Miller Magazine Issue: 141 September 2021
87 ARTICLE MILLER / september 2021 able that the deviation is increasing with lower WA val- ues (waffle flour of a WA < 55 %). This is a disadvantage of the “Rapid Flour Check” method, as it is designed for flours with higher protein quantities and water absorp- tion. In order to maximise the potential of the GlutoPe- ak results and optimise the significance in regards to waffle flours, Brabender included the newly developed “Low-Protein“ method in the course of the test series. The already obtained data were re-evaluated and com- pared afterwards with the results of the ICC-Method. The results obtained showed a good correlation between both methods, which is commented later in the course of this study. 3.2 Parameter for Mixing and Baking of Waffle Masses Adapted on Basic GlutoPeak Data In order to verify a correlation between required wa- ter quantities - respectively product weight on one side, and flour parameters on the other side - the data of the standard analysis and GlutoPeak analysis are dealt with separately. Primarily it presents that a correlation exists towards the standard laboratory data. Following it is tes- ted if the correlation with standard laboratory data is also observed with the GlutoPeak data. Correlations and results of the “Low-Protein” method are listed in a separate paragraph. Standard Analysis The basic correlation of the required water amount (for Abb. 16: Correlation of force maximum Peak 1 and water absorption Abb. 17: Correlation of force maximum Peak 1 and GlutoPeak parameter G Pic. 18: Correlation of protein content measured by GlutoPeak Low Protein Check and routine analysis Pic. 19: Correlation of we gluten measured by GlutoPeak Low Protein Check and routine analysis
Made with FlippingBook
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTMxMzIx