|
Post by jamescary on Jan 21, 2008 20:03:50 GMT -5
Anyone out there using pasta rollers for refining?
I just read in Polymer Clay for Everyone by Suzann Thompson that by using an Atlas Queen pasta roller, one can achieve a thickness of 600 microns at the level 6 setting and 10 microns at the level 7 setting.
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist on Jan 22, 2008 13:31:25 GMT -5
I thought about this, and what you would be making would be a roller mill. The trick from what I gathered is that you need to recirculate and contain the chocolate. And most roller mills have large rollers will the gap angle that pulls the chocolate into the rollers. The pasta maker tests I did never seems to do anything because the gap was to acute and it filtered coarse particles (they just rode the rollers) instead of pulling them in and crushing them.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 22, 2008 15:23:21 GMT -5
Could you load the chocolate up in a bag so that pressure could be applied to help push the chocolate through? Or possibly something could be added to the rollers to help pull the chocolate through? I've been doing a little more research on pasta rollers and it appears that the thinnest setting on the Atlas is really about 300 microns. So, it seems like maybe something would have to pass through with the chocolate to get the particles crushed down more finely. (Maybe I'm pushing too far down this rabbit hole
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jan 23, 2008 1:39:36 GMT -5
Rollers will work, but only if you score them horizontally or roughen them up in some way.
In many commercial conche/refiners, many blades are pushed against the side of a rolling drum in such a way that it forces the chocolate under the blade. However the side of the drum is ribbed, such that it catches the edge of the particle thereby forcing it under the pressure of the knife.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 23, 2008 11:23:08 GMT -5
Are the blades necessary? Do the particles break under the pressure of the drums or do they flatten?
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 23, 2008 13:47:20 GMT -5
Maybe an oat flaker would be better? There's one talked about over on the homebrew boards (Marga Mulino) which they've modified to crush grain at a thickness of 0.06 in (1.5 mm). I'm checking to see how close the rollers can get (there appear to be 3 knurled rollers on it).
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist on Jan 23, 2008 14:22:29 GMT -5
First off, I don't to dissuade anyone from looking into this. I would love to see a home refiner alternative. OTOH, just so you know, I have looked into all these 'off the shelf' options and they didn't work out. Actually, it tells me I need to document this out so people don't go down the same path I did to no avail.
So, what I found out.
Brad, I am not sure what you are describing, but it isn't what I am familiar with for a lab roller refiner. Or if it is, our understanding of the functions of the various pieces are different.
I have seen no refiners with ridges or grooves to draw the chocolate in. They all draw by the nip angle of the rollers and the differential speed of the rollers. Generally on roller operates about 75% the speed of it's mate. This mismatch both helps draw the chocolate in and causes sheer that actually refines the chocolate finer than the gap. Again, generally, to get that nip angle fine enough, the rollers need to be around 9", although I saw some references down to 6" or so. Nothing the size of these pasta and oat rollers.
The blade to my understanding is used to remove the chocolate from the rollers, and deposit onto the next one or take it out of the system. It isn't pressing it into the rollers.
I think this could be built, but those size rollers get expensive. Way more than a Melanger.
Could you push the chocolate in? Maybe - shrug - my experience is that the devil is in the details. Seals, heat, etc. And my gut feeling is no, you can't push it though. If you put the chocolate under pressure, either it is all going to just run through, or if the gap is smaller than the sugar particles, the sugar is just going to filter out and ride on the rollers because you aren't really pushing the solid particles - you are pushing the fluid they are suspended in and the fluid is what will move, leaving the particles behind.
Please keep the discussion going - it is this kind of thing that go us where we are today.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jan 23, 2008 15:59:32 GMT -5
John;
You're right about the roll refiners having rolls of differing speeds. However home pasta machines do not have that ability. They simply aren't meant to crush and grind. They're meant to flatten and smooth. This is why you'd have to score the rolls so that the edges of the chocolate particles catch.
The other issue is pressure. You'd need a heck of a lot of horsepower to force chocolate through a home refiner - more than what's offered in most home equipment. Most of the commercial roll refiners use hydraulics to create the pressure, and significant motors to drive the rolls. I have a commercial Kitchen Aide mixer at home and a very expensive (and solid) pasta roller attachment for it, and I can almost stall it rolling pasta through.
What I was talking about earlier is a commercial refiner/conche, similar to that of what MacIntyre makes, and similar to what Sharffenberger uses. Note that the commercial refiner/conches have the ability to take product right from the nibs, and forego the need for a melangeur. However the price is too steep for a home chocolatier (over $20,000 USD), and usually the power is 3 phase - one more "phase" than we have in our homes.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 23, 2008 19:22:43 GMT -5
brad, I'm a little bummed now.. That is the roller I will be picking up! I was all set to give it go with some champion ground choco.. Maybe it'll just have to stick to its original purpose of rolling pasta Which Kitchenaid do you have? I've got a 325 W 5 qt one. Power does seem to be an issue. Alchemist, I noticed the industrial rollers do appear to be at an angle to one another and I read about the differential speeds. Would you have any more data on the roller's nip angles and how fast they rotate?
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jan 23, 2008 22:14:33 GMT -5
James;
I'm not sure why you'd want to try refining with something other than the Santha... It works just fine.
I just checked my Kitchenaide and it's the 350 watt "Professional" Series.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 24, 2008 0:45:37 GMT -5
brad, my understanding of refining in the santha is that it takes roughly 12 hours in an unmodified one.. Also, there's no gaurantee that every particle makes it under the wheels (although, the probability is very high after a certain amount of time).. I am hoping to reduce the time in the melangeur and try to make each step roughly the same amount of time.. This way I may be able to create an assembly line of sorts..
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist on Jan 24, 2008 8:24:50 GMT -5
Brad, he makes a good point. If we could refine a batch in one hour that would really increase approachability. Likewise, I recall a "new" method of conching. The hot/warm refined chocolate is poured onto a spinning disk. Surface to volume goes up radically and conching occurs. Combine both of those on the home market and you could have finished chocolate in hours instead of days. If that occurs though, it will be at (no pun intended) at the price of expense. James, those speeds are pretty slow. For a traditional 5 roller setup, I have a memory of the fastest roller being around 180 rpm, and it steps down from there to something like 80 by the end. The only real pseudo data I have on nip angle was the practical 6-9" roller. Something else I looked at, but never followed up on was a set of rollers made of toothed bar stock made of Stainless steel. Different mechanism from straight roller refiners, but still a rubbing surface. But as they mesh and touch, you are going to lose some control over the fineness. www.hpcgears.com/products/toothed_bar_stock.htmBrad - those large units use hydraulics and so much power because of their scale. Scale those down and material won't flex, and power consumption is going to go way down geometrically.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jan 24, 2008 13:18:53 GMT -5
John;
In your last post, you talk of two different processes - refining and conching.
I may sound very cynical at this point, but if there was a way to cut the refining time of chocolate down to a matter of an hour or so, instead of 12 hours, would it not stand to reason that the companies spending millions of dollars on research and development of chocolate equipment would have found it already?
Also, regardless of the refining time, the chocolate still needs to be stirred (conched) for a period of time to develop the appropriate flavours. Companies like Netsch, MacIntyre, and such have the refining process down to 9-12 hours and boast of it. HOWEVER, when you read articles such as the ones recently posted in here on Amano chocolate, and others from Sharffenberger, they are clear that it's best to let the chocolate age for a period of time after processing to further develop the flavour profile.
The bottom line here, is that if you want to make chocolate - GOOD chocolate - it's going to take time to develop the product.
You can't make good wine in a hurry (it needs to age). You can't make good scotch in a hurry (it too needs to age). You can't make a good steak in a hurry (aging for this takes at least 28 days).
In relation to these "fine" products for which the discerning customer is willing to pay a premium (such as with fine chocolate), 72 hours to process fine chocolate is blazing fast.
Yes, you can still get quality Angus beef at Burger King, and yes you can get it in 5 minutes. However it's aged at least 20 days prior to hitting the assembly line, and that time is factored into the assembly line process.
Kill enough cows to last 28 days. Hang 'em high.. (Old Clint Eastwood here... snicker snicker) After 28 days, start making burgers, and kill another 28 days production-worth of cows.
Having said that, if James is trying to get an "assembly line" per se going, he should factor in time to make the chocolate, let it age, and THEN use it. There's no rational reason I can see, where he can't start his assembly line process (refining the chocolate) 5 days before the chocolate needs to be created into a bar/bon bon.
Just my two bits for what it's worth.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Jan 24, 2008 16:52:48 GMT -5
good wine, good scotch, good steak, good chocolate.. that's a pretty comprehensive list. i only think i need one more thing added to that to have a rich and fulfilling life, which i do, and she's great
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Jan 24, 2008 18:17:14 GMT -5
Sebastian, well put i'm still working on that fifth one.. any advice? brad, I guess it depends on your definition of 'good'.. Ran across this article today: drinkcraftbeer.com/editorial/articles/drink_craft_beer,_eat_craft_chocolate,_-_a_chocolate_and_beer_pairing_with_taza_chocolate_company.html Here something as simple as a 5 hour refine in stone mill machine brings back good memories of home... My point of the assembly line is to reduce time in each machine, thereby allowing the chocolate to 'flow' from one step to the next -- 20 minute roast, 20 minute winnow, 20 minute pre-grind (champion), 20 minute mix (santha), 20 minute (!) refine (?), ?? minute conche... Then it becomes like singing row row row your boat around the campfire -- beans pulled out of roast and winnowed while new beans roast... Alchemist, I've seen some 'fast conching' abstracts recently.. Mainly related to milk chocolate and the theory goes that you want to drive off the last of moisture and cover as many particles with fat as possible.. So, it would seem the spinning disk idea would do that fairly well.. However, I wonder is there more to conching? I happened across the Food Industries manual which states a 5 roll refiner's rollers run from bottom to top: 20, 33, 45, 66, and 100 rpm.. It also states the rollers on the bottom are usually granite and the ones on top are steel (and cooled because of the amount of friction).. Interesting about the toothed rollers.. So, it would work like a very fine press as the cogs meshed? I ran across this manufacturer while searching around for grain roll refiners (possibly something I'll follow up on): www.chillrolls.com/Also, I considered bicycle trainer rollers (they're about 3" diameter), but they appear to be made out of either aluminum or pvc..
|
|