2/1/2025

Slide No. 1 Slide No. 2

FT334IU- Food Unit Operations 2

PROBLEM SOLVING Energy for size

No. 2 reduction
Dr. Dang Quoc Tuan
Department of Food Technology
International University – VNU- HCMC

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

1 2

Slide No. 3 Slide No. 4

Kick’s Law Bond’s law

The energy required to reduce the size of particles is Specific solutions of the Walker equation, for n=1.5
proportional to the ratio of the initial size of a typical
dimension to the final size of that dimension. Bond, 1952

D- avg. particle size of the feed

d- avg. particle size of ground material
E (J/kg) = the energy required per mass of material gi- mass fraction
KK = Kick’s constant (J/kg),
d1 (m) = the average initial size of pieces,
d2 (m) = the average size of ground particles.
d1/d2 = the size reduction ratio (RR) and is used to evaluate
the relative performance of different types of equipment.
Coarse grinding has RRs below 8:1, whereas in fine grinding, (Energy of size reduction depends on both volume and surface area of
ratios can exceed 100:1 particle)
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

3 4

Slide No. 5 Slide No. 6

Bond’s law Rittinger’s law
the energy required for size reduction is proportional to the
change in surface area of the pieces of food

E (J/kg) = the energy required per mass of material

WB (J kg-1) = the Bond Work Index (40,000–80,000 J kg-1

for hard foods such as sugar or grain) E(J.kg-1) = the energy required per mass of feed (W/(kg/s))
d1 (m) = diameter of sieve aperture that allows 80% of
KR = Rittinger’s constant,
the mass of the feed to pass
d1 (m) = the average initial size of pieces,
d2 (m) = diameter of sieve aperture that allows 80% of
the mass of the ground material to pass d2 (m) = the average size of ground particles.

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

5 6

1
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 7 Slide No. 8

Solution A-1: Assume the rate throughout is M (kg/s)
GRINDING
From Rittinger’s equation
EXAMPLE A-1:

A certain food is milled from 6 mm to 0.0012 mm using

a 10 hp motor. How much power would be adequate to
reduce the size of the particles to 0.0008 mm? Assume
Rittinger’s equation; and 1 hp = 745.7 W. Therefore,

Given To produce particles of 0.0008 mm.

1. d1 = 6 mm. = 6 x 10-3 m. ,
d2 = 0.0012 mm. = 0.0012x10-3 m.
E1 = 10 hp. x (745.7 W/hp.)
2. E2 = ? When d2 =0.0008 mm. = 0.0008 x10-3 m.
Assume rate of throughout no change Therefore the motor is unsuitable and an increase in power of 50%
is required
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

7 8

Slide No. 9 Slide No. 10

EXAMPLE A-2 Solution A-2:
Sugar is ground from crystals of which it is acceptable that 80%
pass a 500 m sieve (US Standard Sieve No.35), down to a size in Assume Bond's equation.
which it is acceptable that 80% passes a 88 m (No.170) sieve,
and a 5-horsepower motor is found just sufficient for the required
throughput. If the requirements are changed such that the 1st condition 1
grinding is only down to 80% through a 125 m (No.120) sieve
but the throughput is to be increased by 50%, what would be the
power of motor sufficient to operate the grinder? Assume Bond's 2nd condition 2

equation.
(E2/1.5M) 447.2136 WB
Given : 2 1 =
1st condition E1 = 5 hp. , rate of throughout = M (kg/s). (5 hp./M) 618.7899 WB
d1 =500 m. = 500x10-6 m. , d2=88 m. = 88x10-6 m
So, E2 = 5.42 hp.
2nd condition E2 = ?. , rate of throughout = 1.5M (kg/s).
d1 =500 m. = 500x10-6 m. , d2=125 m. = 125x10-6 m So the motor would be expected to have sufficient power to operate
the grinder equal 5.42 hp. The existing motor is insufficient.
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

9 10

Slide No. 11 Slide No. 12

EXAMPLE A-3 SOLUTION A-3
It is found that the energy required to reduce particles from a Assume Kick’s Law KK ln(d1/d2) = Eo
mean diameter of l.0 cm to 0.3 cm is 11 kJ kg-1. Estimate the
energy requirement to reduce the same particles from a
diameter of 0.1 cm to 0.01 cm assuming: KK = Eo/ ln(d1/d2) = 11 (kJ/kg)/ln(10/3) = 9.136 (kJ/kg)
(a) Kick's Law,
(b) Rittinger's Law,
(c) Bond’s Law In the second condition:

Given :
d1 = 1.0 cm = 10x10-3 m Eo = KK.ln(d1/d2) = 9.136 (kJ/kg)* ln(10/1)
d2 = 0.3 cm = 3x10-3 m
Eo = 11 kJ/kg Eo = 21.0 (kJ/kg)

d1 = 0.1 cm = 1x10-3 m
d2 = 0.01 cm = 1x10-4 m
Eo = ?

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

11 12

2
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 13 Slide No. 14

SOLUTION A-3
New Surface Formed by Grinding
Assume Rittinger's Law
The surface area per unit mass: the specific
KR = Eo/ (1/d2- 1/d1) = 11 (kJ/kg) /(1/0.003 -1/0.01)(m)
surface.
- To calculate this: necessary to know both the
= 0.047 (kJ/kg.s.m) particle size distribution and also the shape
factor of the particles.
In the second condition: - The particle size gives one dimension that
Eo = KR.(1/d2 – 1/d1) = 0.047(kJ/kg.sm)*(1/0.0001-1/0.001)(m) can be called the typical dimension, Dp, of a
Eo = 424.3 (kJ/kg)
particle.
- Is related to the surface area.

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

13 14

Slide No. 15 Slide No. 16

New Surface Formed by Grinding A Shape Factor
q
We can write, arbitrarily: A shape factor is now defined as: λ = --------
p
for a cube or a sphere λ = 1.
for many materials when ground, approximately λ = 1.75
  surface area to volume ratio: nearly twice that for a cube or a sphere.

Vp - the volume of the particle, Ap - the area of the

The ratio of surface
particle surface, Dp - the typical dimension of the
area to volume is:
particle and p, q - factors which connect the particle
geometries.
A mass m (kg) of particles of density ρ; the number
For example: of particles is m/ρVp; each of area Ap; So total area:
-for a cube, the volume is Dp3 and the surface area is 6Dp2 (p=1,
q=1)
- for a sphere the volume is (π/6)Dp3 and the surface area is
π.Dp2.
- In each case the ratio of surface area to volume is 6/Dp.
the number of particles

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

15 16

Slide No. 17 Slide No. 18

EXAMPLE A-4, E&E, p. 268) SOLUTION A-4
Aperture of Tyler sieves:
In an analysis of ground salt using Tyler sieves, it was
7 mesh = 2.83mm
found that 38%of the total salt passed through a 7mesh
9 mesh = 2.00mm
sieve and was caught on a 9mesh sieve. For one of the 80 mesh = 0.177mm
finer fractions, 5% passed an 80mesh sieve but was 115 mesh = 0.125mm.
retained on a 115mesh sieve. Estimate the surface areas of Mean aperture 7 and 9 mesh:
these two fractions in a 5kg sample of the salt, if the
density of salt is 1050kgm-3 and the shape factor λ is 1.75. Ф= (2.83+2.00)/2 = 2.41 mm = 2.41x10-3 m

Given : Mean aperture 80 and 115 mesh:

7-mesh: 2.83 mm Ф = (0.177+0.125)/2 = 0.151 mm = 0.151x10-3 m
9-mesh: 2.00 mm ; 38%
80-mesh: 0.177 mm Total Area At:
115-mesh: 0.125 mm ; 5%
ρ = 1050 kg/m3; m= 5kg
λ=1.75
Ap = ??

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

17 18

3
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 19 Slide No. 20

EXAMPLE A-5 (E&E, p. 274) SOLUTION A-5
It is suspected that for a product of interest the oxidation Total area:
reactions, which create off-flavors, are surface reactions,
which proceed at a rate that is uniform with time. If the Vp – volume of a particle
shelf life of the product is directly related to the Dp – particle diameter
percentage of the off-flavors that have been produced,
estimate the reduction in shelf life consequent upon the
size reductions, that is (a)
(a) from l.0 cm to 0.3 cm and;
(b) from 0.l cm to 0.01cm in diameter, assuming λ = 1.5.

Given:
(b)

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

19 20

Sieve Analysis Slide No. 21

Mesh Size Slide No. 22

Average Particle Size

The particle size distribution of a material is expressed
as either:
- the mass fraction of material that is retained on each sieve
- the cumulative percentage of material retained
The mean overall diameter of particles (volume or mass
mean diameter) is found using:

Method 1

Method 2 davg =

where davg = mass mean diameter,

di = the average diameter of the fraction i,
m i = mass retained on the sieve,
xi = mass fraction.
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

21 22

Slide No. 23
SOLUTION B-1: Slide No. 24

To find the mass mean diameter, find d as follows:

Example B-1:
A sieve analysis of powdered sugar showed the following Sieve % Mass Mass Average diameter of di.Xi
results. Calculated the mass mean diameter of the sample. aperture retained fraction particles di (μm)
(μm) Xi
0 4.6 0.046 18.5, (0+37)/2 0.851
Sieve aperture (μm) Mass retained (%)
37 12.8 0.128 55.5, (37+74)/2 7.104
250 13.8 74 35.2 0.352 99.5 35.024
125 33.6 125 36.6 0.366 187.5 68.625
74 35.2 250 13.8 0.138 273.5 (250+297)/2 37.743
37 12.8
100 1.0 149.35
pan 4.6
From equation for Method 1:
100
mass mean diameter = 149.35 μm Why 297??

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

23 24

4
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 25 Slide No. 26

Example B-2: The mass fraction of a sample of milled corn retained on Solution B-2, Method 1 (3360+4000)/2
each of a series of sieves. Calculate a mean particle diameter which should
be specified for this mixture. U.S. Micron Wt.
% Xi Dpi Xi*Dpi
Sieve Size grams
U.S. Micron Wt. %
X (%) 6 3,360 1.7 1.7 0.017 3,680 62.56
Sieve Size grams accumulate
8 2,380 3.2 3.2 0.032 2870 91.84
6 3,360 1.7 1.7 1.7 12 1,680 7.9 7.9 0.079 2030 160.37
8 2,380 3.2 3.2 4.9 16 1,191 19.4 19.4 0.194 1435.5 278.487
12 1,680 7.9 7.9 12.8
20 841 18.0 18.0 0.18 1016 182.88
16 1,191 19.4 19.4 32.2
30 594 15.0 15.0 0.15 717.5 107.625
20 841 18.0 18.0 50.2
40 420 11.6 11.6 0.116 507 58.812
30 594 15.0 15.0 65.2
50 297 8.0 8.0 0.08 358.5 28.68
40 420 11.6 11.6 76.8
70 212 6.6 6.6 0.066 254.5 16.797
50 297 8.0 8.0 84.8
70 212 6.6 6.6 100 150 3.4 3.4 0.034 181 6.154
91.4
100 150 3.4 3.4 140 103 3.2 3.2 0.032 126.5 4.048
94.8
140 103 3.2 3.2 200 73 1.1 1.1 0.011 88 0.968
98
200 73 1.1 1.1 270 53 0.6 0.6 0.006 63 0.378
99.1
270 53 0.6 0.6 Pan 0 0.3 0.3 0.003 27 0.081
99.7
Pan 0.0 0.3 0.3 Sum. 100 999.7 (0+53)/2
100
Sum. 100.0 100.0 D = Xi*Dpi = 999.7 m
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

25 26

Slide No. 27
Solution B-2, Method 2 (3360+4000)/2
Mixer Uniformity Analysis Slide No. 28

U.S. Micron Wt.

Calculations
% Xi Dpi Xi/Dpi
Sieve Size grams Calculation of Mixer CV бm - standard deviation,
6 3,360 1.7 1.7 0.017 3,680 4.40E-06
8 2,380 3.2 3.2 2870 1.13E-05
– Mean of samples
0.032 n - number of samples,
12 1,680 7.9 7.9 0.079 2030 3.93E-05 – Standard deviation of samples
16 1,191 19.4 19.4 0.194 1435.5 1.37E-04 c - concentration of the
20 841 18.0 18.0 0.18 1016 1.79E-04 component in each sample
30 594 15.0 15.0 0.15 717.5 2.11E-04
40 420 11.6 11.6 0.116 507 2.31E-04 c - the mean concentration
50 297 8.0 8.0 0.08 358.5 2.26E-04 of samples.
70 212 6.6 6.6 0.066 254.5 2.62E-04
100 150 3.4 3.4 0.034 181 1.90E-04
140 103 3.2 3.2 0.032 126.5 2.56E-04
200 73 1.1 1.1 0.011 88 1.03E-04 – CV % = std. deviation x 100
270 53 0.6 0.6 0.006 63 1.60E-05 mean
Pan 0 0.3 0.3 0.003 27 0.00E+00
Sum. 100 100.00 2.06E-03
(0+53)/2
D = 1/(Xi/ Dpi) = 1/1.87E-03 = 485.6 m Standard deviations the uniformity of the mixture

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

27 28

Mixer Uniformity Analysis Slide No. 29 Slide No. 30

Calculations Mixer Uniformity Evaluation

CV RATING CORRECTIVE ACTION
< 10% Excellent None

10-15% Good Increase mixing time by 25-30%

15-20% Fair Increase mixing time by 50%, look

for worn equipment, overfilling, or
sequence of ingredient addition
20% + Poor Possible combination of all the
above
Consults extension personnel or
equipment manufacturer

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

29 30

5
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 31 Slide No. 32

EXAMPLE C-1: Mixing Coefficient of Variation SOLUTION C-1
After a mixer mixing 99kg of salt with 1 kg of magnesium Fraction composition of magnesium carbonate in the
carbonate had been working for some time, ten samples, samples are: 0.0115; 0.0086; 0.0082; 0.0087; 0.0105;
each weighing 20g, were taken and analyzed for 0.0091; 0.0116; 0.0110; 0.0105; 0.0107.
magnesium carbonate. The weights of magnesium
carbonate in the samples were: The mean composition is: c = 0.011
• 0.230,
• 0.172, The standard deviation: s = бm = 0.0015
• 0.163, The CV(%) = 0.0015/0.011*100% = 14%
• 0.173,
• 0.210,
• 0.182, After some later time, fractional compositions found to
• 0.232, be: 0.0113; 0.0085; 0.0081; 0.0108; 0.0104; 0.0098;
• 0.220, 0.0104; 0.0121; 0.0087; 0.0098
• 0.210,
• 0.213 g. The mean composition c = 0.00999
Calculate the Mixer CV (Coefficient of Variation) The standard deviation s = бm = 13.47x10-5
The CV(%) = 13.47x10-5/0.00999*100% = 1.35%

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

31 32

Slide No. 33 Slide No. 34

Mixing Index What Type of Mixing Index?

-To monitor the extent of mixing
- To compare alternative types of equipment  M1 - used when approximately equal masses of
Several mixing indices available: components are mixed and/or at relatively low
mixing rates.
 M2 - used when a small quantity of one
component is incorporated into a larger bulk of
б∞ - the standard deviation of a ‘perfectly mixed’ sample,
material and/or at higher mixing rates.
б0 - the standard deviation of a sample at the start of mixing
бm - the standard deviation of a sample taken during mixing.  M3 - used for liquids or solids mixing in a similar
way to M1.
б0 found using:
 In practice, all three are examined and the one
that is most suitable for the particular ingredients
and type of mixer is selected.
where V0 - the average fractional volume or mass of a component in the mixture.

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

33 34

Slide No. 35 Slide No. 36

Mixing Index – EXAMPLE C-2
Mixing Index vs. Time During preparation of a dough, 700 g of sugar are mixed
In practice, perfect mixing (where б∞) cannot be with 100 kg of flour. Ten 100 g samples are taken after 1, 5
achieved, but in efficient mixers the value becomes and 10 min and analyzed for the percentage sugar. The
results are as follows.
very low after a reasonable period.
The mixing time is related to the mixing index using: Percentage after 1 min 0.05 0.12 0.46 0.17 1.49 0.22 1.18 0.23 1.69 2.01
Percentage after 5 min 0.85 0.80 0.62 0.78 0.75 0.39 0.84 0.96 0.58 0.47
Percentage after 10 min 0.72 0.69 0.71 0.62 0.68 0.71 0.77 0.72 0.70 0.73

Assume that for ‘perfect mixing’ , б∞=0.0001.

K - mixing rate constant; varies with the type of mixer and
the nature of the components.
Calculate the mixing index for each mixing time and draw
conclusions regarding the mixing time.
tm (s) - mixing time.

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

35 36

6
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 37 Slide No. 38

SOLUTION C-2 SOLUTION C-2:
0.7
Convert concentration in % to fractional: Average mass percent V0 of sugar in the mix: V0 =
100.7
≈0.007

Percentage after 1 min 0.05 0.12 0.46 0.17 1.49 0.22 1.18 0.23 1.69 2.01 From equation for б0:
Percentage after 5 min 0.85 0.80 0.62 0.78 0.75 0.39 0.84 0.96 0.58 0.47
Percentage after 10 min 0.72 0.69 0.71 0.62 0.68 0.71 0.77 0.72 0.70 0.73

1 min 5 min 10 min After 1 min of mixing, c =0.00703, then for Std. Dev. бm:
0.0005 0.0085 0.0072
0.0012 0.008 0.0069
0.0046 0.0062 0.0071
0.0017 0.0078 0.0062
0.0149 0.0075 0.0068
0.0022 0.0039 0.0071 Using Index M2 (small quantity sugar + large amount of flour:
0.0118 0.0084 0.0077
0.0023 0.0096 0.0072
0.0169 0.0058 0.0070
0.0201 0.0047 0.0073
Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

37 38

Slide No. 39 Slide No. 40

SOLUTION C-2: EXAMPLE C-3- Mixing yeast into dough
MIXING INDEX CALCULATION
Similarly, after 5 min, 300 s: бm = 0.00182
M2_t2 = 0.431 For a particular bakery operation, it was desired to mix dough
in 95kg batches and then at a later time to blend in 5kg of
Similarly, after 10 min, 600 s: yeast. For product uniformity it is important that the yeast be
бm = 0.000387 well distributed and so an experiment was set up to follow the
M2_t3 = 0.201 course of the mixing. It was desired to calculate the mixing
index after 5 and 10 min mixing.
Sample yeast compositions, expressed as the percentage of
Interpretation: if the log M2 yeast in 100g samples, were found to be:
is plotted against time, the
linear relationship
indicates that the mixing
index gives a good
description of the mixing
process and that mixing
takes place uniformly and Fractional compositions:
efficiently.

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

39 40

Slide No. 41 Slide No. 42

SOLUTION C-3: Mixing yeast into dough EXAMPLE C-4: Rate of Mixing
For a particular bakery operation, it was desired to mix dough in 95kg batches and
then at a later time to blend in 5kg of yeast. For product uniformity it is important that In a batch mixer, blending starch and dried, powdered
the yeast be well distributed and so an experiment was set up to follow the course of
the mixing. Calculate the mixing index after 5 and 10 min mixing, assuming б∞=0.01. vegetables for a soup mixture, the initial proportions of
Fractional compositions:
dried vegetable to starch were 40:60. The variance of
the sample compositions measured in terms of
fractional compositions of starch was found to be
0.0823 after 300s of mixing. For how much longer
- бm,52 = 0.0033  бm,5= 0.057 - Assuming б∞ = 0.01 should the mixing continue to reach the specified
- бm,102 = 0.00038  бm,10 = 0.019  б 2 = 0.0001
∞
maximum sample composition variance of 0.02?
Assume that the starch and the vegetable particles are
-Calculating: of approximately the same physical size and that б∞2 =
0.0001
б02 = 0.0475

- M3,5 = 0.061
- M3,10 = 0.006

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2 Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

41 42

7
 2/1/2025

Slide No. 43 Slide No. 44

SOLUTION C-4: Rate of Mixing
In a batch mixer, blending starch and dried, powdered vegetables for a soup mixture,
the initial proportions of dried vegetable to starch were 40:60. The variance of the
Further Readings:
sample compositions measured in terms of fractional compositions of starch was
found to be 0.0823 after 300s of mixing. For how much longer should the mixing 1. P.J. Fellow. 2016. Food processing technology: Principles and
continue to reach the specified maximum sample composition variance of 0.02? practice. CRC Press. Woodhead Publishing Limited. 3rd Edition.
Assume that the starch and the vegetable particles are of approximately the same (Ch. 3, 4, 5)
physical size and that б∞2 = 0.0001
2. R. Earle, R.L. and Earle, M.D. 2012. Unit operations in food
Initial variance бo2 = 0.4(1-0.4) =0.24 processing, The Web Edition. (Ch. 9, 11, 12)
http://www.nzifst.org.nz/unitoperations
Then, Mixing Index:

Calculating K, for tm = 300s:

Problems:
E&E (Chap 9):
E&E (Chap 11): 1; 2; 5
Then, for бm2 = 0.02: E&E (p. 286, Chap 12): 2, 3, 4, 5

Mixing Time:

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

Food Technology Department International University Food Unit Operations 2

43 44