3.9 Article

Optimizing Mixing during the Sponge Cake Manufacturing Process

Journal

CEREAL FOODS WORLD
Volume 59, Issue 6, Pages 287-292

Publisher

AACC INTERNATIONAL
DOI: 10.1094/CFW-59-6-0287

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [AGL2009-12785-C02-02]
  2. Conselleria de Educacion of Valencia Government

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sponge cakes have traditionally been manufactured using multistage mixing methods to enhance potential foam formation by the eggs. Today, use of all-in (single-stage) mixing methods is superseding multistage methods for large-scale batter preparation to reduce costs and production time. In this study, multistage and all-in mixing procedures and three final high-speed mixing times (3, 5, and 15 min) for sponge cake production were tested to optimize a mixing method for pilot-scale research. Mixing for 3 min produced batters with higher relative density values than did longer mixing times. These batters generated well-aerated cakes with high volume and low hardness. In contrast, after 5 and 15 min of high-speed mixing, batters with lower relative density and higher viscosity values were produced. Although higher bubble incorporation and retention were observed, longer mixing times produced better developed gluten networks, which stiffened the batters and inhibited bubble expansion during mixing. As a result, these batters did not expand properly and produced cakes with low volume, dense crumb, and high hardness values. Results for all-in mixing were similar to those for the multistage mixing procedure in terms of the physical properties of batters and cakes (i.e., relative density, elastic moduli, volume, total cell area, hardness, etc.). These results suggest the all-in mixing procedure with a final high-speed mixing time of 3 min is an appropriate mixing method for pilot-scale sponge cake production. The advantages of this method are reduced energy costs and production time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available