Rosberg, David W.

Schroeder, Harry W.

Texas A&amp;M Repository

MAY 1959 KndintioJf Harry W. Schroeder and Dauid W. Rosberg* SUMMARY Preliminary experiments with drying rough rice with infra-red radiation from a gas-fired infra-indicate possibilities for developing a faster method of drying rice and other agricultural than conventional systems now in general use. Drying rates were obtained which from 3.60 to 0.49 percent moisture removed per minute of exposure to infra-red. Yield of rice was increased significantly over the yield from control samples air-dried at room tem-Rate of drying varied directly with radiation intensity, but was affected little by the maximum ill)er'atu:re to which the rice was heated. Head yield varied directly with the total time rice was exposed to infra-red radiation and with maximum temperature to which it was heated. It varied inversely with radiation intensity and mcreasing rates of moisture removal. Germination decreased as temperature and rate of moisture removal increased. scale laboratory tests were conducted tation in August and September 1958 the effects of infra-red radiation fired "Schwank" infra-red 48,000 on the drying of rough rice. 1RN111'1TrI"nt~ were designed to provide in-on rates of drying, effects of this type on milling yields and germination and a basis for further experimentation the possibilities for commercial ap-the method for drying rice and other products. tee used in these experiments was ob-the Rice-Pasture Experiment Station The experimental long-grain se-is of very early maturity and has a yield. The rice was harvested late a moisture content of 24 to 25 percent transported immediately to College Sta-it was stored in sealed containers, pathologist. Quality Maintenance and Biological Sciences Branch, MHD, AMS, Agriculture: and associate professor, Physiology and Pathology, Texas Agri-Station. refrigerated at 45 ° F. until used in the drying experiments. The basic procedures in the three experiments in this report were: (1) a quantity of green rice was mixed thoroughly; (2) split into samples of approximately 1 pint by volume with a Boer-ner Sampler; (3) the moisture content was deter-mined for each sample; (4) the sample was sealed in pint mason jars until exposed to infra-red radiation; (5) The rice was spread on screen-bottomed trays in an approximately single kernel layer for drying; (6) when a laboratory thermo-meter at the level of the rice reached a predeter-mined temperature, the tray was removed from beneath the heater and the exposure time re-corded; (7) intensity of radiation was varied by increasing or decreasing the distance between the rice and the heater; and (8) all moisture de-terminations were made with a CAE (Motomco) Moisture Meter. In experiment 1, the trays were placed in front of a fan after irradiation until the rice cooled to room temperature and a moisture con-tent determination was made. This procedure was repeated until the moisture content was re-duced to approximately 14 percent. The samples were then sealed in their original containers and stored until they were milled. TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R . D . LEWIS. DIRECTOR . COLLEGE STATION , TEXAS TABLE 1. COMPARISON OF TREATMENTS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON MOISTURE REMOVAL IN EXPERIMENT I TEMPERED) AND EXPERIMENT 2 (TEMPERED) Maximum temperature of rice, °C SO Distance from heater, inches 14 22 Number of exposures to Non-temp. 10 10 infra-red Tempered 5 5 Total exposure to infra- Non-temp. 3.93 8.63 red, minutes Tempered 2.42 4.42 Percent moisture removed Non-temp. 9.70 9.10 during total exposure Tempered 8.70 9.10 Percent moisture removed Non-temp. 2.47 1.24 per minute of exposure Tempered 3.60 2.06 Experiment 2 duplicated the treatments of experiment 1 except that immediately after ir-radiation the samples were returned to their con-tainers and allowed to stand at room temperature with tops removed for approximately 10 hours before a moisture determination was made. The containers were then sealed until the entire proc-ess could be repeated. In effect, there was a 24-hour or longer tempering period between ex-posures. The samples dried in experiment 2 were placed on screen-bottomed trays at room tem-perature for 4 days prior to milling. This was done in an attempt to bring all samples to the same moisture content so that any noted effects on head yield could be attributed to the infra-red drying treatments. Experiment 3 was conducted with methods similar to those described for experiment 2. A different range of maximum temperatures and radiation were used and the samples were not air-dried after the last exposure to infra-red. All treatments were replicated three times. Control samples were air-dried at room tem-perature on screened trays; otherwise they were treated in an identical manner as the infra-red-dried samples. Milled yields are based on 125-gram samples of rough rice, milled with a modified portable McGill Miller using two breaks at 15 and 5 pounds pressure, respectively, for 30 seconds each break. 55 60 30 14 22 30 14 22 10 7 7 8 6 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 14.05 3.93 7.35 12.63 4.37 9.42 8.15 3.38 6.45 12.78 3.98 8.43 9.10 9.80 9.30 9.80 9.40 9.60 9.90 10.30 10.70 10.90 11.20 11.60 .72 2.49 1.08 .70 2.15 1.04 1.21 3.05 1.66 .85 2.81 1.38 RESULTS The data compiled for experiments 1 are compared in Tables 1 and 2. Temp tween exposures appears to have efficiency of moisture removal. As tenlpelral was increased and radiation intensity d the effect of tempering on the rate of removal was not as great, Table 1. The efficient moisture removal was obtained lowest temperature, 50° C., but at the radiation intensity, 14 inches from the Radiation intensity appears to have a effect on removing moisture from rough rice does the actual temperature to which the is heated; therefore, the faster the tenlpelral of rice is raised the faster moisture is Heating the rice to 50° C. at high intensity appears to be the most efficient ment; however, the total moisture l"Ol'Yl{\'ITotf not equal for all treatments since moval is progressively slower at the r' drier, Table 1. Further experime:nta.tloll necessary before the most efficient trea be ascertained. The milling yields, Table 2, suggested high temperatures and high radiation . increased milling yields. The lack of and failure to control the final moisture accurately in these preliminary experiments vent a close evaluation of the data, but a is apparent in the results, which provide a for continued work. TABLE 2. COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF TREATMENTS ON QUALITY AS MEASURED BY YIELD OF HEAD GERMINATION BETWEEN EXPERIMENT 1 (NON-TEMPERED) AND EXPERIMENT 2 (TEMPERED) Maximum temperature of rice, °C SO 55 60 Distance from heater, inches 14 22 30 14 22 30 14 22 30 Moisture content Non-temp. 14.7 14.6 14.3 15.3 14.9 14.3 15.2 14.9 14.7 when milled, i'o Tempered 12.7 11.8 11.3 12.2 12.0 11.3 12.3 12.0 ItO Head rice in i'o of Non-temp. 90.5 88.8 94.5 99.1 94.5 93.8 116.8 111.5 100.7 control, dry basis Tempered 89.5 92.6 89.2 92.5 93.7 98.3 114.4 94.2 85.5 Percent germina- Non-temp. 10 64 65 0 7 20 1 0 25 tion Tempered 51 84 91 3 46 84 0 B 53 1 Air-dried at room temperature. TABLE 3. RESULTS OF DRYING ROUGH RICE WITH INFRA-RED RADIATION AT THREE RADIATION INTENSITY LEVELS AND HEATING TO 2 MAXIMUM TEMPERATURES1 Maximum temperature of rice, °C 45 50 Controf Distance from heater, inches 10 14 18 10 14 18 Number of exposures to 15 15 15 13 13 13 0 infra-red Total exposure to infra-red, 3.60 4.80 6.20 4.10 5.60 7.30 0 minutes Percent moisture removed 10.60 11.00 10.90 11.40 11.60 12.00 2.903 during total exposure Percent moisture removed 2.94 2.29 1.76 2.78 2.07 1.64 per minute of exposure Moisture content when milled 13.70 13.50 13.30 11.50 11.90 11.40 13.40 Total yield milled rice in % 101.60 100.10 100.90 103.50 102.70 104.70 100.00 of controL dry basis Yield head rice in % of con- 94.00 94.30 100.90 114.50 122.00 123.20 100.00 trot dry basis Percent germination 39 69 82 5 26 65 72 lAverage of three replications. :Air-dried at room temperature. 'Moisture lost from open containers during the cooling period at room temperature. Tests showed that germination decreases when the rice is dried rapidly at high tempera-ture and the infra-red irradiation exposure pe-riod is increased. Experiment 3 was planned and executed prior to obtaining the milling yields from experiments 1 and 2. The data in Table 3 are an average of three replications. The rate of moisture removal per minute of infra-red exposure followed the same pattern as observed in experiments 1 and 2; that is, increased radiation intensity and lower maximum temperature of the rice appearently increase the rate of moisture removal. To mini-mize the effects of final moisture content on the rate of moisture removal, the data are plotted in Figure 1 for rice dried at both temperatures at 25~--------------------------------------~ 20 15 100~--------------------------------------~ EXPOSURE TIME (M IN .) Figure 1. Rate of drying of rough rice exposed to in-fra-red radiation at a distance of 10 inches from the heater and heated to 45°C., compared with the rate of drying at the same intensity, but heated to 50°C. radiation intensity obtained 10 inches from the heater. The difference between drying rates is not significant. The data in Table 3 show a significant difference between drying rates when radiation intensity is decreased; hence the tem-perature to which the rice is heated apparently does not influence the rate of drying as much as does the intensity of the radiation. It, therefore, is assumed that rapid drying was achieved as a direct effect of infra-red radiation and not as a result of merely raising the temperature of the rice. The head yield of in-fra-red-dried rice was in-creased over the head yield of the air-dried (room temperature) control in four of the six treat-ments in this experiment. Head yield tended to increase inversely with the rate of moisture re-moval following the trend observed in experi-120 ..J o a: ... z o (.) I~'  I~ "'0. e-10" IL IIO o 100 90~--------------------------------------~ I 2 3 % MOISTURE REMOVED PER MINUTE Figure 2. The relation of yield of head rice to drying rates for rice heated to maximum temperatures of 45°C. and 50°C" at distances of 10, 14 and 18 inches from the heater. TABLE 4. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF HEAD YIELD IN EXPERIMENT 3, DISREGARDING MOISTURE CONTENT OF RICE AT TIME OF MILUNG Source of DF SS MS F variation Total 20 345.26 Treatments 6 294.98 49.16 13.691 Error 14 50.28 3.59 ISignificant at the 1 % level. ments 1 and 2. An analysis of variance of head yield in grams, disregarding the moisture content at the time of milling, is given in Table 4. Using Duncan's range test of significance of variance of means for the 5 percent level, yields from all treatments heated to 50° C. were sig-nificantly greater than the head yield of the con-trol. There was no significant diff tween the control and any of the samples to 45 ° C. Head yield was plotted in relation to centage of moisture removed per minute posure, Figure 2. Head yield decreased rate of drying increased for both ten1pe:raI Figure 2 also shows that head yield infra-red radiation intensity increases. ACKNOWLEDGMENT These studies were conducted by the Maintenance and Improvement Section, B Sciences Branch, Marketing Research Agricultural Marketing Service, United Department of Agriculture, and the cultural Experiment Station, in coopera the Texas Infra Red Radiant Company, Texas. 

Drying Rough Rice with Infra-red Radiation.

http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/160740/354/MP0354.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y

Drying Rough Rice with Infra-red Radiation.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Texas A&M Repository

Drying Rough Rice with Infra-red Radiation.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Texas A&amp;M Repository

Texas A&M Repository