Methodologies for Processing Plant Material Into Acceptable Food on a Small Scale- Phase II
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NASAContractorReport177647 Methodologies for Processing Plant Material into Acceptable Food on a Small Scale- Phase II Thomas R. Parks, John N. Bindon, Anthony J. G. Bowles, Peter Golbitz, Rauno A. Lampi, and Robert F. Marquardt Food and AgroSystems, Inc. 1289 Mandarin Dr. Sunnyvale, CA 94087 Prepared for Ames Research Center CONTRACT NAS2-13404 September 1994 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 This report represents the efforts of many, not only principal authors. Food and AgrosSystems sincerely appreciates and wants to acknowledge the valuable contributions made by the following: Mr. Kenneth Carlson Mr. Dan Casper Mr. Fred Coury Dr. Robert Decareau Mr. E. Ray Pariser EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i. Food processing is a technically feasible, effective part of manned space systems. Equipment suitable for processing food on a small scale, under zero-/micro-gravity conditions, have been developed and evaluated on a laboratory prototype scale. 2. Preliminary estimates indicate that while most nutrients can be met by the four crops studied in Phase II, it may be neces- sary to include an additional crop, such as Canola, which has about 2.5 times as much oil content as soy, to aid in meeting dietary fat requirements. 3. Daily planting/harvesting regimens increase personnel invol- vement, but reduce quantities of material to be processed, storage requirements, equipment sizing, energy require- ment (present estimates indicate a possible maximum in- dividual motor peak load of about 2 HP), and opportunities for automation. 4. Use of stable intermediate food products and food processing are compatible with both plant growth and preprepared food systems. They provide a feasible means of reducing the space requirements and packaging residue associated with portion- packaged foods. The four crops selected for this study, wheat, white potatoes, soybeans, and sweet potatoes, are capable of providing, with the addition of selected spices, flavors, acidulants, and other nor- mal food ingredients, a broad and very acceptable menu. The figure on page iv shows a range of foods estimated producible from these crops under micro-/zero-gravity conditions. These and other products were prepared during prototype trials. Products capable of being made from the selected crops were analyzed in terms of their equipment needs. Commercially avail- able equipment was screened in terms of product and zero-gravity suitability. Where existing equipment was not available or could not be modified sufficiently, equipment concepts were developed and tested on a laboratory/prototype scale. The figure on page v contains a listing of equipment designed/tested. Patent appli- cations are being prepared for approximately twelve of these con- cepts. The figure on page v shows an overall material flow/unit opera- tions analysis divided into processing areas, from harvest to pro- ducts as eaten, including biomass processing, and indicating typi- cal equipments required. Harvesting decisions have significant ramifications on downstream operations, including: storage requirements, equipment sizing, energy needs, automation levels, and personnel involvement. Based on NASA nutritional guidelines and USDA Handbook 8, "Composition of Foods", it is estimated that daily processing quantities of the four crops selected for this project would be approximately as follows for a crew of twelve: * ii 0 r_ _0 Z_ U_ O_ \ o i o O3 0 0 U < 0 :_ _ :_ iii EQUIPMENT CONCEPTS DESIGNED AND/OR PROTOTYPE TESTED BY FASI DURING PHASE II PARTICLE SIZE REDUCTION Slicer/grater/dicer/fry cutter throat design * Fry cutter configuration Bread slicer guide * Biomass chopper Mills for grains and dry beans MISCELLANEOUS Peeler * Pancake/waffle pan * Breadmaker/baker * Trimmer/peeler Soybean dehuller HEAT TRANSFER High air velocity oven configuration for increased production * Combination oven Steaming chamber for microwave and high air velocity ovens Roasting system for wheat and soybeans Freezing system for liquids FOOD FORMING Pasta extruder * Pizza sheeter MIXER Dough mixer/kneader * Dry solids and liquid mixer DRYER Louver Dryer Inflatible Dryer CLASSIFICATION/SEPARATION Mass/inertia cleaner Size separator WASHER/DRYER Washer/Dewaterer * GRAIN/BEAN THRESHER Impact thresher Screen thresher (2 types) Roller thresher for soybeans MATERIALS HANDLING Hot/cold beverage dispenser * Liquid materials measuring and dispensing system Dry solids measuring and dispensing system * NOTE - Patent applications in process iv Q,. 0 °_ 0'_" '_, o_ LO D.. 0 G) 0 WHEAT --3.26 Kg WH. POTATOES 5.86 " SOYBEANS --3. i0 " SW. POTATOES--- .......... 2 . 80 " * Note - These quantities provide only about 1/3 of the desired fat intake. More specific information is needed about the nutrient content and functional properties of the various cultivars being developed under NASA's sponsorship. However, for the quantity range shown above, it would appear that storage bin capacities might range from 5 to 15 L, and that maximum individual motor peak load HP might be about 2.0. Less frequent harvesting would involve com- mensurately higher cube and weight penalties, and greater energy demand. Current space food service is based on the use of portion packag- ed foods preprepared at Earth-bound facilities. This poses two significant problems: high cube requirement of some foods, and high cube devoted to storing packaging residues. Future long term space exploration and manned modules on bodies such as the moon and Mars will be required to produce food on site as mis- sions extend beyond practical resupply limitations. In the in- terim, means are needed to reduce storage cube for food supplies and packaging residues. A practical interim solution would involve the concept of stable, high density, intermediate food products, which would have re- duced cube and packaging needs, reduced needs in terms of on-site processing equipment and energy demand, and high versatility in terms of menu application. Stable intermediate products would be compatible and complemen- tary to both on-site plant production and earth supply operation- al configurations, as shown in the figure on page vii; and could be produced by Earth-based facilities, or plant production/pro- cessing installations located on the moon or elsewere, depending on the needs of the mission. Preliminary estimations comparing the relative space requirements and feeding capability of providing ready to eat bread versus providing wheatberries and a breadbaking machine indicated that the on-site baking alternative could require approximately 37 L less space for a 30 day mission. For the same space, it was es- timated that baking would produce sufficient bread for an addit- ional 18 days. A proposal has been submitted to the IN-STEP Pro- gram to investigate the technical feasibility of baking bread in microgravity. A Phase III extension of this project has already received ini- tial funding to investigate new equipment concepts for processing soybeans. Discussions have begun with appliance manufacturers to fund two more Phase III extensions. Discussions with a third ap- pliance manufacturer about a fourth Phase III will be initiated in the near future. vi oo O_ _q Z / o_ _u D_ _,_ _q O_ UE_ 0 oo_ _DdO t] O0 _q O_ O3 Z 0 z 0 0 [-_ 0_ Z ZU H Lo 0 q.) 0 0 i.-i 0 _C 0 Z i--t H o3 U 0 0 U o r_ z 0 O_ i-t _:0_ vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................. ii Table of Contents ........................................... viii Introduction ................................................... 1 Description/Scope of the System ................................ 2 Project Objectives ............................................. 5 Method of Approach ............................................. 5 System CapacityCapabilitiesConstraints ....................... 6 Products and Processes ......................................... 8 Process/Product Flow Diagrams .................................. 8 Unit Operations Summary Table ................................. 12 Establishment of Preliminary Menu ............................. 12 Discussion of ProductEquipment Needs ......................... 12 Materials Handling/Particle Control ........................... 22 Identification/Discussion of Commercially Available Equipment Suitable for CELSS Application ................. 23 Homogenizer ................................................. 24 Chiller/Heater .............................................. 24 Freezer ..................................................... 24 Griddle(Waffle Iron) ........................................ 25 Mill(Flour) ................................................. 25 Mixer(Dry Ingredients) ...................................... 28 Dehull ...................................................... 28 Slice/Grate ................................................. 29 KitchenAid/K-Tec ......................................... 29 Cuisinart ................................................ 29 French Fry Cutter/Dicer ..................................... 30 Cuisinart ................................................ 31 K-Tec .................................................... 34 KitchenAid(Throat) ....................................... 34 Wedge Cutter ............................................. 36 Mandolin(Boerner) ........................................ 36 Static Friction .......................................... 39 Conclusions .............................................. 41 FlakerCracker .............................................