search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ODOURS AND EMISSIONS | TECHNOLOGY


Using this electronic nose, the company says


packaging material can be evaluated in a matter of minutes instead of several days with a panel test. Analytical throughput is high because the instru- ment is available 24/7. Moreover, the method raises no health or safety issues since no human testing is involved. The instrument also helps identify the molecules entering the chemical composition of the headspace, whereas a sensory panel cannot do this easily. Most importantly, an instrumented method delivers objective and repeatable evaluation. Aplha MOS says that sensory panel results can lack repeatability due to possible internal variability, as well as the influence of the assessors’ mood, state of health or fatigue. The company says it is also difficult to maintain the constant performance of a panel over time: regular training and benchmark- ing is needed, and results can be influenced by turnover of panel members. The Heracles instru- ment is claimed to ensure long-term repeatability, without any drift over time.


Using its e-nose and the e-tongue, Alpha MOS has been running studies on the flavour and taste of milk stored in different types of packaging. “This study proved that in one of the packaging samples, the odour and taste of milk stayed much more stable over time than in other ones, while in others many more volatile organic compounds devel- oped,” says Bonnefille. “These results allowed the selection of the most suitable type of packaging to preserve milk sensory quality.”


Another study focused on a company producing plastic films used for packaging beverages. It aimed to control the odour of films obtained from recycled materials sourced from household waste. The producer wanted to evaluate the recycling process efficiency in removing odours. “The Heracles e-nose was able to provide a quality control tool to determine whether the recycled plastics were conformant or not, based on human


panel classification. In addition, the use of the AroChemBase library of chemical compounds and corresponding sensory attributes, allowed the identification of the main molecules responsible for off-odours,” Bonnefille says. Addressing future developments, Alpha MOS plans to work on a simpler version of the electronic nose that will show greater robustness and the highest level of consistency when switching between instruments. The aim is to create a solution for global groups needing to ensure consistent quality across different production sites.


Studying waste As part of a collaborative recycling study conduct- ed with the Chair of Aroma and Smell Research at the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürn- berg in Germany and the University of Alicante in Spain, Germany’s Fraunhofer IVV (Institute for Process Engineering and Packaging) has analysed the sensory properties of post-consumer recycled bags made of LDPE originating from several different collection systems. Plastics recyclates produced from waste packag- ing need to meet high sensory requirements to be


Above: Fraunhofer IVV identified more than 60 odourous substances in plastic sourced from different recycling collection systems in Germany


SPREAD THE WORD


Let the world know about the good things your company is doing by advertising in Compounding World magazine. Download the media pack to find out about our


forthcoming features, global readership, and cost-effective advertisement packages. http://bit.ly/CW_21_Media


IMAGE: FRAUNHOFER IVV


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62