Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/53382 |
Resumo: | We evaluated various sieving methods to estimate particle size (PS) and geometric standard deviation (GSD) of ground corn. The corn had been previously divided in six fractions and each one ground in a hammermill (1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5- or 12-mm sieves). The stacked sieving method, with prior drying at 105ºC without agitators was the reference. We evaluated eight sieving methods, distributed in a factorial design (2 x 2 x 2 x 6), consisting of the following treatments: i) with and without agitators (two 25-mm rubber spheres), ii) with and without previous drying, iii) with a nest of test sieves set in a stacked or reverse, and iv) employing six ground corn degrees, totaling 48 treatments (four replicates). There was a linear increase in PS estimation for methods without drying and stacking and quadratic increases for the others. Reverse, drying, and agitator methodologies gave better sieving of corn, and consequently gave the lowest PS and highest GSD. The results were more pronounced for high-intensity grinding (hammermill sieve with small apertures) in which the differences between the reference method with the drying and reverse methods were up to 210 µm. Reverse sieving combined with agitators allowed the greatest passage of corn particles through the test sieves and promoted better characterization of ground corn. |
id |
UEM-7_8c2ce0fed89220bc57cdbdea6f7bca22 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/53382 |
network_acronym_str |
UEM-7 |
network_name_str |
Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground cornDifferent sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground cornanimal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation.animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation.We evaluated various sieving methods to estimate particle size (PS) and geometric standard deviation (GSD) of ground corn. The corn had been previously divided in six fractions and each one ground in a hammermill (1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5- or 12-mm sieves). The stacked sieving method, with prior drying at 105ºC without agitators was the reference. We evaluated eight sieving methods, distributed in a factorial design (2 x 2 x 2 x 6), consisting of the following treatments: i) with and without agitators (two 25-mm rubber spheres), ii) with and without previous drying, iii) with a nest of test sieves set in a stacked or reverse, and iv) employing six ground corn degrees, totaling 48 treatments (four replicates). There was a linear increase in PS estimation for methods without drying and stacking and quadratic increases for the others. Reverse, drying, and agitator methodologies gave better sieving of corn, and consequently gave the lowest PS and highest GSD. The results were more pronounced for high-intensity grinding (hammermill sieve with small apertures) in which the differences between the reference method with the drying and reverse methods were up to 210 µm. Reverse sieving combined with agitators allowed the greatest passage of corn particles through the test sieves and promoted better characterization of ground corn.We evaluated various sieving methods to estimate particle size (PS) and geometric standard deviation (GSD) of ground corn. The corn had been previously divided in six fractions and each one ground in a hammermill (1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5- or 12-mm sieves). The stacked sieving method, with prior drying at 105ºC without agitators was the reference. We evaluated eight sieving methods, distributed in a factorial design (2 x 2 x 2 x 6), consisting of the following treatments: i) with and without agitators (two 25-mm rubber spheres), ii) with and without previous drying, iii) with a nest of test sieves set in a stacked or reverse, and iv) employing six ground corn degrees, totaling 48 treatments (four replicates). There was a linear increase in PS estimation for methods without drying and stacking and quadratic increases for the others. Reverse, drying, and agitator methodologies gave better sieving of corn, and consequently gave the lowest PS and highest GSD. The results were more pronounced for high-intensity grinding (hammermill sieve with small apertures) in which the differences between the reference method with the drying and reverse methods were up to 210 µm. Reverse sieving combined with agitators allowed the greatest passage of corn particles through the test sieves and promoted better characterization of ground corn.Editora da Universidade Estadual de Maringá2021-12-22info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/5338210.4025/actascianimsci.v44i1.53382Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences; Vol 44 (2022): Publicação contínua; e53382Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences; v. 44 (2022): Publicação contínua; e533821807-86721806-2636reponame:Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)instacron:UEMenghttps://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/53382/751375153374Copyright (c) 2021 Acta Scientiarum. Animal Scienceshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBiazzi, Heverton Michael Bee Tubin, Jiovani Sergio Conte, Renato AugustoRobazza, Weber da Silva Paiano, Diovani2022-02-17T17:40:22Zoai:periodicos.uem.br/ojs:article/53382Revistahttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSciPUBhttp://www.periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/oaiactaanim@uem.br||actaanim@uem.br|| rev.acta@gmail.com1807-86721806-2636opendoar:2022-02-17T17:40:22Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
title |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
spellingShingle |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn Biazzi, Heverton Michael animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. |
title_short |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
title_full |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
title_fullStr |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
title_full_unstemmed |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
title_sort |
Different sieving methods for determining the physical characteristics in ground corn |
author |
Biazzi, Heverton Michael |
author_facet |
Biazzi, Heverton Michael Bee Tubin, Jiovani Sergio Conte, Renato Augusto Robazza, Weber da Silva Paiano, Diovani |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bee Tubin, Jiovani Sergio Conte, Renato Augusto Robazza, Weber da Silva Paiano, Diovani |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Biazzi, Heverton Michael Bee Tubin, Jiovani Sergio Conte, Renato Augusto Robazza, Weber da Silva Paiano, Diovani |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. |
topic |
animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. animal nutrition; corn milling; feed processing; geometric particle size; geometric standard deviation. |
description |
We evaluated various sieving methods to estimate particle size (PS) and geometric standard deviation (GSD) of ground corn. The corn had been previously divided in six fractions and each one ground in a hammermill (1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5- or 12-mm sieves). The stacked sieving method, with prior drying at 105ºC without agitators was the reference. We evaluated eight sieving methods, distributed in a factorial design (2 x 2 x 2 x 6), consisting of the following treatments: i) with and without agitators (two 25-mm rubber spheres), ii) with and without previous drying, iii) with a nest of test sieves set in a stacked or reverse, and iv) employing six ground corn degrees, totaling 48 treatments (four replicates). There was a linear increase in PS estimation for methods without drying and stacking and quadratic increases for the others. Reverse, drying, and agitator methodologies gave better sieving of corn, and consequently gave the lowest PS and highest GSD. The results were more pronounced for high-intensity grinding (hammermill sieve with small apertures) in which the differences between the reference method with the drying and reverse methods were up to 210 µm. Reverse sieving combined with agitators allowed the greatest passage of corn particles through the test sieves and promoted better characterization of ground corn. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-12-22 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/53382 10.4025/actascianimsci.v44i1.53382 |
url |
https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/53382 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.4025/actascianimsci.v44i1.53382 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.uem.br/ojs/index.php/ActaSciAnimSci/article/view/53382/751375153374 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da Universidade Estadual de Maringá |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora da Universidade Estadual de Maringá |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences; Vol 44 (2022): Publicação contínua; e53382 Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences; v. 44 (2022): Publicação contínua; e53382 1807-8672 1806-2636 reponame:Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) instacron:UEM |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) |
instacron_str |
UEM |
institution |
UEM |
reponame_str |
Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) |
collection |
Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
actaanim@uem.br||actaanim@uem.br|| rev.acta@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1799315363586899968 |