• EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科学与工程领域高质量科技期刊分级目录第一方阵T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国农林核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中国生物医学SinoMed
中国精品科技期刊2020
杜凯欣,王凤成,SOTS Serhii,等. 不同表面处理设备对小麦清理效果的对比研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2023,44(21):258−266. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2022120229.
引用本文: 杜凯欣,王凤成,SOTS Serhii,等. 不同表面处理设备对小麦清理效果的对比研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2023,44(21):258−266. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2022120229.
DU Kaixin, WANG Fengcheng, SOTS Serhii, et al. Comparative Analysis on Cleaning Effect of Different Surface Treatment Equipments on Wheat[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2023, 44(21): 258−266. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2022120229.
Citation: DU Kaixin, WANG Fengcheng, SOTS Serhii, et al. Comparative Analysis on Cleaning Effect of Different Surface Treatment Equipments on Wheat[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2023, 44(21): 258−266. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2022120229.

不同表面处理设备对小麦清理效果的对比研究

Comparative Analysis on Cleaning Effect of Different Surface Treatment Equipments on Wheat

  • 摘要: 为深入探究不同清理设备对小麦籽粒表面的清理程度,选用FBPY-S-1 30小麦剥皮机和FDMW30×60打麦机(转子、定子结构不同),通过原粮直接清理、一清润麦后二清、原料先润麦后清理三种工艺来清理原粮小麦。以增碎率、剥皮率、灰分降等指标作为表征清理效率的可视化参数,对比两种设备对小麦的清理效果;以小麦籽粒的阿拉伯木聚糖、烷基间苯二酚含量并结合扫描电镜(SEM)观察微观结构综合分析两种设备对小麦皮层的去除情况;通过测定处理前后小麦籽粒的真菌毒素和微生物含量确定两种设备对小麦籽粒的卫生改变情况。实验结果表明,剥皮机的清理效率是打麦机的3~4倍,增碎率不及打麦机的二分之一。剥皮机可将0.45%~0.63%的小麦表皮轻微剥落,而打麦机对小麦皮层厚度无影响。剥皮机对毒素微生物的去除率高于打麦机近2倍,同时轻度剥皮处理对小麦的总淀粉和粗蛋白含量无显著影响(P>0.05)。在不同工艺中,工艺一单次剥皮处理可以达到较好的干法清理效果。但以工艺二润麦前后分别进行剥皮处理对小麦的清理效果最佳,与一清前的原粮相比,此工艺的整机出杂率达1.93%,可使小麦籽粒的脱氧雪腐镰刀菌烯醇含量降低62%、菌落总数含量减少49%,大肠杆菌减少78%。综上可知,FBPY-S-1 30小麦剥皮机的剥皮处理和工艺二相结合可以达到对原粮小麦清理的最佳效果。

     

    Abstract: In order to deeply explore the cleaning degree of wheat grain surface by different cleaning equipments, FBPY-S-1 30 debranner and FDMW30×60 scourer were selected in this paper (with different rotor and stator structures). Three processes were used to treat raw wheat, including direct cleaning of the raw grain, first cleaning and tempering followed by second cleaning, and first tempering and then cleaning of the raw grain. The degree of wheat cleaning by the two kinds of equipments was compared by taking such indicators as increase of broken wheat grains, debranning rate and ash reduction as visual parameters to characterize the cleaning efficiency. The removal of wheat cortex by the two kinds of equipments was comprehensively analyzed based on the content of arabinoxylan and alkylresorcinol in wheat grain and the microstructure observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The hygienic changes of the two kinds of equipment to wheat grains were determined by determining the mycotoxins and microorganisms contents of wheat grains before and after treatment. The experimental results showed that the cleaning efficiency of the debranner was 3~4 times of that of the scourer, and the increase rate of broken wheat grains was less than half of that of the scourer. The debranner could slightly peel off 0.45%~0.63% of wheat bran, while the scourer had no effect on the thickness of wheat bran. The removal rate of mycotoxins and microorganisms by the debranner was nearly twice higher than that of the scourer, and the slight peeling treatment had no significant effect on the total starch and crude protein content of wheat (P>0.05). In different processes, the single peeling treatment of process I could achieve good dry cleaning results. However, the best cleaning effect of wheat was achieved by peeling before and after wheat moistening in process II. Compared with the raw grain before first cleaning, the impurity removal rate of this process was 1.93%, which could reduce the content of deoxynivalenol in wheat grains by 62%, the total aerobic plate content by 49%, and the number of coliforms content by 78%. In summary, the combination of peeling treatment of FBPY-S-1 30 Debranner and process II can achieve the best effect on cleaning raw grain wheat.

     

/

返回文章
返回