Effect of ceramic membrane channel diameter on limiting retentate protein concentration during skim milk microfiltration

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 99, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 167-182

  Adams, Michael C ^a   Barbano, David M ^a  

^a Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Ceramic membranes; Channel diameter; Microfiltration; Protein

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; MILK PROTEIN; PLASMA PROTEIN;

ANIMAL; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; CERAMICS; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FILTRATION; FOOD HANDLING; HYDRODYNAMICS; MILK; PILOT STUDY; VISCOSITY;

ANIMALS; BLOOD PROTEINS; CERAMICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FILTRATION; FOOD HANDLING; HYDRODYNAMICS; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; MILK; MILK PROTEINS; PILOT PROJECTS; VISCOSITY;

EID: 84952716089     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: 15253198     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2015-9897     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Adams M.C., Hurt E.E., Barbano D.M. Impact of soluble calcium and lactose on limiting flux and serum protein removal during skim milk microfiltration. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98:7483-7497. a, http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9474.
2. Adams M.C., Hurt E.E., Barbano D.M. Effect of ceramic membrane channel geometry and uniform transmembrane pressure on limiting flux and serum protein removal during skim milk microfiltration. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98:7527-7543. b, http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9753.
3. Amelia I., Barbano D.M. Production of an 18% protein liquid micellar casein concentrate with a long refrigerated shelf life. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96:3340-3349.
4. Anema S.G. Effects of milk solids concentration on the pH, soluble calcium, and soluble phosphate levels of milk during heating. Dairy Sci. Technol. 2009, 89:501-510.
5. Official Methods of Analysis 2000, AOAC International, AOAC International, Gaithersburg, MD. 17th.
6. Bacchin P., Aimar P., Field R.W. Critical and sustainable fluxes: Theory, experiments, and applications. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 281:42-69.
7. Beckman S.L., Barbano D.M. Effect of microfiltration concentration factor on serum protein removal from skim milk using spiral-wound polymeric membranes. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96:6199-6212.
8. Belfort G., Davis R.H., Zydney A.L. The behavior of suspensions and macromolecular solutions in crossflow microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 96:1-58.
9. Brookfield Engineering Laboratories Inc. 2014. More solutions to sticky problems. Accessed Apr. 20, 2015. http://http://www.brookfieldengineering.com/download/files/more_solutions.pdf.
10. Cheryan M. Ultrafiltration and microfiltration handbook. Costs and Processing Economics 1998, 339. Technomic Publishing Company Inc, Lancaster, PA.
11. COMSOL. 2013. Which turbulence model should I choose for my CFD application? Accessed Mar. 13, 2015. http://http://www.comsol.com/blogs/which-turbulence-model-should-choose-cfd-application/.
12. Fernandez-Martin F. Influence of temperature and composition on some physical properties of milk and milk concentrates II: viscosity. J. Dairy Res. 1972, 39:75-82.
13. Gesan-Guiziou G., Daufin G., Boyaval E., Le Berre O. Wall shear stress: effective parameter for the characterization of the cross-flow transport in turbulent regime during skimmed milk microfiltration. Lait 1999, 79:347-354.
14. Glantz S.A., Slinker B.K. Multicollinearity and what to do about it. Primer of Applied Regression and Analysis of Variance 2001, 185-187. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, NY. 2nd.
15. Hurt E., Barbano D.M. Processing factors that influence casein and serum protein separation by microfiltration. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93:4928-4941.
16. Hurt E., Zulewska J., Newbold M., Barbano D.M. Micellar casein concentrate production with a 3X, 3-stage uniform transmembrane pressure ceramic membrane process at 50°C. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93:5588-5600.
17. Hurt E.E., Adams M.C., Barbano D.M. Microfiltration: Effect of channel diameter on limiting flux and serum protein removal. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98:3599-3612.
18. Kaylegian K.E., Houghton G.E., Lynch J.M., Fleming J.R., Barbano D.M. Calibration of infrared milk analyzers: Modified milk versus producer milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89:2817-2832.
19. Mulder M. Membranes processes in separation and purification. Energy Requirements in Membrane Separation Processes 1994, 459. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
20. Samuelsson G., Huisman I.H., Tragardh G., Paulsson M. Predicting limiting flux of skim milk in crossflow microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 1997, 129:277-281.
21. Sauer A., Doehner I., Moraru C.I. Steady shear rheological properties of micellar casein concentrates obtained by membrane filtration as a function of shear rate, concentration, and temperature. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95:5569-5579.
22. Solanki G., Rizvi S.S.H. Physico-chemical properties of skim milk retentates from microfiltration. J. Dairy Sci. 2001, 84:2381-2391.
23. USDA. 1965. Pages 1-74 in Full committee report of study conducted in thirteen federal milk order markets on volume-weight conversion factors for milk. Supplement to marketing research report 701. Consumer and Marketing Service, Dairy Division, USDA, Washington, DC.
24. Wojciechowski K.L., Barbano D.M. Modification of the Kjeldahl noncasein nitrogen method for bovine milk concentrates and milks from other species. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98:7510-7526.
25. Zulewska J., Newbold M., Barbano D.M. Efficiency of serum protein removal from skim milk with ceramic and polymeric membranes at 50°C. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92:1361-1377.