NON-SILICONE VEGETABLE OIL BASED ANTI-FOAM COMPATIBLE WITH CROSS-FLOW FILTRATION

Abstract

A method of processing a liquid including adding an antifoam to a process liquid, and after adding the antifoam, continuously feeding the process liquid through one or more cross-flow filter membrane configured for cross-flow filtration, wherein the antifoam includes a mixture of (A) a vegetable oil and (B) an organic emulsifier or surfactant. The antifoam may, for example, not contain silicone.

Claims

1. A method of processing a liquid, comprising: adding an antifoam to a process liquid, and after adding the antifoam, continuously feeding the process liquid through one or more cross-flow filter membrane configured for cross-flow filtration, wherein the antifoam comprises a mixture of (A) a vegetable oil and (B) an organic emulsifier or surfactant.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein purified liquid passes through the cross-flow filter membrane as filtrate, and solids suspended in the process liquid, which are too large to pass through pores of the cross-flow filter membrane, are retained in an increasingly concentrated retentate.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the process liquid is a liquid subject to excessive foaming during a liquid processing step.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein the process liquid is a beverage.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein the process liquid is beer or wine.

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the process liquid is beer, and the antifoam is added during a step of wort boiling and/or during a step of fermentation.

7. The method according to claim 1, wherein 2 ppm to 500 ppm of the antifoam is added to the process liquid.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cross-flow filter membrane is composed of a ceramic material or a polymeric material.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cross-flow filter membrane is composed of polyethersulfone (PES), polysulfone (PS), modified polyethersulfone (mPES), mixed ester (ME), mixed cellulose ester (MCE), or blends thereof.

10. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cross-flow filter membrane is composed of polyethersulfone (PES).

11. The method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of reducing a temperature of the process liquid below a melting point of the vegetable oil of the antifoam.

12. The method according to claim 1, further comprising a step of allowing the antifoam to at least partially solidify prior continuously feeding the process liquid through the one or more cross-flow filter membrane.

13. The method according to claim 1, wherein the vegetable oil is one or more selected from the group consisting of soybean oil, palm oil, rice bran oil, sunflower oil, olive oil, coconut oil, rapeseed oil, canola oil, peanut oil, cottonseed oil, corn oil, linseed oil, safflower oil, sesame oil, hazelnut oil, açaí palm oil, avocado oil, brazil nut oil, cashew oil, chia seed oil, cocoa butter oil, flaxseed oil, hemp seed oil, pecan oil, and walnut oil.

14. The method according to claim 1, wherein the organic emulsifier or surfactant is one or more selected from the group consisting of mustard, soy and egg lecithin, mono- and diglycerides, polysorbates, carrageenan, guar gum, polyglycerol esters, stearoyl lactylates, propylene glycol, propylene glycol esters, sucrose esters, saccharide fatty acid esters, milk proteins, wheat glutens, gelatins, prolamines, soy protein isolates, starches, acetylated polysaccharides, alginates, carrageenans, chitosans, inulins, long chain fatty acids, waxes, agar, alginates, glycerol, gums, poloxamers, monosodium phosphates, monostearate, fatty acid methyl esters (e.g., methyl stearate, methyl palmitate, methyl palmitoleate (cis-9)), and blends thereof. Specific examples include, for example, sorbitan monododecanoate, polyoxyethylene 20 sorbitan monostearate, sorbitan mono-9-octadecenoate, and 9-octadecenoic acid.

15. The method according to claim 1, wherein the antifoam further comprises hydrophobic silica and/or hydrophilic silica.

16. The method according to claim 1, wherein the vegetable oil includes rapeseed oil, and the organic emulsifier or surfactant includes one or more selected from the group consisting of sorbitan monododecanoate, polyoxyethylene 20 sorbitan monostearate, sorbitan mono-9-octadecenoate, and 9-octadecenoic acid.

17. The method of claim 1, wherein a weight ratio of the vegetable oil in the antifoam is from 5.0 to 70.0 wt %; and a weight ratio of the organic emulsifier or surfactant in the antifoam is from 5.0 to 60.0 wt %.

18. The method of claim 16, wherein a weight ratio of the vegetable oil in the antifoam is from 5.0 to 70.0 wt %; and a weight ratio of the organic emulsifier or surfactant in the antifoam is from 5.0 to 60.0 wt %.

19. The method of claim 1, wherein silica is not included in the antifoam

20. The method of claim 1, wherein silicone is not included in the antifoam.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

[0045] Any figures contained herein are provided only by way of example and not by way of limitation.

[0046] FIG. 1 is a chart showing an effect of different formulations on antifoam efficiency in Example 1.

[0047] FIG. 2A is a chart showing an effect of dose response of AFV3 on % increase in foam height in beer fermentation in Example 2.

[0048] FIG. 2B is a chart showing an effect of antifoam dose response on foam stability of finished beer in Example 2.

[0049] FIG. 3 is a chart showing an effect of antifoam on cross-flow filtration using crossflow advanced and 0.45 μm PES membrane in Example 3.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCLOSURE

[0050] Before the present compositions, methods, and methodologies are described in more detail, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not limited to particular compositions, methods, and experimental conditions described, as such compositions, methods, and conditions may vary. It is also to be understood that the terminology used herein is for purposes of describing particular embodiments only, and is not intended to be limiting, since the scope of the present invention will be limited only in the appended claims.

[0051] As used in this specification and the appended claims, the singular forms “a”, “an”, and “the” include plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Thus, for example, references to “a glyceride” includes one or more glycerides, and/or compositions of the type described herein which will become apparent to those persons skilled in the art upon reading this disclosure and so forth.

[0052] Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this disclosure belongs. Any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein may be used in the practice or testing of the disclosure, as it will be understood that modifications and variations are encompassed within the spirit and scope of the instant disclosure.

[0053] Unless otherwise stated, each range disclosed herein will be understood to encompass and be a disclosure of each discrete point and all possible subranges within the range.

[0054] As used herein, “about,” “approximately,” “substantially,” and “significantly” will be understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art and will vary in some extent depending on the context in which they are used. If there are uses of the term which are not clear to persons of ordinary skill in the art given the context in which it is used, “about” and “approximately” will mean plus or minus <10% of particular term, and “substantially” and “significantly” will mean plus or minus >10% of the particular term. “Comprising” and “consisting essentially of” have their customary meaning in the art.

[0055] In embodiments, the present disclosure provides mixing the components of the antifoam and/or obtaining the antifoam; adding the antifoam to a process liquid; and subjecting the process liquid to cross-flow filtration.

[0056] As shown in the Examples below, the antifoam provides, for example, one or more of the advantages described above compared to the use of a conventional silicone-based antifoam.

[0057] In addition, the antifoam provides, for example, no sensory impact on the final food product (e.g., a beverage, such as beer or wine, or other liquid).

EXAMPLES

[0058] In the following, although embodiments of the present disclosure are described in further detail by means of Examples, the present disclosure is not limited thereto.

Example 1

[0059] Example 1 shows the effect of different antifoams on fermentation processes.

Methodology

[0060] Antifoam Solution Preparation and Dosing

[0061] The following formulations were tested for antifoam efficiency: [0062] AFS: water 65 wt %, silicone 20 wt %, and organic emulsifiers 15 wt %; [0063] AFV1: water 60 wt %, silicone 25%, organic emulsifiers 15 wt %; [0064] AFV2: polyalkyl glycol 90 wt %, and propyl alcohol 10 wt %; and [0065] AFV3: rapeseed oil 45 wt %, 9-octadecenoic acid 35 wt %, sorbitan monododecanoate 15 wt %, and other organic emulsifiers 5 wt %.

[0066] A 1% (w/v) solution of each antifoam in water was obtained and recirculated vigorously for 30-60 mins. The antifoam solution was added to beer within 1-2 hours, as per dosage requirement of the trial. The beer was fermented for 4 to 5 days at room temperature (RT), i.e., about 20° C. or as per required by the brand style. A foam measurement was recorded daily at 24-hour intervals to calculate the percentage (%) increase in foam height compared to a blank sample with no fermentation occurring where yeast is not added.

[0067] Results

[0068] The results are shown in FIG. 1.

[0069] Among the different antifoams tested, AFV3 worked well compared with the silicone-based antifoam AFS. As noted above, AFV3 is the antifoam formulation based on rapeseed oil and other organic emulsifiers, and based on these results, AFV3 was chosen for further testing.

Example 2

[0070] Example 2 shows the effects of dose optimization and foam stability in the finished beer.

Methodology

[0071] Beer Preparation

[0072] Approximately 1.5 Kg of Amber malt extract was added to 8.5 L of water. The mixture was heated, 1.5 g/l of hops was added when the mixture started to boil, and a rolling boil was maintained for 45 minutes. Next, 1 whirlfloc Tablet was added 15 minutes before the boiling was stopped. The original gravity (OG) was then brought to about 1.045-1.050 using water or dextrose as required. Next, the wort was cooled using a heat exchanger and then hot break (proteins and polyphenols that coagulate during the wort boil) was separated by leaving the wort to settle for 20 minutes and decanting the clear wort. 700 ml of wort was then poured into graduated cylinders so that foam could be measured. Next, 250 g/hl of ale yeast Safale K-97 was added to each graduated cylinder, and the wort was allowed to ferment at RT for 4 to 5 days. Finally, the graduated cylinders were placed in a chilled incubator at 0.5° C. for 48 hours.

[0073] Filtration

[0074] Filtration is not particular limited, and of course, can be carried out as per the brand style in brewery. The following process was carried about for this test. 250 g/hl of filter aid was added into beer and mixed. Next, a filter unit was assembled (SARTOFLOW® Slice 200 Benchtop System) using a 0.45 μm PES filter membrane. Chilled water was recirculated at 2° C. around the filter unit jacket. The filter was precoated with 700 g/hl of filter aid in water. Next, chilled beer was poured into filter unit so that there is minimum disruption of filter precoat. The filter unit was then sealed and constant air pressure was applied. The filtered beer was then collected.

[0075] Carbonation and NIBEM Analysis

[0076] Beer was carbonated at a concentration of 5 g/l CO.sub.2. Foam stability of finished beer was done using NIBEM equipment as per standard protocol.

[0077] Results

[0078] Based on the results from Example 1, AFV3 was chosen as an antifoam to conduct dose response curve (see FIG. 2A) and to measure foam stability in finished beer (see FIG. 2B). Based on the results, the use of AFV3 at 40 ppm was best suited to deliver antifoam efficiency, as well as preserve the foam stability in finished beer.

Example 3

[0079] Example 3 shows the effects of beer with cross flow filtration.

[0080] Beer Preparation

[0081] Beer preparation was conducted using the same methodology described in Example 2.

[0082] Filtration

[0083] Filtration is not particular limited, and of course, can be carried out as per the brand style in brewery. Cross-flow filtration was carried out using Sartoflow Advanced equipment and a PES hollow fibre membrane of 0.45 μm porosity. The following beer sample protocol was used for the cross-flow filtration.

[0084] Sartorius Advanced with Hollow Fibre Membrane Sample Analysis Protocol

[0085] The reservoir tank was filed with 9 litres of sample using a peristaltic pump. The feed pump was started at a slow speed. The bypass valve was opened fully before starting the pump so that any air in system would not go into the column. The system was left to recirculate for 5 minutes at 5% pump speed to flush any air from system. The bypass valve was then slowly closed, and the pump speed was slowly increased so the feed and TMP=0.5-5 psig to wet the module and remove air from the system. The pinch valve on the retentate was used to generate back pressure and transmembrane pressure (TMP) to get permeate flow through the fibres. The pump speed was then slowly increased so the feed and TMP=0.5-5 psig thereby removing air from the system. The inlet pressure was slowly increased to 0.7 bar and a flux analysis was carried out. The Retentate flow rate (L/h), Permeate flow rate (L/h), Inlet Pressure (bar), DPRESS (bar), TMP (bar), and Diaphragm (% capacity) were recorded every 5 minutes.

[0086] The beer samples were dosed with the non-silicone antifoam AFV3 and the silicone antifoam AFS at 40 ppm each. Then they were filtered using above protocol, and the flux rate was measured in litres/hour.

[0087] Results

[0088] Based on the results from Example 1, AFV3 was chosen as the non-silicone antifoam and AFS as the silicone antifoam to compare efficiency of filtration and showcase filter blinding. Based on the results, AFV3 was shown to provide better filtration performance compared to AFS. AFV3 also showed faster filtration rate and slower blinding of the membrane and hence lower impact on the cross-flow filtration performance with 0.45 μm membrane.

[0089] While there have been shown and described fundamental novel features of the disclosure as applied to the preferred and exemplary embodiments thereof, it will be understood that omissions and substitutions and changes in the form and details of the disclosure may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit of the disclosure. Moreover, as is readily apparent, numerous modifications and changes may readily occur to those skilled in the art. For example, any feature(s) in one or more embodiments may be applicable and combined with one or more other embodiments. Hence, it is not desired to limit the present disclosure to the exact construction and operation shown and described and, accordingly, all suitable modification equivalents may be resorted to falling within the scope of the present disclosure as claimed. In other words, although the embodiments of the disclosure have been described with reference to the above examples, it will be understood that modifications and variations are encompassed within the spirit and scope of the disclosure. Accordingly, the invention is limited only by the following claims.

[0090] All references disclosed herein are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties.