readings for Milling Methods 1lmiddot16c

26

I

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 32: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Total Lipids Whiteness

44 8 [] [J 16

[]IS43 J] 1- j II

42 1- 113 4

41 7 I-I liiO

1- i I j 2I __ J

6 I ] 9 L] 14

II 3

40 Is

39 I shy

III38

37 025 03 035 04 045 05 055 06

Total Lipids Figure B-4 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percent of Total Lipids for Milling Methods 1-16

23

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 33: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Bran Removal Whiteness

44~----------------------------------~

ISe435

43 i lSb

i l6b

gtshy

lie I I 12b

IS

425

13 I I 14c Il

42 I IIJ

lib

13e

41 5 1----l-_l--------------_

5 6 7 8 9 10 Bran Removal

Figure B-9 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Bran Removal for Milling Methods 11-16c

28

11

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 34: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs 2-AP Levels Whiteness

44~------------------------------------~ l[16 8

I 11543 -shyII

42~----------------------------~ [13

7 [4

41 I 6 i J [1 9 2[ 14

Ii 3

40 I 5

39

38 I

I

37~~~--~~~--~~--~~~--~~

550 600 650 700 750 800 850 2-AP Levels

Figure B-6 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to 2-AP Levels for Milling Methods 1-16

25

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 35: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Surface Lipids Whiteness

44

435

43

425

42

415

160

-- I liSe

I

J ISb

II6b _

I 1m j iuc

IS

II13b 14e 14b I] 1-1 11 I

lib In r

I bull

i Be

II I i

01 015 02 025 03 035 Surface Lipids

Figure B~l1 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Surface Lipids for Milling Methods 11~16c

30

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27

Page 36: DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL FOR DOMESTIC ...afcerc.tamu.edu/publications/Publication-PDFs/CP-3-96 Determining a... · DETERMINING A STANDARDIZED MILLING PROTOCOL

Whiteness vs Brokens Whiteness

44

I435

43 lie

r I

IS ~425

42 13b11 111

13 1

I I L

L lib

13c

I415

16lt1

ISe J

12c IJ

ISb

l 1JIbull

I i12b

I I I J 14b 14c

I1 1

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Brokens

Figure B-8 Comparison of Whiteness Readings to Percentage of Brokens for Milling Methods 11-16c

27