Optimization of wheat debranning using laboratory equipment for ethanol production

Elizabeth George, Bayartoghtok Rentsen, Lope G. Tabil, Venkatesh Meda

Abstract


Abstract: Ethanol production from starchy cereal grains is increasing rapidly due to increasing demand for alternative fuels. In Canada, wheat is the primary feedstock in ethanol plants. To improve the productivity of the ethanol plants in terms of product quality and yield, debranning of wheat grains may be employed. Debranning is advantageous in two ways. Firstly, bran removal increases the starch content of the feedstock, improving the fermentation efficiency of the ethanol plants. Secondly, bran, a valuable co-product can be used as an animal feed ingredient. In this study, experiments to optimize the debranning process were carried out using two kinds of abrasive equipment, the Satake and the TADD (tangential abrasive dehulling device) mills. Wheat samples (30 and 200 g) were debranned in the Satake mill at 1 215, 1 412, and 1 515 r/min rotational speeds, 30, 36, and 40 grit sizes, and 30, 60, and 90 s retention times, and in the TADD mill at 900 r/min rotational speed, 30, 36, 50, and 80 grit sizes, and 120, 180, 240, and 300 s retention times. In addition to debranning efficiency, the starch separation efficiencies of the two mills were calculated in different debranning conditions. In the Satake mill, the 30 g and 200 g sample size, 1 412 r/min and 1 515 r/min rotational speeds, all grit sizes, and 60 s of retention time demonstrated the highest debranning efficiency. Correspondingly, optimal results in the TADD mill were obtained with 200 g sample size, 900 r/min rotational speed, 50 and 80 grit sizes, and 180 s and 240 s retention times. However, based on the experimental results, Satake mill provided better debranning values compared to the TADD mill. The starch separation efficiency values supported these results.
Keywords: wheat debranning, ethanol production, Satake mill, tangential abrasive dehulling device, grit size, retention time, rotational speed, starch separation efficiency
DOI: 10.3965/j.ijabe.20140706.008

Citation: George E, Rentsen B, Tabil L G, Meda V. Optimization of wheat debranning using laboratory equipment for ethanol production. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2014; 7(6): 54－66.

Keywords


wheat debranning, ethanol production, Satake mill, tangential abrasive dehulling device, grit size, retention time, rotational speed, starch separation efficiency

Full Text:

PDF

References


Nixon K.From non food feedstock to fuel: “Here and now”. In Fueling the Future: The Role of Woody Biomass for Energy Workshop. Ponsford, MN: University of Minnesota Cooperative Extension, 2009.

Racz V J. Canadian biofuel industry: Western Canada perspective and opportunities. In Proceedings Capturing Feed Grain & Forage Opportunities 2007- “Farming for Feed, Forage and Fuel”. Red Deer, AB. 2008. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/crop12127. Accessed on [2011-08-24].

Boyle, E.R. Biofuels: Bonanza or boondoggle for Saskatchewan? Saskatchewan Notes, 2008; 7(2): 1-4. Regina, SK: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives – SK. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/Saskatchewan_Pubs/2008/SaskNotes_Biofuels.pdf. Accessed on [2012-05-25].

Olar M, Romain R, Bergeron N, Klein K. Ethanol industry in Canada. Research series SR.04.08. Quebec City, QC: Centre for Research in the Economics of Agrifood, LavalUniversity, 2004.

Licht F O. Biofuels and the international development agenda. (F.O. Licht) World Ethanol and Biofuels Report, 2005; 3(21): 5.

Licht F O. How Canada ranks: A study of national biofuels policies world-wide. Canadian Renewable Fuels Association, 2006.http://www.bioenergy.org.nz/documents/liquidbiofuels/nationalbiofuelspolicystudyMarch-28-2006.pdf. Accessed on [2012-05-21].

Hooper D G. Renewable fuels in Canada: Policy making and regulation. Assessing LCFS and other policy frameworks: The case for biofuels. Canadian Renewable Fuels Association, 2011.http://www.pollutionprobe.org/happening/LCFS%20files/P1-3A-2%20DHooper.pdf. Accessed on [2011-06-23].

Saunders J, Levin D B. Effect of wheat starch content and structure on the availability of fermentable sugars to optimize ethanol production. Powerpoint Presentation. Winnipeg, MB: Department of Biosystems Engineering,University of Manitoba, 2010. http://www.slideserve.com/milek/effects-of-wheat-starch-content-and-structure-on-the-availability-of-fermentable-sugars-to-optimize-ethanol-production. Accessed on [2010-11-21].

Kindred D, Verhoeven T, Weightman R. Effect of variety and fertilizer nitrogen on alcohol yield, grain yield, starch and protein content, and protein composition of winter wheat. Journal of Cereal Science, 2008; 48(1): 46–57.

AAFC.“Ethanol.” Bi-weekly Bulletin, 2006; 19(18). Ottawa, ON: Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada.

Reimer K. This year’s ‘must grow’ crop. Winter Cereal Grower, 2011; 44:1. Minnedosa, MB: Winter Cereals Canada.

Bender K. The wheat growers. Saskatoon, SK: Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, 2011. http://www.wheatgrowers.ca (2011/11/18).

Sosulski K, Sosulski F. Wheat as a feedstock for fuel ethanol. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 1994; 45–46(1):169–180.

(S and T)2 Consultants Inc. The addition of ethanol from wheat to GHGenius. Ottawa, ON: Natural Resources Canada, 2003.http://www.ghgenius.ca/reports/NRCanWheatEthanol.pdf. Accessed on [2012-04-22].

Agu R C, Bringhurst T A, Brosnan J M, Jack F R. Effect of process conditions on alcohol yield of wheat, maize, and other cereals. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 2008; 114(1): 39–44.

Corredor D Y, Bean S R, Schober T, Wang D. Effect of decorticating sorghum on ethanol production and composition of DDGS. Cereal Chemistry, 2006; 83:17–21.

Wang S, Sosulski K, Sosulski F, Ingledew M. Effect of sequential abrasion on starch composition of five cereals for ethanol fermentation. Food Research International, 1997; 30: 603–608.

Singh S, Singh N. Effect of debranning on the physico-chemical, cooking, pasting, and textural properties of common and durum wheat varieties. Food Research International, 2010; 43(9): 2277–2283.

Sanchez O J, Cardona C A. Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Bioresource Technology, 2008; 99(13): 5270–5295.

Dexter J E, Marchylo B A. Recent trends in durum wheat milling and pasta processing: Impact on durum wheat quality requirements. In Les Colloques No. 99 International Workshop on Durum Wheat, Semolina, and Pasta Quality: Recent Achievements and New Trends, eds. Abecassis J, Autran J C, Feillet P. pp 139-164. Montpellier, France: Institute National de la Recherche, 2001.

Satake T. Combination of grinding and friction-type rice polishing machine. 1969, US Patent 3,485,280.

http://www.google.com/patents/US3485280

Wang R, Koutinas A A, Campbell G M. Dry processing of oats- Application of dry milling. Journal of Food Engineering, 2007; 82 (4): 559–567.

Hogan J T, Normand F L, Deobald H J. Method for removal of successive surface layers from brown and milled rice. Rice Journal, 1964; 67: 27.

Oomah BD, Reichert R D, Youngs C G. A novel, multi-sample, tangential abrasive dehulling device (TADD). Cereal Chemistry, 1981; 58 (5): 392–395.

Normand F L, Hogan J T, Deobald H J. Protein content of successive peripheral layers milled from wheat, barley, grain sorghum, and glutinous rice by tangential abrasion. Cereal Chemistry, 1965; 42: 359–367.

Lawton J W, Faubion J M. Measuring kernel hardness using the tangential abrasive dehulling device. Cereal Chemistry, 1989; 66(6): 519–524.

George E, Rentsen B, Tabil L G, Meda V. Optimizing the debranning of wheat for ethanol production. ASABE Paper No. MBSK 10-101, Saskatoon, SK: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 2010.

Opoku A, Sundaram J, Tabil L G, Crerar B J. Barley milling. Report prepared for MB Projects. Saskatoon, SK: Department of Agricultural and Bioresource Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, 2003a.

Opoku A, Tabil L G, Sundaram J, Crerar B J, Park S J. Conditioning and dehulling of pigeon peas and mung beans. CSAE/SCGR Paper no. 03-347. Montreal, Quebec: Canadian Society for Agricultural Engineering, 2003b.

Method 44-15A. Moisture - Air-oven method. In: Approved Methods of the AACC. American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC International), 1995.

AOAC. Official methods of Analysis of the AOAC International, 16th edition supplement. 25-28. Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, 1998.

Method 76.13. Total starch assay procedure (Amyloglucosidase/α-amylase method). In: Approved Methods of the AACC, 10th edition.American Association of Cereal Chemists, 2000.

McCleary B V, Solah V, Gibson T S. Quantitative measurement of total starch in cereal flours and products. Journal of CerealScience, 1994; 20: 51–58.

Tyler R T, Youngs C G, Sosulski F W. Air classification of legumes. I. Separation efficiency, yield, and composition of the starch and protein fractions. Cereal Chemistry, 1981; 58(2): 144–147.

SAS Institute. User’s Guide: Statistics Version 9.2. Statistical Analysis System Inc., Cary, NC, USA, 2008.

Wang N. Optimization of a laboratory dehulling process for lentils (Lens culinaris). Cereal Chemistry, 2005; 82(6): 671– 676.

Mbengue H M. Projet 3-P-84-0016 de Creation d'un décorriquer au Sénégal — situation des Iravaux de recherches au 3 1-08-86, p 24. Centre national de recherches agronomiques, Bambey, Senegal, 1986.

Bassey M W, Schmidt O G. Abrasive-disk dehullers in Africa: from research to dissemination. Ottawa, ON: International Development Research Centre, 1989.

Peltonen-Sainio P, Kntturi M, Rajala A, Kirkkari A M. Impact dehulling oat grain to improve quality of on-farm produced feed. 1. Hullability and associated changes in nutritive value and energy content. Agricultural and Food Science, 2004; 13: 18–28.

McCluggage M E. Factors influencing the pearling test for kernel hardness in wheat. Cereal Chemistry, 1943; 20: 686.

Liu K. Laboratory methods to remove surface layers from cereal grains using a seed scarifier and comparison with a barley pearler. Cereal Chemistry, 2007; 84(4): 407–414.

Posner E S, Hibbs A N. Wheat flour milling, 2nd edition. St Paul, MN: American Association of Cereal Chemists, 1997.

Mwasaru M A, Reichert R D, Mukuru S Z.Factors affecting the abrasive dehulling efficiency of high-tannin sorghum. Cereal Chemistry, 1988; 65(3): 171–174.

Reichert R D, Tyler R T, York A E, Schwab J, Tatarynovich J E, Mwasaru M A. Description of a production model of the tangential abrasive dehulling device and its application to breeders' samples. Cereal Chemistry, 1986; 63: 201–207.

Black R G, Singh U, Mears C. Effect of genotype and pretreatment of field peas (Pisum sativum) on their dehulling and cooking quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 1998; 77: 251–258.

Moritz J S, Wilson K J, Cramer K R, Beyer R S, McKinney L J, Cavalcanti W B, et al. Effect of formulation density, moisture, and surfactant on feed manufacturing, pellet quality, and broiler performance. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 2002; 11: 155–163.

Dziki D. Mechanical properties of single kernel of wheat in relation to debranning ration and moisture content. Acta Agrophysica, 2004; 4: 283–290.

Delwiche S R. Wheat endosperm compressive strength properties as affected by moisture. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 2000; 43(2): 365–373.

Wang N. Effect of variety and crude protein content on dehulling quality and on the resulting chemical composition of red lentils (Lens culinaris). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2008; 88: 885–890.

El Hag M E, El Tinay A H, Yousif N E. Effect of fermentation and dehulling on starch, total polyphenols, phytic acid content, and in vitro protein digestibility of pearl millet. Food Chemistry, 2002; 77:193–196.

Rios G, Pinsoon-Gadais L, Abecassis J, Zakhia-Rozis N, Lullien-Pellerin V. Assessment of dehulling efficiency to reduce deoxynivalenol and Fusarium level in durum wheat grain. Journal of Cereal Science, 2009; 49: 387–392.




Copyright (c)



2023-2026 Copyright IJABE Editing and Publishing Office