|
Post by chocomania on Mar 15, 2006 3:17:28 GMT -5
your welcome. let me know how much they would cost. It might also be a good idea to ask if they have old or refurbished ones available. sometimes these companies have them as they help their existing customers upgrade to newer machines. then again your right. the santa would be the most economical option. although having a melangeur in a factory is a wonderful marketing incentive. Hmmm maybe santha can make something like it for 50 liters capacity. (not bowl type as what they have right now.) but the old fashion looking melangeur for visual appeal's sake.
|
|
|
Post by chocomania on Mar 15, 2006 3:24:10 GMT -5
and for everyone else that hasnt seen this yet... www.chocoeasy.com . this is fantastic as well. ive been talking to this company for quite some time and will get their prices soon as well. Their conch machine (refiner, dry conch, wet conch in one) can conch up to 14 microns in 12 hours. not bad... somehow their processing type is a little different to achieve this. i cant understand the technical explanation they gave me but in short its all about the advancement in science and technology that now we can produce fantastic chocolates in a day rather than conching for days.
|
|
|
Post by Samantha Madell on Mar 15, 2006 5:42:29 GMT -5
Regarding chocomania's comment that the ChocoEasy "can conch up to 14 microns in 12 hours"... There seems to be some confusion here.
The process of conching is not about reducing particle size (particle size is reduced during refining). Conching brings about a number of changes in the chocolate that require time to take place - for example, the "corners" on the cocoa particles are smoothed out, and the last of the volatile acids are released, leading to a smoother and less acidic end product. Many low-end chocolate producers would only conch for, say, 12 hours simply because time is money.
Sam
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Mar 15, 2006 8:15:44 GMT -5
Regarding chocomania's comment that the ChocoEasy "can conch up to 14 microns in 12 hours"... There seems to be some confusion here. The process of conching is not about reducing particle size (particle size is reduced during refining). Conching brings about a number of changes in the chocolate that require time to take place - for example, the "corners" on the cocoa particles are smoothed out, and the last of the volatile acids are released, leading to a smoother and less acidic end product. Many low-end chocolate producers would only conch for, say, 12 hours simply because time is money. Sam The interesting thing, though, is that there are high-speed, high-shear conches that do just that--conch in a very small amount of time. As John has noted before, it seems that there is some debate between proponents of the fast and slow conching techniques, and the machines that go along with them. Another thing that John has pointed out, and this is a comment from the owner of Dagoba, is this: chocolatetalk.proboards56.com/index.cgi?board=refining&action=display&thread=1139361197&page=1#1139405965Point being, here, that if we are dealing with a very high quality bean that we have sought out specifically for its particular flavor profile, including various high notes, that conching much can actually be detrimental. If, on the other hand, one is using a lower quality bean, and perhaps a mixture of lower quality beans, with relatively strong bitter, or other non-favorable notes, then quite a bit of conching might be required to have a usable product. I, personally, am no conching expert, so I can only go by what I read here and in industry books. However, it seems that far from things being cut and dry regarding conching techniques and conching time lengths, that there are actually a large variety of different variables that go into the decision. That said, Sam, I would be highly interested in knowing more about your Hobart setup. Are there special paddle attachments for the Hobart that allow it to conch with a certain amount of shear by pressing the chocolate against the side of the metal mixing bowl? I would really like to hear more. Also, I don't know if you saw my question to you about equipment that you use to clean the beans. It is here: chocolatetalk.proboards56.com/index.cgi?board=techniques&action=display&thread=1142287637&page=1#1142341386Thanks again to everyone for the conversation. Chocomania, if you find out the price to the ChocoEasy, I would be interested to know. Alan
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist on Mar 15, 2006 10:48:43 GMT -5
Alan, you are right. I have been talking with Santha about a larger capacity Santha.
I have a conference that I am attending at the end of March. After that, information for the larger ones will be available. Just a ballpark, but the largest should run about $1300 with shipping in the US and hold around 40-50lb of chocolate.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Mar 15, 2006 11:06:56 GMT -5
netzsch makes this product. while you may have some particles that are at the 14 um level, there's a big difference between 85% < 14 um and 2% < 14 um. You can realistically expect to have an 85% < 30 um coming out of this equipment for a 12 hr period.
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Mar 15, 2006 13:23:18 GMT -5
Dear Chocomania, I got a response from the olive-oil refiner company. They still haven't given me a price. But, they said that the price of a new machine was far more than $15,000, and when I asked about refurbished machines, the woman told me that I would be "better off sticking to the US market and to something made for exactly what need. "
So, we don't have a price for those, but it sounds like they aren't the best option for us anyway. I would be interested in knowing pricing on the ChocoEasy, though, when you finally have it. Regarding particle size, I found something that might interest everyone: www.chocoeasy.com/the_quality/enlarge1.html
It seems that the finished result is within the range of what we are looking for. Of course, if the new large batch Santha is on the way, then that could change things for us too.
Alan
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist on Mar 15, 2006 15:21:34 GMT -5
netzsch makes this product. while you may have some particles that are at the 14 um level, there's a big difference between 85% < 14 um and 2% < 14 um. You can realistically expect to have an 85% < 30 um coming out of this equipment for a 12 hr period. I don't have this data up anywhere yet, but I do actually have some particle size analysis of the chocolate that the Santha produces over time. As a control, it was run against a Dagoba product, both 78%. At the 10 hours, 90% was under 14.5 um, 95% was under 17 um and there were no particles larger than 38 um. For comparison, the Dagoba control was the same for 95% and 13.7 um at 90%. It had no particle larger than 53 um, and 99.96% under 38 um.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Mar 15, 2006 15:49:03 GMT -5
I've never analyzed a santha produced product, but I'm very familiar with the various industrial processes and what they're capable of. If you're able to hit a 90% < 14 um with the santha at 10 hours, that's very impressive. The technical person in me would want the know the specifics on how the analysis was done (ie, coulter laser particle size analyzer), what the carrier was (IPA?, P-OH?), and when was the last calibration/results? If you'd like, you can send me some product and i'll run it on a validated piece of equipment.
I'd also suggest that going too fine isn't necessarily a good thing. There's a point where your mouth can't distinguish finer particle sizes, and you're there. As you go increasingly finer, the surface area increases dramatically - meaning your viscosity is going to be increasingly difficult to manage. Just something to keep in mind. In fact, as you go too fine, the product can become unpleasantly 'sticky' - sort of akin to putting a spoonful of pnut butter in your mouth.
|
|
|
Post by Samantha Madell on Mar 15, 2006 17:35:14 GMT -5
Alan, in response to your questions:
* Are there special paddle attachments for the Hobart that allow it to conch with a certain amount of shear by pressing the chocolate against the side of the metal mixing bowl?
Well, no, because I'm not trying to shear the particles during conching. This goes back to the point I was making earlier about the difference between refining and conching, which I do separately (I use an old granite roll refiner for refining). And by the way, I'm not suggesting that the way I do things is the only way to do things! :-)
* Since you recommend a separate area for storage and cleaning of beans, that makes at least two sections. I was thinking it also might be better to winnow in that same area to avoid contaminating the product that is being refined with dust. Does that sound reasonable to you?
I'm reluctant to give advice on this, because it depends on a number of variables. I crack and winnow in a food-grade area, because, by cracking and winnowing, you're basically changing the product from a "packaged" food (in its shell), to an "ingredient" (not in its shell). Our winnowing set-up has been carefully designed to catch the output without letting dust fly around the place. Also, we use certified organic beans, so the shells are technically edible anyway.
* It makes sense to me to have a small super-cooled room into which molded chocolate can be moved (on a rolling table) in order to set it, for de-moulding, for storage, and for packaging. Does this also sound about right to you?
That sounds about right to me. You wouldn't want the room to be too cool though, because of issues associated with heat shock when the packaged chocolate leaves the room. (I don't know what the weather's like where you are, but we have hot weather to contend with in summer).
Sam
|
|
|
Post by chocomania on Mar 15, 2006 21:48:37 GMT -5
will let you know the prices of the chocoeasy 50 and 300 allan. looks like you ran into 'very friendly' people at the olive oil source. here's the company who manufactures those miniature presses and melangeur just in case you havent found it. www.pieralisi.com/ i dont have time go about those things right now as i will be out for a trip and wil be back next week. i probably will get the infos on the chocoeasy as well by then. by the way, i still couldnt figure out where to upload my photos of the beans on the web. i tried yahoo photos but did not work on this forum. let me know if you have any ideas on this. ill share my bean photos from pod to drying.
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Mar 15, 2006 23:20:51 GMT -5
Chocomania: Sounds good.
Sam: Do you happen to know what the average percentage weight of the nibs, post winnow, is compared to the weight of the pre-winnowed beans when your winnower is used? Is it above 80%? I know that theoretically 84% is attainable with some beans.
Alan
|
|
|
Post by Samantha Madell on Mar 16, 2006 0:52:54 GMT -5
Alan - I can tell by looking at the outputs that my winnower is efficient. Exactly how efficient I don't know. Next time I run it, I'll do the measurements and let you know.
Sam
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Mar 16, 2006 11:08:55 GMT -5
Alan - I can tell by looking at the outputs that my winnower is efficient. Exactly how efficient I don't know. Next time I run it, I'll do the measurements and let you know. Sam Sam, Thank you for doing this. Alan
|
|
|
Post by chocomania on Mar 24, 2006 4:29:18 GMT -5
here is the average price of the chocoeasy. i cant post the negotiated price in respect to Netzsch request to keep it confidential. chocoeasy 50 is 50.000,00 EUR and the 300 is 95.000,00 EUR. anyone fell from their chair already? It seems that the chocoeasy is like the santha which grinds, dry conches and wet conches as well. here is a little more detail: www.foodengineeringmag.com/CDA/Archives/aa6190115c2f8010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____i dont understand quite well the technicality of the conversation in the above article. can someone actually explain if this machine is really advantageous compared to others?
|
|