• Save
DIL Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) Promatec Food Ventures
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

DIL Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) Promatec Food Ventures

on

  • 7,652 views

DIL is represented in the Benelux by Promatec Food Ventures BV, tel 0031 (0)497 33 00 57. ...

DIL is represented in the Benelux by Promatec Food Ventures BV, tel 0031 (0)497 33 00 57.

DIL - German Institute of Food Technologies is designing and manufacturing Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) generators. DIL is a specialist in process technology and fooddesign. www.dil-ev.de and www.elcrack.de

PEF for winning of fruit and vegetable juices, mass transport enhancement, food safety, retain freshness and quality and a tool for cell desintegration.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
7,652
Views on SlideShare
7,587
Embed Views
65

Actions

Likes
4
Downloads
0
Comments
0

7 Embeds 65

http://www.slideshare.net 43
http://www.linkedin.com 7
http://future.cogoweb.com 6
https://www.linkedin.com 4
http://www.slashdocs.com 2
http://www.slideee.com 2
http://onedepth.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

DIL Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) Promatec Food Ventures DIL Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) Promatec Food Ventures Presentation Transcript

  • Application potential and commercial experience with pulsed electric fields in food processing Stefan Toepfl
  • Situated in the hotspot of German food production… 95 employees 6 Mio. € turnover 60 % bilateral projects 30 % public projects active for 600 companies
  • Non-Profit Membership Organization
  • Mechanisms of Action
  • Emerging Technologies… G.C.Hahn R.Koch VanErmengem L.Pasteur Esty & R.Rausing N.Appert Meyer 1795 1876 Heat 1848 1951 1857 1895 1922 Van´t Hoff Bridgmen Industrial B. Hite V Platen Equipment HPP 1885 1904 1954 1899 Flaumenbaum Sale Krupp Electropure Doevenspeck PEF 1920 1948 1958 1986 1967 Roentgen Prescott Bequerel Gewürzmüller Irradiation 1895 1896 1904 1957 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000
  • PEF – Application in Food Processing Applications and processing parameters
  • PEF treatment of plant tissue Quantification of relevant interactions – technical scale 80 70 60 50 juice yield [%] 40 30 20 10 0 JonaGold 2 kJ/kg 10 kJ/kg 20 kJ/kg enzyme 5 kJ/kg 10 kJ/kg 15 kJ/kg enzyme JG + GD control control Impact of PEF-treatment (2 kV/cm) on Jona Gold (JG) and Golden Delicious (GD) juice yield using a decanter centrifuge. Juice yield including an eventual transition of solids to juice
  • PEF treatment of plant tissue Application to key elements – pretreatment 10 t/h installation in German fruit juice company Premium cloudy juice production, using continuous belt press yield increase + 4 to 6 % in comparison to untreated Subsequent enzymatic maceration yield increase + 0 to 2 % Shift to higher production of premium quality first press Energy input: 4 to 6 kJ/kg Kea-Tec Electroporator (Müller et al. 2007)
  • Separation: PEF treatment of plant tissue Quantification of relevant interactions – technical scale Polyphenol extraction from Red Boskop apple Schilling, Toepfl et. al. 2007
  • Separation: PEF treatment of plant tissue Anthocyanin and polyphenol extraction from grapes Lopez et al. 2008
  • Separation: PEF treatment of microalgae Extraction of functional compounds from microalgae Component Chl. dm Chl. dm Yield Spir. dm Spir. dm Yield BM PEF BM increase BM PEF BM increase % %Spirulina Chlorella Protein 5,48 6,98 + 27 33,68 38,12 +13 g/100g Chlorophyll 0,011 0,1 + 809 0,17 0,26 + 52,9 g/100g Carotenoids 0,008 0,05 + 525 0,044 0,11 + 150 g/100g Protease 204,7 707,2 + 245,5 864,2 812,5 -6 Unit/100g Koehler, Toepfl et. al. 2006
  • PEF treatment of plant tissue Application to key elements – pretreatment Olive oil recovery Replacement of malaxation process with same yield
  • tabletop device PEF treatment of plant tissue Sensors Impedance analysis to evaluate tissue integrity Zp1,00 100 [%] 0,90 90 CDI Zp 0,80 80 0,70 70 0,60 60 CDI Zp 0,50 50 (related to 0,40 40 juice) 0,30 30 juice yield 0,20 20 w/ w [%] 0,10 10 0,00 0 coa P P P fr fi e ju rse EF 3,6 EF 7,3 EF 10 ozen ne gr nzym ice grin 6 [ k 1 [ k ,97 -18 ind e din J J [ kJ ° ing g / kg] / kg] / kg C ] Impedance analysis of apple tissue after PEF treatment; juice yield determined by centrifugation handheld device
  • Application of Pulsed Electric Fields – Treatment costs ELCRACK ELCRACK ELCRACK ELCRACK Model 5 kW 5 kW 30 kW 30 kW Application Tissue disintegration Average power kW 5 5 30 30 Chamber diameter mm 10 10 50 50 Electric field strength kV/cm 25 25 6 6 Specific energy kJ/kg 5 10 5 10 Operation per day h 20 20 20 20 per year h 4400 4400 4400 4400 Investment and operation Investment i. k€ 85 85 185 185 Depreciation y 5 5 5 5 Capacity Production kg/h 3600 1800 21600 10800 Daily production t 72,0 36,0 432,0 216,0 Operarion costs per kg Depreciation €-cent/kg 0,078 0,157 0,033 0,065 Maintenance/wear €-cent/kg 0,002 0,008 0,001 0,003 Energy €-cent/kg 0,021 0,042 0,021 0,042 Total €-cent/kg 0,101 0,206 0,054 0,110 Total per t €/t 1,011 2,061 0,543 1,102 Energy costs €/kWh 0,120
  • PEF Processing of Meat Potential applications of PEF tissue disintegration Drying Enhancement Raw Products (Salami type sausages, Parma or Serrano Ham) Brining / Injection Cooked Products (Prosciutto type) Tenderization/Curing Beef Meat
  • Mass transport in meat tissue Freezing/Thawing Energy and time-consuming ( >> 330 kJ/kg) Microbial contamination during thawing Salt diffusion in meat, fresh and frozen (Brandscheid, Honikel et al. 1998) Impact of a PEF-treatment on the structure of chicken meat (1.6 kV, 40 p) (Gudmundsson 2001)
  • PEF – Treatment of meat tissue Impact on dry-cured ham production control hand salted 110 control brine injection 4 kV/cm, 20 kJ/kg, injection 100 4 kV/cm, 20 kJ/kg hand salted 3 kV/cm, 5 kJ/kg, injection relative weight [%] 90 3 kV/cm, 5 kJ/kg, hand salted 80 70 60 50 40 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 drying time [h] Drying of pork shoulder after hand salting (approx. 10 % of weight on surface) or saturated brine (approx. 8 %) injection after a PEF-treatment at different intensity in comparison to untreated control. Drying at 8° 95 % rel. humidity C,
  • PEF – Treatment of meat tissue Impact on meat pickling/curing 1,30 1,25 1,20 relative weight [%] 1,15 PEF 1,10 1,05 1,00 control 0,95 0,90 fresh injection tumbling/curing cooking Relative weight development during production of cooked ham in relation to fresh weight. Injection: 22 % brine with 1.5 % phosphate addition, 2 h tumbling and 4 h curing, cooking up to 64° core temperature C PEF Control
  • PEF Treatment of Meat Products – REM Micrographs Improvement of water binding indicated by swollen, sponge-like tissue structure 100x Improved micro- diffusion of brine Improved water binding due to interaction between protein/salt/phosphate
  • PEF – Treatment of meat tissue Impact on meat water binding capacity Improvement of mass transfer in meat tissue •Increase of water loss after PEF •Improvement of water binding capacity in combination with binding agents Impact of PEF-treatment phosphate (PO4) addition on weight yield after cooking of pork shoulder. Injection of 25 % brine, 2 h tumbling.
  • Equipment development at DIL Concept for treatment of meat pieces
  • Application of Pulsed Electric Fields Gentle Juice Preservation Non-thermal effect on microorganisms control Potential to achieve microbial decontamination at low thermal load Example: PEF-Treatment of S. cervisiae in fruit juice PEF-treated
  • Application of Pulsed Electric Fields Gentle Juice Preservation Inactivation of different microorganisms 0 0 0 0 35°C -1 -1 -1 -1 45°C 55°C -2 -2 -2 -2 -3 -3 -3 -3 lg (N/N0)[-] -4 -4 -4 -4 -5 -5 -5 -5 -6 -6 -6 -6 E. coli L. innocua S. cerevisae B. megaterium -7 -7 -7 -7 0 40 80 120 0 40 80 120 0 40 80 120 0 40 80 120 -1 Specific Energy [kJ kg ] Inactivation of E. coli, L.innocua, S. cerevisae and B. megaterium in ringer solution with an electrical conductivity of 1.25 mS cm-1 after PEF treatment with graphite anode and a field strength of 16 kV cm-1
  • Integration of temperature-time-profile Evaluation of thermal and PEF effects Determination of c-value 3.5 log-cycle of E. sakazakii Thermal inactivation tx N ∫ − k(T(t))dt (t ) = e 0 N0 k = e a ⋅T - b Product deterioration t T − Tref c - value = ∫ 10 z dt 0
  • E. sakazakii Comparison to thermal portion of inactivation L. monocytogenes 15s Protective effect in comparison to Ringer solution (dotted lines)
  • Solid state pulse modulator, based on transformer typology Rectangular pulses, bipolar Peak voltage 25 kV Pulse width 4 to 30 µs Pulse repetition 0 to 1.000 Hz Touch Screen, measurement of peak voltage and current Flowmeter, calculation of specific energy input Titanium electrodes Al2O3 insulator
  • Different treatment chamber modulels available
  • 5 kW technical scale system 30 kW industrial scale system
  • Applicability of novel technologies for food preservation Oliven Äpfel Mikroorganismen Fleisch Wein Mechanism Membrane Protein DNA Membrane Makro molecules Operation continuous batch continuous Products liquid liquid/solid liquid/solid packed packed Installed units 3 130 170 Capacity 2.000 l/h 2.000 kg/h 10.000 kg/h Disadvantage only vegetative discontinuous Acceptance microbes Oxidation
  • Cost comparison of different novel techniques Assumptions: Thermal Liquids, with heat recovery PEF liquid food, 50 – 500 kJ/kg HHP 600 MPa, 5 min HPT 700 MPa, 5 min Irradiation 5 – 10 kGy
  • Application of Pulsed Electric Fields - Conclusions Cost effective, short-time cell disintegration technique, improvement of mass transfer processes Highly effective microbial inactivation, low maximum temperature and residence time Equipment available at DIL
  • Pulsed Electric Fields (PEF) E < Ecrit Intact E cell E > Ecrit Reversible E >> Ecrit Irreversible Key elements: Localized effect on cell membranes Affecting cell/tissue integrity Improvement of mass transport
  • THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION DIL German Institute of Food Technologies Stefan Toepfl s.toepfl@dil-ev.de www.elcrack.de T 0049 5431 183 140 DIL is represented in the Benelux by: Promatec Food Ventures BV Mark de Boevere mark.deboevere@promatecfoodventures.com www.promatecfoodventures.com T 0031 497 33 00 57