CLAIRE M.

BERON MARCH 23, 2017

10058233 MARCH 30, 2017

EXERCISE No. 7

Test Milling

I. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A. List of Materials
1. Equipment/Instruments:
a) SATAKE Laboratory Rubber Roll
b) SATAKE Abrasive Whitener
c) Sample Pans
d) Digital Weighing Scale
e) 4.2 Indented Tray
f) Grain Counter

2. Working samples (400 grams of clean paddy)

B. Methods

Two 200 grams paddy samples were weighed and poured separately into the hopper of the
SATAKE laboratory rubber roll. Each sample was processed for a full minute before turning the
machine off and weighing the discharge. For sample 1 and 2, unhulled paddies were manually
separated from the dehulled ones before measuring their weight. Broken brown rice grains were
then separated from the whole ones using a 4.2 indented tray by straining the samples 3 to 4 times
to remove as much broken grains as possible. 1000 grains were manually picked from both samples
using a grain counter and were weighed. All brown rice samples were then mixed (whole, broken,
and dehulled), weighed, and passed through the SATAKE abrasive whitener. The resulting
milled/whitened rice was again weighed before passed through the 4.2 indented tray for head rice
separation from the broken ones. The weight of both whole and broken grains was taken before
manually picking another set of 1000 grains from samples 1 and 2 and weighing them.
II. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Rice milling is the process of converting paddy into rice (Wimberly, 1983). It is comprised of two
major operations: hulling or the removal of husk from the paddy while maintaining a minimum damage
to the bran layer and not breaking the grain; and whitening where the silver skin and the bran layer of
the processed brown rice are removed (Araullo, 1976). In this exercise, the sample paddy was placed
under various processes in order to acquire the needed information to determine the effectiveness and
efficiency of the milling equipment used – SATAKE Laboratory Rubber Roll and SATAKE Abrasive
Whitener. The complete results are indicated in the Appendix section while the summary of the
performance of machines are as follows:

Measure of Performance of Machine Percent

Coefficient of Hulling, eh 0.9619 (96.19%)
Coefficient of Wholeness, ew 0.9270 (92.70%)
Hulling Efficiency, En 89.17
Hulling Recovery, % 73.24
Milling Recovery, % 58.63
Milling Degree, % 9.53
% Head Rice 82.36

The coefficient of hulling is defined as the measure of the ability of the huller to remove the
hulls of the grains whereas coefficient of wholeness is the measure of the ability of the huller to dehull
without breaking or damaging the grain (Agricultural Machinery - Rubber Roll for Rice Mill - Methods of
Test , 2004). Based on the provided data, the recorded coefficient of hulling (eh) and coefficient of
wholeness (ew) are 0.9619 (96.19%) and 0.9270 (92.70%) respectively. This means that the huller
equipment used has a relatively good performance since it registers a 96.16% hulling efficiency and out
of all the grains dehulled, only 7.30% (100% decreased by the coefficient of wholeness) are broken or
not whole. The hulling recovery computed, that is, 89.17% further proves the effectiveness of SATAKE
Laboratory Roll in serving as milling equipment.

The efficiency of the whitening process is also analyzed in this exercise and this can be
determined through the percentages of milling recovery, milling degree, and head rice. Milling recovery
is defined as the total milled rice obtained from the paddy while head rice is the milled rice with length
greater or equal to three quarters of the average of the whole kernel (Dhankhar, 2014). Lastly, milling
degree is the measure of the percentage of bran removed from the brown rice. Unfortunately, the
milling recovery acquired in the experiment comprises of only 58.63% which is only a little more than
half of the entire paddy sample. This may have been the result of some losses and damaged grains when
the brown rice was subjected to the whitening process. A milling degree of 9.53% was also acquired
which may imply that some grains may have been severed or damaged during the process of removing
its rice bran. However, the head rice percentage of 82.36% is ideal since it means majority of the rice
grains are greater or equal to three quarters of the average of the whole kernel (minimal broken milled
rice).

Overall, it can still be concluded that SATAKE abrasive whitener still did a relatively fair
performance taking to account that the ideal milled rice percentage is 68-72% of the entire paddy
(Milling) and the acquired milling recovery is 58.63% - not too far from the ideal rate. There is still a high
possibility for improving this result especially through a more improved way of handling the experiment
considering that not all losses can be attributed to the equipment itself.

III. CONCLUSION

Milling is important since it transforms the paddy into a form fit for human consumption.
Effective milling operation is essential since it can greatly affect the profitability of a rice enterprise as
well as limiting the amount of paddies wasted during production. Hence, testing the efficiency of milling
equipment is required to prevent losses and to know whether it is appropriate to make such investment
or not.

In the experiment, it has been proven that SATAKE Laboratory Rubber Roll performs effectively
with its hulling efficiency of 89.17%. On the other hand, the performance of SATAKE Abrasive Whitener
is still questionable considering its milling recovery of 58.63% that is quite short of the 68-72% ideal
range. However, this result may be attributed to other different factors such as grain quality and the
way the experiment was conducted; not just the inefficiency of the equipment.
IV. REFERENCES

(2004). Agricultural Machinery - Rubber Roll for Rice Mill - Methods of Test . In Philippine National
Standards (pp. B-33). Philippine Agricultural Engineering Standards.

Araullo, E. e. (1976). Rice Postharvest Technology. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research
Centre.

Dhankhar, P. (2014). Rice Milling. IOSR Journal of Engineering, 35.

Milling. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2017, from Rice Knowledge Bank:
http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/step-by-step-production/postharvest/milling

Wimberly, J. (1983). Technical Handbook for the Paddy Rice Postharvest Industry in Developing
Countries. Laguna, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.

V. APPENDIX

Table 1. Data on Hulling

Sample 1, g Sample 2, g Average, g

Sample, W1 200.10 200.33 200.22
Brown Rice, W2 148.28 145.02 146.65
Unhulled Paddy, W3 7.02 8.24 7.63
Whole Brown Rice, W4 133.79 138.10 135.95
1000 Whole Brown Rice, W5 21.95 21.08 21.52
Manually Dehulled Paddy, W6 5.39 5.84 5.62
Broken, Brown Rice 11.05 10.46 10.76

Table 2. Data on Whitening

Sample 1, g Sample 2, g Average, g

Total Brown Rice*, W7 153.81 149.91 151.86
Milled Rice, W8 118.59 116.17 117.38
Brewers Rice, W9 0.31 0.35 0.33
Whole Milled Rice, W10 97.16 96.18 96.67
 Broken Milled Rice, W11 21.21 19.50 20.36
1000 Whole Milled Rice, W12 19.44 19.50 19.47
*Wt. of Total Brown Rice = Wt. of Brown Rice + Wt. of Manually Dehulled Brown Rice

Table 3. Performance of Machines

Measure of Performance of Machine Percent

Coefficient of Hulling, eh 0.9619
Coefficient of Wholeness, ew 0.9270
Huller Efficiency, En 89.17
Hulling Recovery, % 73.24
Milling Recovery, % 58.63
Milling Degree, % 9.53
% Head Rice 82.36

COMPUTATIONS:

Coefficient of Hulling = (Wt. of palay - Wt. of unhulled palay)

Wt. of palay
= 200.22 - 7.63
200.22
= 0.9619

Coefficient of Wholeness = Wt. of whole brown rice

Wt. Brown Rice
= 135.95
146.65
= 0.9270

Hulling Efficiency = Hulling Coefficient x Coefficient of Wholeness

= 0.9619 x 0.9270
= 0.8917
= 89.17%
Hulling Recovery = Wt. of brown rice
x 100
Wt. of palay
= 146.65
x 100
200.22
= 73.24%

Milling Recovery = Wt. of whitened rice

x 100
Wt. of palay sample
= 117.38
x 100
200.22
= 58.63%

Milling Degree = (Wt. of 1000 Whole Brown Rice - Wt. of 1000 Whole Whitened Rice)
x 100
Wt. of 1000 Whole Brown Rice
= 21.52-19.47
x 100
21.52
= 9.53%

Percent Head Rice = Wt. of Whole Grains

x 100
Wt. of Milled Rice
= 96.67
x 100
117.38
= 82.36%