TEMPERATURE and HEAT TRANSFER STUDIES in a WATER IMMERSION RETORT by GERRY F. MORELLO B. Sc., University of British Columbia, 19
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TEMPERATURE AND HEAT TRANSFER STUDIES IN A WATER IMMERSION RETORT by GERRY F. MORELLO B. Sc., University of British Columbia, 1981 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DECREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Food Science We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 1987 © GERRY F. MORELLO, 1987 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of f^O&b SUEAlCg The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 DE-6(3/81) ABSTRACT Temperature and heat transfer studies in a pilot-scale water immersion retort were performed. The temperature study investigated the temperature distribution and stability of the retort during the cook period. The investigation of heat transfer uniformity within the retort was based on heating and cooling parameters calculated from the heat penetration curves of food-simulating teflon transducers. The uniformity of sterilizing conditions within the retort was determined from process lethalities calculated for the transducers. Variable retort operating conditions consisted of two retort temperatures (115 and 125°C) and three weir heights (29.2, 31.2 and 34.6 cm). Mean standard deviations of thermocouple readings indicating temperature distribution during the cook period ranged from 0.19 to 0.22 C°. Slight temperature gradients were found between the upper and lower water channels and between the entrance and exit regions of water channels. The coldest locations (the exit regions of water channels 1 and 2) averaged approximately 0.6 C° lower than the hottest locations (the entrance and exit region of water channel 11 and the exit region of water channel 10). Mean standard deviations of thermocouple readings indicating temperature stability during the cook period ranged from 0.10 to 0.20 C°. Temperature stability was uniform between all water channels, except channel 11, which was less stable. The entrance and exit regions of water channels displayed similar stability. The existence of heat transfer variability within the water immersion retort was indicated. A retort temperature of 125°C produced smaller f^ and f values ii than 115°C. Variations in weir heipht influenced the distribution of fj values between trays. Weir height 2 (31.2 cm) exhibited uniform values between all trays. Weir height 1 (29.2 cm) exhibited uniform f^ values between all trays, except for a significantly larger value for the very top tray. Although weir height 3 (34.6 cm) created the most variability between tray levels, weir height 1 displayed the widest range of f^ values. More variability in f values between trays was shown during the cool period. Weir height 2 displayed the most uniform f values between trays, however, the range of f values between trays was similar for all three weir heights. Within trays, a gradient of f^ and f values was found between the entrance, exit and middle positions, with the smallest values found in the entrance positions. In comparison, the largest f^ values were found in the exit and middle positions of trays 1 and 10. The largest f values were found in the middle positions of trays 1 and 3 and the middle and exit positions of tray 10. Weir heights 1 and 2 produced smaller values than weir height 3, variations in weir height had no influence on j values. A gradient of values between tray levels was shown, with smaller values associated with upper trays and larger values with lower trays. Smaller and j values were associated with the entrance positions of trays than with the middle and exit positions. A comparison with steam processing indicated larger fj values for the water immersion process and larger f values for the cooling method used with the steam process. Calculation of process lethalities indicated variability of sterilizing conditions iii within the retort. Larger F0 values were associated with upper trays than with lower trays. Within trays, larger F0 values were found in the tray entrance positions than the middle and exit positions. The largest F0 values were exhibited in the entrance positions of the middle to upper trays, while the smallest values were found in the middle and exit positions of the bottom trays. Retort pressure studies indicated pressure stability during the cook period, however, during the initial minutes of the cool period, a significant pressure drop occurred, which the retort corrected. Pressure stability was maintained once the target pressure was re-established. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii List of Tables vii List of Figures x Nomenclature xi Acknowledgements xii I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 4 A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 4 B. THERMAL STERILIZATION SYSTEMS 5 1. Development of the Retort 5 2. Conventional Thermal Processing Systems 6 C. THERMAL PROCESSING FLEXIBLE CONTAINERS 8 1. Heating Media 8 2. Media Circulation 11 3. Retort Pressure 12 4. Racking Design 13 D. COMMERCIAL STERILIZERS FOR POUCH PROCESSING 14 III. EXPERIMENTAL 18 A. RETORT SYSTEM 18 1. FMC 500W Laboratory Sterilizer 18 2. Retort Operating Procedure 20 B. PROCESSING CONDITIONS 21 C. DATA COLLECTION 24 1. Temperature Distribution and Stability 24 2. Heat Transfer Distribution 25 a. Heat Transfer 25 b. Teflon Transducers 28 c. Comparison With Steam Processing 32 3. Process Lethality Calculation 33 4. Retort Pressure 33 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 35 A. RETORT TEMPERATURE 35 1. Temperature Distribution 45 2. Temperature Stability 51 B. HEAT TRANSFER 56 1. Heating Rate Index (f^) 56 2. Cooling Rate index (f ) 62 ° c 3. Heating Lag Factor (j, ) 68 v 4. Cooling Lag Factor (j^) 75 5. Comparison With Steam Processing 80 C. LETHALITY DISTRIBUTION 83 D. RETORT PRESSURE 89 V. CONCLUSIONS ; 93 VI. LITERATURE CITED 97 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Estimated total water flow rates through retort car and corresponding flow through each paired water channel 23 Table 2: Thermocouple locations in the retort 27 Table 3: Transducer locations in the retort 30 Table 4: Some thermophysical properties of teflon 31 Table 5: Sample computer output of retort temperature histories 36 Table 6: Comparison of overall mean retort car temperatures with reference thermometer temperatures 43 Table 7: Range and mean of overall temperature uniformity (26 thermocouples) during the entire cook period 44 Table 8: Analysis of variance for overall standard deviations of temperature 44 Table 9: Range of temperature uniformity at each minute interval, the average uniformity during the cook period, and the range of times for the retort to stabilize 46 Table 10: Analysis of variance for pooled mean thermocouple temperatures 47 Table 11: Duncan's multiple range test comparing pooled mean thermocouple temperatures of different weir heights 49 Table 12: Duncan's multiple range test comparing pooled mean thermocouple temperatures of different water channels 50 Table 13: Range and mean of standard deviations of temperature for each ' thermocouple during the entire cook period 52 Table 14: Analysis of variance for temperature stability 53 Table 15: Duncan's multiple range test comparing mean temperature stabilities of different weir heights 54 Table 16: Duncan's multiple range test comparing mean temperature stabilities of different water channels and the reference thermometer 55 Table 17: Analysis of variance for heating rate indices 58 Table 18a: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f^ values associated with different trays for weir height 1 60 vii Table 18b: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different trays for weir height 2 60 Table 18c: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f^ values associated with different trays for weir height 3 61 Table 19: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f^ values associated with different tray positions 61 Table 20: Analysis of variance for cooling rate indices ...63 Table 21a: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f values associated with different trays for weir heig ht 1 65 Table 21b: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f values associated with different trays for weir height 2 65 Table 21c: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f values associated with different trays for weir height 3 66 Table 22: Duncan's multiple range test comparing f values associated with different tray positions 66 Table 23: Analysis of variance for heating lag factors 70 Table 24: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different weir heights 72 Table 25a: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different trays for weir height 1 72 Table 25b: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different trays for weir height 2 73 Table 25c: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different trays for weir height 3. 74 Table 26: Duncan's multiple range test comparing values associated with different tray positions 74 Table 27: Analysis of variance for cooling lag factors 76 Table 28a: Duncan's multiple range test comparing j values associated with different trays for weir height 1 78 Table 28b: