Copyright
Joseph Arthur Le Clerc.

Graham flour: a study of the physical and chemical differences between graham flour and imitation graham flours online

. (page 2 of 7)
Online LibraryJoseph Arthur Le ClercGraham flour: a study of the physical and chemical differences between graham flour and imitation graham flours → online text (page 2 of 7)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


From these observations it appears that while the millers generally
understand by the term "Graham" an unbolted wheat meal, and



EXAMINATION OF GKAHAM FLOUR. 13

while many millers throughout the country are producing Graham
flour in this manner, yet in many of the mills an imitation Graham
flour is being produced which in the main consists of the by-products
of the modern milling and which is generally a mixture of low-grade
flour, bran, fiber, offal, and germ, all of which are separations made
in the process of milling high and medium grades of flour, and are
always eliminated from the high and medium grades.

EXAMINATION OF GRAHAM FLOUR.

Since the passage of the Food and Drugs Act the Bureau of Chem-
istry has many times been called upon to decide whether certain
flours labeled " Graham flour" were or were not true to that name.
Little work has been done on the subject and no help is obtained
from the literature. In order to secure information in this connec-
tion samples of Graham flour were made in the laboratory and sam-
ples were collected by a representative of the Bureau of Chemistry
from goods manufactured under his direction in various mills through-
out the country; samples of the product appearing on the market
were also collected.

METHODS OF OBTAINING SAMPLES.

For the purpose of this investigation about 90 samples of Graham
and imitation Graham flours were secured. Some of these samples
were milled under the observation of the representative of the bureau
in order to collect as many data as possible on the processes of milling,
the source of the sample, the amount of flour made by the miller, and
the manner of disposing of the same. Particular note was made of
the manner of milling, the kind of mill used, the number of times the
material went through the mill, whether the product was bolted or
not, and whether any additions of bran or low-grade flour or abstrac-
tions of any portions of the wheat berry were made.

Inasmuch as flour mills do not make Graham flour every day,
but only on demand, and this demand limited, many mills visited
were found to be making ordinary flour. In most of these cases,
however, the miller had samples of the Graham flour from the
previous run on hand, and gave information as to the exact manner
in which the product was made. Such samples were marked "from
stock," with the further designation "true," or "imitation," depend-
ing upon the statements of the millers themselves as to the proc-
esses of manufacture.

METHODS OF EXAMINING SAMPLES.

After these samples had been received in the laboratory they were
subjected to physical and chemical examinations. The mere chem-
ical analysis of a sample does not always show whether it is an imi-
tation Graham or true Graham because there are greater variations



14



GRAHAM FLOTJR.



in the composition of true Graham than are sometimes shown by
mixtures of flour with other mill products such as bran or other
offal.



PHYSICAL EXAMINATION.



Since Graham flour is supposed to be wheat ground into meal
without bolting, it was thought that a mechanical separation of the
flour by sifting, and a macroscopic and chemical examination of the
several portions would show whether the flour was an imitation or a
true product.

Graham flour, when ground either on rolls or on a stone mill, is
composed of particles of all sizes, ranging from the chopped bran to
impalpable powder, while the general run of imitation Graham
flours is composed of bran together with flour which generally is of
a very even granulation; therefore all that is necessary to be done in

i | the case of most of the samples

of Graham or imitation Graham
flour is to pass them through a se-
ries of sieves, weigh the portions
remaining on each sieve, and
make a macroscopic examination
of the products. For the purpose
of making the mechanical separa-



2O



40



/O9 (FTME M/DDL/NGS)




tions, a bolting frame such as is
attached to an experimental mill
was used. This frame held four
sieves (in the case of the first few
samples analyzed only three sieves
were used, namely, a 20, 30, and
109), giving five separations; that
is, those portions remaining on the four sieves and the portion going
through the finest sieve. The four sieves used ranged in fineness as
follows: 1st, a 20-mesh wire; 2d, a 40-mesh silk bolting cloth; 3d,
a 70-mesh silk bolting cloth; 4th, a 109-mesh silk bolting cloth,
equivalent to a No. 10 standard silk.

Several preliminary experiments were made to determine the
length of time required to have all the material well sifted. It was
found that 5 minutes was not long enough, and so 10 minutes was
adopted as the proper time to run each sample. All the material
that can pass the 109-mesh sieve passes through in 10 minutes at
160 gyrations per minute. This portion is called flour. The accom-
panying diagram shows a cross section of such a sieve.

A macroscopic examination of the products of separation is of the
greatest importance, since in this way one may often detect or
determine whether the bran is an added product or not. The appear-



EXAMINATION OF GRAHAM FLOUR. 15

ance of the shorts and the middlings will show the general character
of the products used.

Some of the imitation Graham flours found on the market are
made from products of the mill which are valuable as flour-producing
stock. Such is the case when purified middlings are used, and if
these represent any large proportion of the total amount of the imita-
tion Graham, it is quite evident that no attempt is made to dispose
of inferior products, since it is more expensive for the miller to grind
the wheat and make the separations into offal, middlings, and flour
and then mix the resulting products than it would be to grind the
wheat on one or two sets of rolls without bolting.

When purified middlings are used in large amounts it is difficult
to detect mixtures. Examples of such flours will be indicated in
the general discussion of the results (see p. 39).



CHEMICAL METHODS.



Besides making these mechanical separations, the several por-
tions were analyzed for total nitrogen and alcohol-soluble nitrogen
from which results the gliadin ratio was calculated by dividing the
alcohol-soluble nitrogen by the total nitrogen. In many cases, also,
the ash, fiber, and pentosans were determined hi the original sam-
ple of Graham flour and in that portion passing through the 109 sieve.

The analysis of each of the samples is given in Tables 1 to 9. In
Tables 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 are found the relative nitrogen con-
tent in the flour examined as compared with that in each product of
separation and the same relation between the products of separation
with one another. In Tables 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, and 21 are found the
relative gliadin numbers in the flours examined as compared with
those of the products of separation and the same relation between
the products of separation with one another.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLES.

Of the Graham flour samples analyzed, 12 were purchased on the
market and designated as true Graham flours. The data obtained
are given in Table 2 (p. 17). Seven samples, the analytical data on
which are found in Table 3 (p. 17), were also collected by the same
representatives of the bureau and are described as imitation Grahams.
In Tables 4 and 5 (pp. 17 and 18) will be found the analyses of 12
samples, 6 of them being of the nature of pure Graham and 6 imita-
tion Graham.

Thirteen samples were obtained under observation from the mills
and are true to name. The analyses of these will be found in Table
6 (p. 18). Thirteen samples were obtained from "stock" and desig-
nated by the millers "true Grahams." Their analyses are to be
found in Table 7 (p. 19).

67800 Bull. 16413 3



16



GRAHAM FLOUE.



Eight samples were collected under observation, and from the man-
ner of their manufacture are designated "imitation Graham." The
results of their analyses will be found in Table 8 (p. 19). Eighteen
samples, grouped in Table 9 (p. 20), were obtained from the stock on
hand, and according to the description of the method by which they
were prepared by the miller they are classified as " imitation Gra-
hams."

Eight samples of Graham flour were made by the use of small
experimental mills in the bureau. For this purpose three samples
of wheat were ground, namely, a soft winter wheat, a hard winter
wheat, and a durum wheat. Two of the samples of wheat were
divided into three portions, one portion being ground through the cor-
rugated rolls three times, the second portion through the corrugated
rolls five times, and the third portion ground on a burrstone mill.
The soft winter wheat was passed through the corrugated rolls only.
The analyses of these 8 samples are given in Table 1.

RESULTS OF ANALYSES.
TABLE 1. Separation and analysis of Graham flour milled in the Bureau of Chemistry.



Sample No. and
kind.


Bran.


Shorts.


Coarse
mid-
dlings.


Fine
mid-
dlings.


Flour.


Graham flour.


Nitro-
gen.


Ash.


Fiber.


Pento-

sans.


Gliadin
ratio.


Soft winter:
9904 !


Per ct.
249
12.5

9.6
3.2
8.0

25.8

5.7
1.3


Per ct.
34.4
16.0

54.8
31.8
22.6

56.4
53.1
36.5


Perct.
17.6
21.7

18.4
32.5
15.4

8.3
21.9
30.7


Perct.
8.2
20.4

7.2
16.0
14.2

4.0
7.8
11.8


Per ct.
15.0
28.8

9.5
16.0
40.3

5.6
10.8
19.0


Perct.
1.91
2.03

3.14
3.16
3.10

2.11
2.11
2.22


Per ct.
1.80
1.90

1.89
1.60
1.78

1.53
1.60

1.59


Per ct.
3.01
3.27

3.17
2.66
3.03

2.76

2.71
2.55


Per ct.
7.74
7.74

8.55
7.21
7.83

7.10
7.84
7.65


38.9
39.1

42.7
42.4
39.7

35.1

40.2
3cS.2


9910 2


Hard winter:
99221


9928*


9934


Durum:
9940 *


9946 J


99523





Sample No. and
kind.


Bran.


Shorts.


Coarse mid-
dlings.


Fine mid-
dlings.


Flour.


Nitro-
gen.


Glia-
din
ratio.


Nitro-
gen.


Glia-
din
ratio.


Nitro-
gen.


Glia-
din
ratio.


Nitro-
gen.


Glia-
din
ratio.


Nitro-
gen.


Glia-
din

ratio.


Ash.


Soft winter:
9904 '


Perct.
2.29
2.47

3.58
3.26
3.23

2.30
2.30
2.12


30.0
26.2

35.2
33.7
20.5

27.8
28.7
25.8


Per ct.
1.91
2.38

3.31
3.53
3.27

2.19
2.25
2.33


36.4

25.6

39.9
35.4
33.9

34.5
37.2
34.6


Perct.
1.81
1.97

2.75

2.94
2.99

1.91
1.99
2.11


46.1
41.0

45.4
44.6
38.8

39.0
42.3
40.2


Per ct.
1.80
1.90

2.80
2.90
2.98

1.88
1.91
2.12


48.7
44.7

47,1
4S.3
43.8

40.7
42.6
40.4


Perct.
1.63
1.74

2.88
3.07
2.98

1.91
1.88
2.17


51.7
51.6

50.0
50.5
46.8

45.9
43.3
42.3


Per cl.
0.60
.51

.94
.90
1.11

1.08
1.05
1.17


9910 2


Hard winter:
9922 i


9928 J


9934


Durum:
9940 l


9946*


9952





1 Passed through corrugated rolls three times.
Passsd through corrugated rolls five times.
Passed through burr mill once.



EXAMINATION- OF GKAHAM FLOTJB. 17

TABLE 2. Separation and analysis of Graham flour purchased on the market.



Sample No.


i

a i

r
8


8|

s' 1

8


0)

>
<u
3 .

3

i!

8


1

|
ff

r


Graham
flour as per
sample.


Bran.


Shorts.


Middlings.


Flour.


CJ

2




c .
5


2






o -


2




c .
S.2

a*-

a




2


2

|.2

3


fe


*



3


6636


P.ct.
0.4
14.3
15.5
5.6
6.3
7.3
12.5
13.4
10.0
16.4
18.8
15.2


P.ct.
11.8
8.8
6.7
5.9
7.5
5.5
6.0
5.5
6.7
7.0
4.9
6.9


P.ct.
54.2
37.6
31.4
63.6
52.4
57.3
39.5
32.0
29.1
36.3
29.7
42.6


P.ct.
33.4
38.6
46.0
24.9
33.2
29.8
42.0
46.0
53.4
40.0
45.8
34.6


P.ct.
2.47
2.01
2.08
2.01
1.91
2.11
2.01
1.90
1.91
1.94
1.82
1.90


40.0
38.7
36.7
41.8
38.9
39.9
41.1
39.8
39.6
40.1
38.1
40.6


P.ct.
2.67
2.27
2.58
2.26
2.38
2.44
2.63
2.44
2.49
2.49
2.39
2.36


29.2
21.1
22.6
23.2
20.6
18.4
28.5
27.0
23.9
25.1
26.1
24.9


P.ct.
2.71
2.62
2.47
2.21
2.36
2.39
2.41
2.47
2.30
2.43
2.47
2.47


26.0
23.7
23.0
25.3
19.9
19.9
24.4
20.1
23.1
21.6
19.3
22.7


P.ct.

2.40
1.97
2.17
2.01
1.82
2.09
2.01
1.88
2.10
1.95
1.98
1.90


37.7
39.5
34.4
42.2
38.5
37.6
37.7
38.4
32.7
37.4
34.7
39.5


P.ct.
2.46

1.71
1.81
2.05
1.82
2.02
1.81
1.70
1.68
1.68
1.49
1.60


53.6
53.5
49.4
43.4
50.1
48.6
49.7
49.1
48.0
51.7
46.1
52.6


6637


6638


6951


6952


6953


6954


6955


6957


6958


6959


6960





TABLE 3. Separation and analysis of imitation Graham flours purchased on the market.





oT
>


of


f





Graham












1


.2


eo




flour as per


Bran.


Shorts.


Middlings.


Flour.






CO


So


3


sample.












S3 d


co +2


8 I


^*O












Sample No.


n


o> |




a


d


*


j


2


j


*


j


g


.


oil







gm


1


60
o'"


1


13 5


1


1.2


1


la


1


|.2


1


a .
'5.2




a
o


5


5


H




3


2


O


2


3


g


3
O


g


3




P.ct.


P.tf.


P.rf.


P.rt.


P.ct




P c.




P cf




P ct




P c<




6167


9.1


5.0


7.7


77.8


2.66


39.0


2.68


23.5


2.74


25.6


2.85


22. 6


2.66


43 2


6632


14.9


5.5


4.3


74.5


1.99


39 8


2 25


20 5


2 27


21 3


2 31


24 5


1 90


49


6633


9 7


6 1


16.7


67 2


2 26


35


2 58


21 8


3 16


17 3


2 98


16 9


1 95


49 3


6634


3.2


3.3


6.7


86.3


2.39


44.9


2.95


18 2


3 07


20 5


2 92


21 6


2 26


52 7


6635


16.2


9.3


14.7


59.4


2.15


38.7


2.64


17.3


2.67


18.7


2.07


38.3


1.96


50 8


6639


15.7


8.0


3.9


71.8


2.18


40 5


2 26


19 1


2 35


20 8


2 65


21 4


2 13


50 5


6956 .. . .


10.7


7.5


12.5


69.2


2.02


41.6


2.36


24.0


2.27


28.4


2.25


32.7


1.90


49.4





TABLE 4. Separation and analysis of Graham flour samples.





cT


f


f


g


Graham












1


3







flour as per


Bran.


Shorts.


Middlings.


Flour.








m 09


6 p


sample.












Rri


0^5


|














Sample No.


J


o

o-g


a


,-


a*


2


j


2


d





d


2


c


^






fc


^ 2


600)




o .


ju


g




c .


O


a .




a .




a


a


a


r






I


35






|




1


35




O


O


O


H





O








jj?


a


2


O


fc


o




P.ct.


P.d.


P.ct.


P.c.


P.c<.




P.r<.




P.c/.




p.c<.




P.ct.




6237 .


13.7


8.7


42.3


35.4


1 69


36 8


2 11


26 5


2 07


25 3


1 70


38 8


1 43


48 6


6238


5.5


13


57 2


23 7


1 85


38 8


2 46


28 5


2 54


26 5


1 81


39 9


1 60


65 2


6268


2.9


7.1


49.6


40.1


2.16


37.5


2.61


26 9


2 71


25 6


2 21


35 2


1 89


51 9


6283


11.4


9.1


48. 6


29 9


1 99


41 9


2 57


26 2


2 56


24 6


1 95


39 5


1 80


53 7


6500


10.5


5.7


34.0


49.7


1.77


42.0


2.30


25.3


2.27


23 7


1 91


37 1


1 45


58


6284 .. .


15.1


6.9


20.5


56.5


2.13


36.2


2.61


23.6


2.75


21.4


2.50


32.0


1.79


57.2





18 GRAHAM FLOUR.

TABLE 5. Separation and analysis of samples of imitation Graham flour.





cT


i


i





Graham












i


i


i




flour as per


Bran.


Shorts.


Middlings.


Flour.








s|f


6 5


sample.










Sample No.


1


J




ri


*


A

I*


H


*'


.





.


cb


.


rt




ii


w


jl'l


^


f"


a .




S -


g.


a .


So


t3 .


g,


S




B


B


5


E-




3


2





I


5


1


.2*"



I


3




P.ct.


P.ct\P.ct.


P.c*.


F.efc




P.rf.




P.rt.




P.ct.




P.ct.




6229


3.9


fi ?


21.0


70.0


2.78


40.2


2.30


20.7


2.43


21.9


2.69


22.1


2.83


44.8


6230


6.9


5.8


16.7


70.0


2.68


32.5


2.40


18.4


2.50


19.4


2.78


21.7


2.77


40.2


6231


5.4


5.2


21.3


67.9


2.83


30.7


2.39


18.7


2.54


19.0


2.83


21.8


2.92


37.0


6236


10.2


6.5


9.4


74.1


2.21


34.6


2.43


18.4


2.60


20.5


2.64


18.3


2.10


46 4


6239


4.7


4.0


20.2


71.0


2.11


40.7


2.39


27.4


2.22


27.5


1.93


39.2


2.14


47.5


6269 . .


11.6


3.4


6.6


78.3


2.12


41.7


2.74


24.0


2.72


24.0


2.91


26.5


1.91


52.5





TABLE 6. Separation and analysis of Graham flour obtained under observation.



Sample No.


|"

1

*|

If

8


(

i,
*l

i*

<


r *


On No. 109 sieve,
fine middlings.


I

ll
Ssf
|1


Graham flour as per sample.


oS
og

&3

O w


a
1
2


4


1




1
1


i

h

1=

a
o


714


Perct.
11.4
8.6
4.0
4.6
9.4
7.3
4.0
16.3
5.0
8.8
6.8
5.1
6.5


Perct.

15.7
18.0
15.4
27.5
16.1
13.4
21.4
20.5
12.5
29.2
11.5
32.7
12.5


Perct.
12.2
23.0
7.8
29.6
19.1
12.0
18.5
21.4
7.2
23.2
5.7
17.7
8.0


Perct.
19.8
24.6
15.3
18.8
16.6
17.4
16.6
14.2
14.7
12.2
12.7
10.9
13.5


Per ct.
40.9
24.7
57.8
19.2
38.0
49.9
39.3
27.8
60.6
26.3
62.7
32.8
59.0


Per ct.
2.00
2.07
2.11
2.34
1.74
1.70
2.00
1.73
1.72
1.81
1.60
1.85
1.84


Perct.
1.94
1.76
1.80
1.83
1.79
1.74
1.87
1.72
1.73
1.71
1.60
1.52
1.69


Per ct.
2.49
2.24
2.39
3.42
1.95
2.36
2.41
2.17
1.87
2.34
2.06
2.36
2.15


Per ct.
6.99
6.70
6.97
7.64
6.68
6.70
7.28
6.70
6.70
6.49
6.47
6.18
6.47


36.2
39.0
38.9
39.6
41.2
40.5
39.7
42.6
41.2
42.7
41.7
41.4
43.1


7728


7783 ....


7837


9049


9055


9073


9091


9103




9145


9199


9205





Sample N.


Bran.


Shorts.


Coarse
middlings.


Fine
middlings


Flour.


%



So
|l

O


2



I*

3


i

I
g




So

1
O


g


ft

|o

3


2




9d

!*




4

<


7714


Perct.
2.66
2.61
2.64
2.58
2.23
2.25
2.41
2.27
2.36
2.27
2.15
2.44
2.39


26.9
24.2
22.6
25.6
28.3
26.5
27.6
28.5
22.9
28.2
24.2
24.7
22.9


Perct.
2.64
2.66
2.66
2.56
2.23
2.29
2.60
2.23
2.30
2.06
2.28
2.05
2.42


22.3

23.5
20.8
27.4
24.8
22.7
24.8
27.0
22.9
30.7
20.9
32.9
20.0


Perct.
2.13
1.97
2.48
2.16
1.65
1.84
2.08
1.57
2.25
1.70
2.16
1.80
2.16


33.0

42.4
23.4
40.3
43.4
35.9
35.4
47.4
25.9
44.6
25.3
44.4
30.2


Perct.
1.91
1.90
2.07
2.16
.66
.62
.90
.59
.71
.68
.62
1.76
1.85


45.2
52.1
45.4
44.5
48.2
49.4
47.6
52.1
46.4
51.8
49.0
51.8
46.7


Perct.
1.71
1.71
1.88
2.33
.39
.46
.71
.41
.51
.57
1.34
1.63
1.67


48.4
55.8
50.4
49.4
52.0
51.4
53.7
53.8
51.6
56.8
54.0
55.1
51.7


Perct.


7728


0.47
.65
.91
.71
.68
.50
.47
.67
.58
.57
.53
.67


7783


7837


9049


9055 . .


9073


9091 . .


9103


9127


9145


9199...


9205





EXAMINATION OF GRAHAM FLOUB.



19



TABLE 7. Separation and analysis of samples obtained from stocks claimed by millers

to be true Graham.



Cample No.


<D

1

Sg
6.S

fc

ft
O


I
ss

J

a




fs>

1

o ^


On No. 109 sieve,
fine middlings.


g
d jj

1


Graham flour as per sample.





4


1

E





2

1*




7707


Perct.
7.9
10.2
11.9
9.4
13.6
11.8
2.0
9.4
7.8
2.3
13.7
3.3
10.6


Perct.
12.5
24.0
12.4
14.3
10.1
14.4
13.5
17.2
13.2
6.5
12.3
12.5
21.5


Perct.
5.0
19.7
15.7
15.1
9.4
16.4
15.8
15.9
15.0
8.6
18.5
6.7
14.6


Perct.
16.0
16.8
18.5
19.1
20.8
15.7
19.0
14.2
7.5
10.6
15.3
7.4
11.1


Per ct.
57.9
29.0
40.7
42.0
45.5
41.4
49.6
43.2
56.2
71.7
39.6
69.4
41.4


Perct.
2.17
1.96
2.12
2.11
2.30
2.08
1.74
1.71
1.79
2.47
1.88
1.86
1.82


Perct.


Perct.


Perct.


37.5
38.0
38.4
35.3
37.8
37.8
41.2
39.8
46.2
47.4
42.9
45.3
40.5


7758


1.56
1.75
1.65


1.99
1.73
1.79


6.65
6.35
6.55


7776


7789


7795


7830


1.73
1.78
1.73
1.36
.95
1.73
1.31
1.54


2.25
2.15
2.24
1.49
1.11
1.75


7.09
7.00
6.79
5.87
5.20
6.57


9061. .


9067


9157


9163.


9193


9211


9223


2.52


6.92





Sample No.


Bran.


Shorts.


Coarse
middlings.


Fine
middlings.


Flour.


2


&

3 6

CJ


1




I 1

o


f

%


g

Jl

CJ


2


*

I 1

O


.
2


t

|6

1"

O


j


7707 . . .


Perct.
2.68
2.50
2.71
2.80
3.03
2.61
2.04
2.12
2.14
2.53
2.28
2.40
2.26


22.5
28.1
28.4
23.6
28.3
26.6
21.2
25.5
28.5
22.5
28.3
23.7
29.8


Perct.
2.64
2.34
2.66
2.67
2.93
2.43
2.10
2.30
2.00
2.54
2.44
2.08
2.07


21.2
27.3
25.3
22.6
23.1
24.2
19.0
23.8
27.7
22.1
30.2
25.0
30.3


Perct.
2.65
1.91
2.11
2.21
2.47
2.02
1.80
1.73
1.58
2.19
1.81
1.93
1.80


20.1
39.0
35.6
29.1
29.8
38.9
34.3
41.4
48.4
40.0
44.6
32.4
42.1


Perct.
2.25
1.81
1.96
2.00
2.16
2.03
1.72
1.66
1.61
2.23
1.78
1.91
1.82


40.2
50.0
46.5
41.8
45.5
41.5
43.7
48.2
52.1
46.9
53.2
41.9
45.5


Perct.
1.99
.63
.82
.72
.02
.81
.70
.43
.73
.51
.73
.82
1.58


48.6
57.7
50.9
48.2
47.9
47.7
47.5
52.5
55.1
53.0
54.3
53.2
51.5


Perct.
0.73
.44
.60
.59
.51
.67
.89
.56
.62
.76
.50
.67
.65


7758


7776 .


7789


7795


7830


9061


9067


9157


9163 ...


9193


9211


9223





TABLE 8. Separation and analysis of imitation Graham flour obtained under observation.



Sample No.


oT
>

'I
Sg

I?

a
o


o
>
.2

?i

i 1
<


On No. 70 sieve,
coarse middlings.


On No. 109 sieve,
fine middlings.


g

Ij
|s
|


Graham flour as per sample.


1

g


4


1




I


2

5o

o


7721...


Per ct.
3.7
9.4
0.0
6.1
3.4
14.6
5.3
4.3


Per ct.
7.5
12.0
12.7
14.4
5.5
3.8
14.5
9.3


Per ct.
12.9
10.3
14.6
15.0
2.6
.6
4.0
9.5


Per ct.
30.0
18.5
25.0
10.5
5.2
9.7
13.4
14.8


Per ct.
46.0
49.2
47.1
53.3
82.4
71.1
62.4
61.5


Per ct.
2.01
1.97
1.97
1.88
1.94
2.41
2.20
2.20


Per ct.
1.20
1.25
1.20
1.29
1.57
1.71
1.37
1.72


Per ct.


Perct.


46.8
38.1
42.0
38.1
45. G
46.1
43.4
41.3


7803






7810


1.32
1.52


5.35

5.71
5.85


7818


9115 ....


9121




9175




5.50
6.40


9217


1.90





20



GKAHAM FLOUR.



TABLE 8. Separation and analysis of imitation Graham flour obtained under observa-
tion Continued.



Sample No.


Bran.


Shorts.


Coarse
middlings.


Fine
middlings.


Flour.





2

I 1




fc


2

.So

1*




%


2

So

1
O


g


2

So

r

o


%


2

I 1

o


"?

<J


9

I*


7721


Perct.
2.41
2.82


20.4
19.4


Per ct.
2.64
2.69
2.81
2.28
2.33
3.17
2.77
2.61


20.5
18.5
21.5
24.0
20.5
20.4
23.1
22.6


Perct.
1.97
2.07
2.08
1.88
2.33
2.75
2.26
2.54


43.0
41.7
35.4
36.6
24.1
29.5
33.2
27.6


Per ct.
1.87
1.99
1.83
1.87
1.90
2.27
2.05
2.40


51.4

46.8
50.6
42.1
44.7
44.9
45.2
39.8


Perct.
2.05
1.77
1.62
1.71
1.95
2.36
1.97
2.03


52.7
49.5
52.8
48.0
48.6
52.1
53.0
52.5


Perct.
0.65
.43
.47
.65
1.05
.87
.57
.84





7803


7810 ..


7818


2.41
2.44
2.72
3.42
2.39


22.1
22.6
25.3
20.5
21.7


9115


0.03


9121. .


9175




9217









TABLE 9. Separation and analysis of imitation Graham flour obtained from stock.



Sample No.


oT

1

s !

6&

fc
8


(

i

3%

^

8


On No. 70 sieve,
coarse middlings.


On No. 109 sieve,
fine middlings.


s

4

f

fi


Graham flour as per sample.


J3
g


4


1




1


4
ft

a

o


7354


Perct.
1.7
3.2
3.6
5.7
8.6
.0
2.5
9.0
5.2
2.7
2.3
8.6
14.5
.0
7.6
6.7
10.7
6.0


Perct.
8.3
24.3
15.5
10.9
18.2
33.0
10.0
8.4
8.5
37.2
20.4
8.0
17.7
21.5
6.6
12.8
21.0
19.8


Perct.
6.3
1.7
6.3
3.2
1.9
22.1
1.5
1.1
3.5
24.0
16.8
1.1
9.6
7.3
.0
7.9
3.7
7.0


Perct.
27.2
1.8
5.7
3.4
1.8
17.4
2.2
1.9
12.3
12.9
17.4
.0
13.8
2.5
.0
10.3
10.8
16.2


Perct.
55.2
68.4
68.4
76.8
69.5
27.4
83.4
78.7
69.4
22.9
42.7
82.3
44.0
68.6
85.4
61.6
53.6
50.6


Perct.

2.45
2.02
2.23
2.18
2.30
2.08
2.44
1.80
1.74
2.23
1.70
2.65
1.82
1.96
2.32
1.99
2.57
1.83


Perct.
1.38
1.88
1.88
1.19
2.30
1.47
1.80
1.64
1.54
.74
.79
2.76
1.74
1.80
1.51
1.46
1.88


Perct.


Perct.


45.3
41.3
38.4
39.3
41.2
40.9
35.2
40.6
43.0


2 4 5 6 7

Online LibraryJoseph Arthur Le ClercGraham flour: a study of the physical and chemical differences between graham flour and imitation graham flours → online text (page 2 of 7)