Optimization of camellia oil film degumming process using response surface methodology

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230053

Abstract

Abstract:

Taking camellia oil as the research object, Box-Behnken Response Surface Design was used to optimize the process conditions of camellia oil film degumming in order to explore the effects of membrane pore size, mixed oil concentration, and operating pressure on membrane degumming, and compare the effects of membrane degumming and hydration degumming processes on the quality of camellia oil. The results showed that the optimal process conditions for camellia oil film degumming were membrane pore size 10 ku, mixed oil mass fraction 35%, operating pressure 0.25 MPa, and the degumming rate after film degumming was 96.85%. Compared with hydration degumming, membrane degumming has significant effects on camellia oil degumming, decolorization, and deacidification, with a decolorization rate of 51.6% and the acid value decrease from 15.30 mg·g^-1 to 0.64 mg·g^-1.

Key words: camellia oil, membrane degumming, response surface experiment

CLC Number:

S219.06

WU Kunlong, LU Yun, ZHANG Liang, LIU Biao, LI Yanpo. Optimization of camellia oil film degumming process using response surface methodology[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(1): 175-180.

Figures/Tables 11

References 11

[1]	苏会雨, 李涛. 营养与保健油脂:山茶油[J]. 现代食品, 2016(6):34-35.
[2]	沈建福, 姜天甲. 山茶油的营养价值与保健功能[J]. 粮食与食品工业, 2006, 13(6):6-8,21.
[3]	郭少海, 王亚萍, 罗凡, 等. 油茶籽化妆品基础油脱胶工艺的研究[J]. 中国油脂, 2016, 41(9):13-17.
[4]	何东平, 闫子鹏. 油脂精炼与加工工艺学[M]. 2版. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2012:1-5.
[5]	顾雁蕾, 叶兴乾. 植物油膜法脱胶的研究进展[J]. 食品与发酵工业, 2010, 36(3):122-124.
[6]	张慧. 茶叶籽毛油脱胶工艺的研究[J]. 云南农业科技, 2018(3):4-7.
[7]	薛菁. 苦杏仁油精炼工艺及其品质研究[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学, 2019.
[8]	涂向辉. 油脂精炼过程对油脂色泽的影响及控制[J]. 农业机械, 2011(17):51-54.
[9]	乔雪. 铁核桃油氧化稳定性及脱胶工艺的研究[D]. 武汉: 武汉轻工大学, 2017.
[10]	孙志芳. 无色茶油的研制[D]. 南昌: 南昌大学, 2006.
[11]	刘家伟, 耿鹏飞, 胡传荣, 等. 铁核桃油膜法脱胶工艺研究[J]. 中国油脂, 2018, 43(2):1-4.

水平	膜孔径/ku	混合油质量分数/%	操作压力/MPa
-1	2	20	0.10
0	10	35	0.25
1	18	50	0.40

水平	膜孔径/ku	混合油质量分数/%	操作压力/MPa
-1	2	20	0.10
0	10	35	0.25
1	18	50	0.40

实验编号	因素			脱胶率/ %	渗透通量/ (L·m^-2·h^-1)
实验编号	A	B	C	R₁	R₂
1	0	0	0	96.35	44.39
2	-1	0	-1	88.73	38.16
3	-1	0	1	80.64	38.71
4	0	1	-1	90.55	36.77
5	0	-1	-1	94.09	38.99
6	0	0	0	98.35	44.38
7	0	-1	1	78.91	44.01
8	0	0	0	98.36	48.25
9	0	0	0	94.88	46.59
10	0	1	1	92.45	38.63
11	0	0	0	97.36	45.88
12	1	0	1	81.95	38.01
13	1	0	-1	88.79	32.98
14	1	1	0	97.12	34.03
15	1	-1	0	81.99	34.24
16	-1	-1	0	84.35	48.22
17	-1	1	0	89.97	36.14

实验编号	因素			脱胶率/ %	渗透通量/ (L·m^-2·h^-1)
实验编号	A	B	C	R₁	R₂
1	0	0	0	96.35	44.39
2	-1	0	-1	88.73	38.16
3	-1	0	1	80.64	38.71
4	0	1	-1	90.55	36.77
5	0	-1	-1	94.09	38.99
6	0	0	0	98.35	44.38
7	0	-1	1	78.91	44.01
8	0	0	0	98.36	48.25
9	0	0	0	94.88	46.59
10	0	1	1	92.45	38.63
11	0	0	0	97.36	45.88
12	1	0	1	81.95	38.01
13	1	0	-1	88.79	32.98
14	1	1	0	97.12	34.03
15	1	-1	0	81.99	34.24
16	-1	-1	0	84.35	48.22
17	-1	1	0	89.97	36.14

来源	平方和	自由度	均方	F值	P值	显著性
模型	679.88	9	75.54	21.20	0.000 3	显著
A-A	4.74	1	4.74	1.33	0.286 5
B-B	118.20	1	118.20	33.16	0.000 7
C-C	99.48	1	99.48	27.91	0.001 1
AB	22.61	1	22.61	6.34	0.039 9
AC	0.39	1	0.39	0.11	0.750 3
BC	72.93	1	72.93	20.46	0.002 7
A²	169.11	1	169.11	47.45	0.000 2
B²	23.55	1	23.55	6.61	0.037 0
C²	136.56	1	136.56	38.32	0.000 4
残差	24.95	7	3.56
失拟项	16.25	3	5.42	2.49	0.199 5	不显著
纯误差	8.70	4	2.18
总变异	704.83	16