This invention relates generally to a method and apparatus for processing meat and, in particular, to processing meat in a continuous processes.
Processed meat products, such as bologna, hot dogs, sausages, and whole muscle products including ham and turkey, among many others, are convenient and popular food items. A variety of commercial systems are available for making certain processed meats. In one type of commercial system used for making processed meat products including bologna and hot dogs, raw meat in the form of chunks or pieces and other ingredients such as spices are ground, chopped and/or otherwise blended with one or more salt solutions or brine to provide a mixture that can subsequently be formed into a stable meat emulsion or protein matrix. Similar steps of grinding, chopping and/or otherwise working are also employed in making coarse ground products such as sausages, whole muscle products such as processed ham and processed turkey and other processed meats. In each case, proteins form a matrix to hold or bond the separate meat pieces together.
A stable protein matrix requires the protein bonds to suspend or bond with fat and water. Creation of protein bonds in this context requires a process commonly known as protein extraction. In this process, salt soluble or salt extractable, heat coagulable proteins such as myosin, actomyosin, and actin bind water, swell and become tacky as a result of working or blending of the meat in the presence of a salt or a salt solution. The proteins are subsequently set when heated to create a bond. Other myofibrillar proteins, as well as sarcoplasmic or water soluble or extractable proteins, may also play a role in bonding. Salt solutions that may be used in protein extraction include, but are not limited to, sodium chloride, sodium pyrophosphate or diphosphate, potassium chloride, sodium lactate, and potassium lactate. In protein extraction as described herein, the mechanism believed to be primary responsible for the creation of the bonds involves binding proteins, salts, fats, and/or water and subsequent swelling of the proteins, rather than solution of the proteins. More precisely, it is believed that the salt solution frees bonding sites on the proteins for bonding with each other, as well as with water and fat.
Batch processes for blending meat and other ingredients and extracting protein are well known. A known method for achieving protein extraction and ingredient blending for certain products such as whole muscle meats including processed turkey and processed ham involves puncturing the whole muscle meat with hypodermic-type needles, injecting brine or salt solution through the needles, and using a batch processor or mixer to work the meat for approximately 45 minutes under vacuum conditions to remove air, as discussed below. For other products such as coarse ground meat including sausages and emulsified products, meat is ground and added to a batch processor with water, salt solution, spices, and/or other ingredients and worked with or without a vacuum for up to an hour, or in one approach, for 15 to 45 minutes.
A large batch mixer may process approximately 6,000 to 12,000 pounds per hour. The meat product constituents including the meats and the additives are combined in the low shear batch mixer for whole muscle products. This mixing stage typically requires 30 to 60 minutes of being mixed. It is during this time that the constituents are transformed into a mixture that will form a stable protein matrix.
A stable protein matrix is formed when mixtures for whole muscle products, coarse ground products, and emulsified products allow the salt solution to reach the salt-extractable protein. The time it takes for the salt to reach the salt-extractable protein may vary and it is desirable to decrease the time it takes for the process to occur. This process, known as curing, achieves the protein extraction. For whole muscle products, delivery of the brine solution through injection of the hypodermic-type needles inserted into the meat chunks is a relatively imprecise method for attempting to reduce the distance through which the salt solution must diffuse. The curing stage typically requires 24-48 hours for satisfactory diffusion, and the batches are stored in vats and placed into coolers for the cure time. Once the protein extraction has occurred, the mixture may then be further processed.
With respect to the processing equipment, while such mixers have been used commercially for many years, they have significant drawbacks with respect to their space requirements and cost due to their large size, as well as the length of time required for processing each batch, and the time and expense associated with cleaning of the apparatus.
As for the process, conventional batch processing is a lengthy process requiring a number of discrete steps. Initially, various meats are provided by a vendor with specified contents. More specifically, the meats are provided with a specified protein, fat, and/or water content, typically a percentage by weight. A batch sheet is provided to processing plant personnel indicating what mixture of meats, water, and additives are to be combined for one of a variety of meat products. In addition, the batch sheet often needs to be adjusted or more precisely indicated after the batch of meat has arrived at the plant. Based on the formula desired for the final meat product, the plant personnel often have to adjust the meats selected for processing in a particular batch. The final product mixture is carefully controlled. If a particular meat is utilized where the fat content is greater than what the batch sheet calls for, the final product may have an excessive amount of fat. To avoid this, the plant personnel would increase the protein provided by other meats to balance the fat content.
Unfortunately, this is not necessarily a sufficiently precise approach. Each meat, as well as each chunk in a batch of meat, may vary significantly from a sample taken and assumed to be average. Once the water and other additives are mixed in with the batch, it may be difficult to alter the balance. At times, the resulting batch is determined to be inaccurately mixed, and remedial procedures must be taken such as mixing the batch in with additional correction materials. In order to reduce the likelihood of an imprecise batch, relatively large quantities of meat are provided for a single batch in hopes of minimizing or driving to a mean the composition deviation resulting from a meat portion with an aberrational content. A typical amount of a particular meat for a batch is approximately 2000 lbs.
Input constituents are calculated to result in a specific quantity of cooked product. If excessive water or fat is lost post-mix such as during the cook stage, the carefully regulated water, fat, and meat ratios will be off-target. If fat is lost prior to the cook stage, it often remains in the machinery or piping through which the mixture is processed. This can result in down time for the machinery, likelihood of damaged machinery, and greater labor in cleaning the machinery. Furthermore, cooked emulsified products rely, to some degree, on non-protein or non-bound materials to provide the proper texture. The proteins bind to form a matrix with each other and, in the absence of sufficient fat or water, these bonds may form a larger, stronger matrix, which leads the product to become somewhat rubbery. Conversely, if there is too much water, the cooked product may be too soft, and may lack integrity.
As used herein, the term additives may refer broadly to brine solution, water without salt, a spice slurry, nitrite, or other additives. Though the brine solution and the meats themselves each include water, the balance for the final product is typically adjusted with a quantity of water. The spice slurry provides, for instance, flavorings and water. One additive is typically nitrite which is used as a preservative and to provide a desired color. Other inert additives, such as corn starch or non-functional proteins, may also be included.
As the mixture constituents are churned in the mixer for up to an hour, contact with air may produce a froth on the surface of the meat pieces. A final product having visible air may be unacceptable. In some cases, the product must be reprocessed and mixed in with subsequent batches. Air in the product may appear as surface bubbles, or as surface holes. Entrapped air may also lead to product swelling during cooking or may lead to the product having visible air bubbles within its interior.
Air affects the product in other ways as well. For instance, some proteins are denatured by the presence of air, which reduces the functionality of the meat for binding fat and water. The air can also react with the nitrite to retard the development of the proper color. The resulting color may then be undesirable or objectionable to consumers.
To avoid being stirred into the mixture, vacuum pressure may be applied during the mixing process. This requires an extensive set up including the vacuum itself and seals to maintain the pressure. The vacuum system and seals require maintenance, and occasionally leak which results in downgraded product.
While such mixers have been used commercially for many years, they have significant drawbacks. For example, one of the problems is that air may undesirably be drawn into the product. Other drawbacks for the mixers include their space requirements and cost due to their large size, labor costs, the length of time required for processing each batch, vat handling and transfer yield loss, and the time and expense associated with cleaning of the apparatus.
In addition to the problems encountered with batch mixers for both whole muscle products and emulsified products, there are additional constraints for mixers that process whole muscle products. For example, in reducing the time required for processing and accelerating the formation of a stable meat mixture, the meat chunks introduced into the mixer may be subject to increased shear forces. However, high shear forces may not only distort the shape of size of the meat pieces but also impact the texture, mouth feel, and appearance of the meat after processing. Thus, in an effort to speed-up the processing of whole meat products, the processes cannot subject the whole meat to excessive shear force.
The illustrated method and apparatus comprise improved methods and apparatus for use in making processed meat products including whole muscle meat products by providing significant advantages with respect to the size of the apparatus, the time required for processing, the control of the process, and/or other aspects of the manufacturing process.
In one embodiment, the method and apparatus provides for making processed whole muscle meat product in a meat mixer with a housing having an input and an output a distance away. The housing having a pair of parallel rotating shafts with mixing elements located thereon. A plurality of constituents including whole muscle meat and salt solution are input into the meat mixer for processing. By one approach, one of the mixing elements has a generally frustoconical shaped body. The frustoconical mixing element may have a generally circular cross section of increasing diameter or a generally circular cross section with decreasing diameter. In another example, the frustoconical mixing element includes both, a section with an increasing diameter and a section with a decreasing diameter. The frustoconical mixing element may be employed in a working zone to increase diffusion of the salt solution into the whole muscle meat and otherwise assist with processing of the meat. By another approach, one of the mixing elements has a generally ellipsoidal-shaped body. A mixing element with the generally ellipsoidal surface may be employed in a massaging zone to increase diffusion of the salt solution and otherwise assist with processing of the meat. By yet another approach, one of the mixing elements impedes the flow of the plurality of constituents within the meat mixer. A mixing element with a blocking configuration may impede the flow of the constituents to increase the work done on the constituents at a point upstream of the blocking mixing element.
The above needs are at least partially met through provision of the Method and Apparatus for Meat Processing With Expansion and Compression Elements described in the following detailed description, particularly when studied in conjunction with the drawings, wherein:
Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions and/or relative positioning of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. Also, common but well-understood elements that are useful or necessary in a commercially feasible embodiment are often not depicted in order to facilitate a less obstructed view of these various embodiments of the present invention. It will further be appreciated that certain actions and/or steps may be described or depicted in a particular order of occurrence while those skilled in the art will understand that such specificity with respect to sequence is not actually required. It will also be understood that the terms and expressions used herein have the ordinary technical meaning as is accorded to such terms and expressions by persons skilled in the technical field as set forth above except where different specific meanings have otherwise been set forth herein.
Generally speaking, pursuant to these various embodiments, a continuous method and system for processing whole muscle meat is illustrated in
To preserve the integrity of the whole muscle meat, whole muscle meat processing requires slightly more gentle techniques than the high shear forces used for other meat products. While high shear processing provides maceration and tenderization thereby increasing ingredient contact and incorporation, such high shear forces typically disrupt the structure of the whole muscle meat to such an extent that the integrity of the whole muscle structure is nearly completely destroyed. Thus, it is desirable to employ a moderate approach that sufficiently works the whole muscle meat to disrupt enough of the structure to quickly provide for increased ingredient incorporation without excessively destroying the integrity of the whole muscle meat. Whole muscle meat that retains its integrity retains the desired texture, mouthfeel, and coloring, among other characteristics.
To accommodate the more moderate ingredient incorporation techniques, the whole muscle pieces may require additional time to be worked or manipulated by those mixing elements 18 delivering the working or massaging. However, it is still desirable to accomplish the processing quickly, even though more moderate forces are used to process whole muscle meat.
To balance the desire to quickly diffuse the salt solution into the meat and the desire for the whole muscle meat to keep its whole muscle characteristics, a number of mixing elements 18 may be used including the frustoconical element 18d, the blocking element 18e, and the ellipsoidal element 18f. Working the whole muscle meat and other ingredients with mixing elements 18 having a frustoconical body diffuses the other ingredients into the whole muscle meat without excessively macerating or tearing the whole muscle meat thereby retaining the integrity of the meat. The frustoconical mixing element 18d does not have sharp cutting surfaces that would slice or cut the meat. A process employing the frustoconical mixing elements 18d works and gently tenderizes the whole muscle meat, thereby increasing ingredient incorporation without significant particle size reduction of the whole muscle meat pieces.
To provide additional dwell time for the ingredient to undergo additional processing in the mixer housing, the blocking mixing element 18e may be employed. As mentioned, due to the more moderate forces, additional working or manipulation time may be needed to provide sufficient ingredient incorporation. The blocking element 18e, works with surrounding elements to slow the flow of the ingredients and to allow the mixing elements upstream from the blocking element 18e to have a slightly longer exposure to the ingredients.
In one illustrative example, massaging the whole muscle meat and the ingredients with ellipsoidal mixing elements 18f stimulates ingredient incorporation without subjecting the whole muscle meat to excessive shear forces that may bruise, tear, abrade or mince the whole muscle meat. As discussed above, while high shear processing provides maceration and tenderization that increases ingredient incorporation, the same high shear forces also may greatly disrupt the structure of the whole muscle meat to an extent that the integrity of the whole muscle structure is nearly completely destroyed. By employing an ellipsoid element 18f, the whole muscle meat may be massaged or worked to increase ingredient incorporation without excessive damage to the whole muscle meat pieces. The ellipsoid elements 18f do not have edges that can cut or slice the meat pieces and therefore can massage or gently pound the meat without negatively affecting the integrity of the whole muscle meat.
In addition to the ability of the system having capabilities of working the whole muscle meat, the system is flexible such that alternative elements 18 may be positioned on the twin shafts 16 to provide for different processing characteristics. By one approach, some of the mixing elements 18 used along the shaft 19 have sharper edges. By another approach, input lines may introduce ingredients into the housing mixer at slower or faster rates to alter dwell time or mixer-residence time. This flexibility lets the user alter the processing depending on the desired final meat product.
These and other benefits may become clearer upon making a thorough review and study of the following detailed description. Referring now to the drawings, and in particular to
While a single elongated screw as shown in
As the ingredients are forced through the housing 20, the rotating mixing elements 18, such as the sharp-edged ovate element of
The meat, water, salt solution and other additives such as a spice slurry are simultaneously fed into the mixing device. Protein extraction herein involves an intimate contact between the salt solution and the salt-extractable proteins and breaking of the meat structure or rupturing of the membrane systems to separate protein strands, breaking the protein strands themselves, or unraveling of the proteins. In one embodiment, the mixing device applying the high shear force mechanically provides this intimate contact, as opposed to the diffusion utilized in typical batch processes.
One mechanism for this is simply by reducing the mass transfer or diffusion distance. By reducing the meat chunks to relatively small pieces, the salt solution needs to diffuse only over a short distance, if at all. In other words, the work applied to the meat in the presence of the salt or brine solution forces the salt solution into the structure of the meat pieces. This accelerates the process, thereby promoting the necessary chemical reactions wherein chloride ions or other ions occupy bonding sites of the protein strands.
Furthermore, to the degree that the protein strands remain intact, the process deforms the meat chunks, which promotes unraveling of the protein strands.
By applying shear force to a meat piece to deform or grind the meat, the protein strands are also deformed, flattened, stretched, and twisted. This opens up the protein structure, making them more porous, and promotes penetration of the ingredients, including the brine solution. As the dispersion is more thorough, uniform diffusion of the salt solution and other ingredients and additives, for instance, is significantly increased by use of the high shear force. Referring now to
This process causing rapid diffusion through the application of high shear force eliminates the need for curing, as has been described as the time for the salt solution to diffuse through the meat chunks. Because of the need for curing, typical processing methods are necessarily batch-oriented. That is, processing of certain meat products requires diffusion of salt solution into the meat for protein extraction to occur. After mixing or injection with salt solution, typical processes require a cure or diffusion time for the large meat chunks, during which time the meat is set aside to allow satisfactory diffusion. The curing stage required a significant backlog or meat inventory within the plant, which is eliminated to allow for just-in-time product usage and receipt, and reduced storage needs in the processing plant.
A representative piece of meat that has undergone a static batch process curing period is shown in
Through the application of high shear force in the presence of a salt solution, a meat piece displays a physical structure combining both the curing and the unraveling of the protein strands.
The apparatus 10 is capable of working meat ingredients and extracting protein therefrom much faster than prior art batch processes. Specifically, the processing time in one embodiment is reduced from a common 30-60 minutes to approximately 10-60 seconds and, preferably, 10-45 seconds. In general, this time period is related to the throughput rate. As discussed herein, the throughput rate is mostly dependent on the speed of pumps forcing the constituents or ingredients into the mixer.
Additionally, the mixing apparatus need not be used in conjunction with a vacuum environment. Though vacuum may be applied to the mixer, cooked final product made with constituents processed without an applied vacuum on the mixer does not display the visible air characteristics described above for meat that has been churned in a typical mixing vat, nor does it expand when cooked due to entrapped air. By one approach, during use, the interior of the mixer is generally filled with solid and liquid constituents, and is substantially devoid of air. Little or no air is forced into the constituents. Little or no air that may be present in the mixer is mixed in with the constituents because the mixture is not whipped, and because the mixing time is short. By eliminating the vacuum system for the mixer, the process may be simplified, equipment is eliminated with a concomitant cost savings, maintenance costs may be reduced, and product loss may be reduced. It should be noted that other processing steps, such as casing stuffing, may advantageously utilize a vacuum system.
Through the effective use of high shear force applied over a small area or volume of meat, a stable protein matrix is produced. Protein extraction is rapid and easily controlled, and the protein binds the mixed water and fat molecules. The protein is then able to bind with the water and fat to form a protein/water/fat matrix. The other additives may be bound, in suspension, or dissolved therein. This effectively reduces fat and water loss to either an irrelevant level or at least to an acceptable level. Thus, the mixing device and other apparatus do not suffer from fat being left in the equipment. The composition of the final product is more easily controlled without significant fat or water being lost. The texture of the final product is desirable. Testing methods, such as the Ronge Method utilizing a centrifuge to measure quantities of fat escaping from the mixture, will show that the stability of a mixture made by this method is equal to or exceeds the stability of conventional batch processed mixtures.
This system also controls protein matrix formation in emulsified products referred to as fat-free products having 1% or less fat, an example being bologna. These products are typically a meat/additive blend with water. In typical formulation, the blend lacks the fat which otherwise tends to break up the protein matrix. Proteins are able to form strong gel-like structures with long, cross-linked protein strands forming a large matrix, as has been mentioned. This results in a rubbery texture that is undesirable to consumers who expect a texture similar to that of full fat meat products.
Typically, this protein matrix problem in the fat-free products is dealt with by addition or selection of ingredients, though so-called fillers are generally not permitted. One method for breaking up the matrix formation is to add inert additives such as starch or non-functional proteins for instance. Though water binds with the protein to retard matrix formation, excessive water results in a soft product that does not hold together well, and that may allow excessive amounts of water to leech out. Furthermore, water may be driven off during the cook and post-cook stages.
Fat-free products, it is believed, suffer from this problem largely because of the mixing times of conventional batch processes. It is believed that batch processing requires such extensive mixing times that protein linking is able to occur, and the matrix structures begin to form during this time. Analysis of final cooked product using the present method and apparatus has demonstrated that there is a marked disruption in the matrix structure. It is further believed that the high shear of the present method and apparatus prevents or interferes with the ability of the proteins to link as such, and/or the stark reduction in mixing time of the present method and apparatus reduces or eliminates the ability for the proteins to form these long matrix links. In any event, bologna and other so-called no-fat or fat-free products produced using this method do not require any inert additives to reduce or avoid the large matrix formation while still producing a product with the desired texture characteristics of a full fat meat product.
For whole muscle and coarse ground products, another benefit of the present apparatus and method is the elimination of the commonly-known visible protein exudate that forms on the surface of the meats. More specifically, in certain batch processors, a combination of protein, salt solution, and water forms protein exudate, a sticky and viscous material, as the meats sit in the curing vat for the batch processing. This must be broken up prior to further processing steps, such as delivering through pumps. Because the present system utilizes continuous processing, this exudate does not have the opportunity to form.
It is believed that the protein exudate results from lengthy mixing time periods. That is, as a time period must elapse for the entirety of the constituents to have sufficient protein extraction, some portions of the constituents will allow excess protein to be extracted. By reducing and controlling the amount of protein extraction throughout the constituents, the exudate is reduced or eliminated. As the mixture discharged from the mixer is delivered relatively quickly to further processing, such as casing stuffing or thermal processing, the mixture does not continue to cure and extract additional proteins. In other words, the residence time within the mixer is less than is required for the formation of a visible protein exudate to form, and the protein extraction substantially ceases once discharged from the mixer. Though it has been suggested that the exudate is actually responsible for bonding of the meat product, elimination of the exudate has shown no deleterious effect on the final product created as described herein.
In some cases, it may be desirable to control the temperature of the mixer housing. For instance, it is believed that cooling the mixer housing is beneficial in forming coarse ground items. It is also believed that the internal temperature of the mixture during the mixing process optimally remains below a threshold level, or a maximum rise in internal temperature during processing. As it has been found that increased shear work in the mixer improves mixture stability, reducing the temperature of the mixture by cooling the mixer housing or inputting ingredients (such as cool water) at points along the length of the mixer may allow the residence time to increase, or allow the RPMs of the mixing elements to increase. More specifically, cooling the mixture may allow increased shear work while maintaining the temperature of the mixture below the threshold level.
It should be noted that varying the size of the outlet, in the form of a discharge gate opening, necessarily affects residence time for the mixture within the mixer. The opening may be in the range of ⅛ inch to two inches.
One example of a commercially available mixer such as that described is a Twin Shaft Continuous Processor manufactured by Readco Manufacturing, Inc., of York, Pa., having 5″ diameter mixing elements 18a on counterrotating shafts 19, and throughput of about 6,000 lbs./hr. at about 200 rpm. In operation, the shafts may have adjustable speeds. Satisfactory operation of the system may be achieved with rotational velocities of, e.g., 100-600 RPM. For the present system, the rate of rotation determines the amount of work, including shearing, applied to the mixture. To drive the mixture through, the mixing elements 18 and/or the system pumps for inputting the constituents may be used. It should be noted that any pumping force is not what would be termed “high pressure” such that the structural integrity of the pumps, pipes, and other components are generally not in danger of failure. The pressure does not force the fat to separate from the mixture. In other embodiments, larger or smaller mixers may be used, e.g., 8 in. diameter mixers having throughput of at least 20,000 lbs/hr, and up to about 25,000 lbs./hr. The output may vary depending on the downstream processes, such as casing or form stuffing or cooking. Typically, the thermal processes of cooking or chilling determine the actual mixing device output rate than can be handled downstream.
As shown in
As can be seen in
As described, the mixing elements may be placed in different rotational orientations and different orders, i.e., configurations to vary shear rate, throughput rate, and/or other process parameters. The mixing elements may also be interchanged with mixing elements of different configurations as discussed in more detail below. In other embodiments, to facilitate cleaning and sterilization of the apparatus, the mixing elements may be formed integrally with the shaft as a one-piece, unitary rotor, or may be otherwise supported for rotation therewith.
In one illustrated embodiments, mixing element 18a (
On each shaft 19, each of the mixing elements 18 has a wiping action relative to one or more mixing elements on the opposite shaft to avoid build up of ingredients on the mixing elements by one approach. This self-cleaning characteristic helps to maintain flow of the ingredients through the mixer, and helps in maintaining good distribution of the ingredients. Shaft 19 is preferably a one piece unitary item that may be removed from the housing 20.
A modified screw element 30 that may be used in conjunction with or instead of one or both of the screw elements 17 and mixing elements 18 is shown in
The arrangement of the mixing elements may be constructed in different manners for different amounts of dwell time, as well as for different amounts and types of work to be applied. For instance, an initial section may be spiral fluted or screw elements which may also be used for pumping through the housing and which may be used for initial size reduction of the incoming meat chunks. As the mixture passes through the mixing elements 18, a first group of mixing elements may be arranged to provide a first level of shear force application that is primarily for mixing or for allowing the described reactions to occur between the protein and salt solution, as examples. Then, the mixture may pass through a second group of mixing elements imparting a second, higher level of shear force application for the purposes described herein. There may be a further grouping for applying a shear force lower than the second level for additional mixing, followed by a final group of mixing elements for final high shear application, such as for final size reduction or comminution.
The utilization of the mixing device in this manner allows for continuous processing, as the mixture forms a stable mixture that is output at one end as new material to be processed enters at the input. Pre-input hoppers including one or more grinders may be used for feeding the meat input lines and for some amount of meat chunk size reduction to facilitate the pumping of the meat into the mixing device. In this manner, meats and other constituents may be simultaneously fed into a continuous processor so that size reduction, mixing, grinding, protein extraction, and/or emulsification may all occur continuously and in a single piece of equipment. Thus, the amount of equipment is reduced, the floor space required for that equipment is reduced, sanitation is simplified for the equipment, and the opportunity for contamination of the mixture is reduced.
The configuration of the rotating mixing elements such as the mixing elements may be adjusted depending on the type of product being mixed or being produced. For instance, finely chopped products resulting in a smooth and fine batter, such as bologna, may be produced. More coarsely chopped products such as salami may also be produced. In addition, whole muscle products such as turkey or ham may be processed as discussed below.
An even greater amount of shear force application is achieved with the configuration of
Testing was performed to determine emulsion stability of various mixtures utilizing a product formula for beef franks. When the mixture leaves the mixer, whether batch processor or an apparatus as described herein, the mixture will be processed by other machinery and forces. Accordingly, the mixture must not lose stability during this downstream processing. As noted above, a stable emulsion is consider as being one that loses less than 2% of the final product due to fat cook-out during cooking. With reference to the table of
It is generally considered that an emulsion is sufficiently stable if three minutes of additional shear do not result in the emulsion having cookout greater than 2% of the product, by weight, lost due to fat cook-out. The testing determined that the control mixtures withstood additional shear force for approximately 6-8 minutes before the additional work resulted in excessive fat and water cookout, and was unstable at greater time periods. As can be seen in
The ingredients are preferably pumped through the input lines into the mixer, though an inlet hopper 62 may alternatively also be employed, as is shown in
Ingredients are supplied as input streams by a plurality of input assemblies 66. The input streams may include a first stream comprising predominantly lean meat or muscle content, a second stream comprising predominantly fat content, a third stream comprising one or more salt solutions such as sodium chloride dissolved in water as well as any spices or flavorings, a fourth stream comprising an aqueous nitrite solution, and a fifth stream consisting essentially of water. Additional ingredients including flavorings such as spices, preservatives, and/or other ingredients may be introduced in additional streams, or may be incorporated in one of the five streams described above. Some meat products may utilize more than two meats, and in some of these instances the system may include additional input assemblies. In other cases, some meat products require small amounts (relative to the overall mixture, such as in the range of 2-5%) of a plurality of particular meats, and these may be pre-mixed and delivered to the mixer with a single input for metering them in at the relatively low rate. Each input line may be provided with the hopper 68 or tank which may hold a pre-mixed quantity of its respective constituent. For instance, a relatively low rate of nitrite solution is used, so a single, pre-mixed quantity in a vat metered through an input line is sufficient for the continuous processing. A left-over-batter line may also be provided to return batter to the mixer for reworking.
In the embodiment of
As an ingredient stream passes through an associated content analyzer 82, the stream is analyzed to determine, for example, fat, moisture and/or protein content. In order to achieve balance between the various ingredients in the desired ratio, a control system receives input from a plurality of analyzers, and regulates the throughput rates of the metering pumps 84 so that the ingredients flow into the inlet hopper 62 in the desired ratio, as specified by the product formula.
Various methods may be used for analyzing the fat, moisture, and protein content. Known methods include use of microwave energy or infrared light. Commercially available in-line analyzers may be programmed to analyze characteristics of a wide variety of substances ranging from, e.g., petrochemicals to processed cheese. Examples of such analyzers include in-line analyzers GMS#44 and GMS#46 manufactured by Weiler and Company, Inc., of Whitewater, Wis., and the Process Quantifier manufactured by ESE Inc. of Marshfield, Wis. These analyzers typically must be calibrated for each individual application, either by the manufacturer or by the end user.
The process preferably employs one or more additional input streams to supply moisture, flavor enhancers, preservatives, and/or other ingredients. In the process of
To produce a mixture with desired moisture, protein and fat content levels, the control system 100 regulates the flow rates of the input streams by adjusting the speed of a pump or valve associated with each input stream. In the embodiment of
Adjustments are made using a feed-forward method whereby the pumps and valves provide the proper relative amounts of the input streams based on upstream analysis. To determine the need for adjustments to the various flow rates, the control system 100 utilizes the content analyzers 82 to determine the protein, fat and/or moisture content levels of ingredient input streams 102, 104 upstream of the metering pumps 110 and 112. In some embodiments, for each input stream element that is analyzed, analysis is completed before the element reaches the metering pump associated with the input stream so that the flow rate of the associated input stream may be adjusted as needed to maintain the desired compositional parameters of the combined output stream continuously within the target range. In other embodiments, analysis may take place after the element has passed through the metering pump, and flow rates may be adjusted as necessary to account for the delay. Thus, the percentages of protein, moisture and fat entering the mixer are preferably regulated so that adjustments to variations in input stream characteristics are made as the input streams flow into the hopper, rather than being made in response to characteristics of the mixture measured downstream from the mixer 10.
More specifically, the control system 100 initially receives a prescribed formulation for the meat product, such as from a database. The control system 100 then receives information regarding the composition (i.e., fat content, water content, etc.) of the meats passing through the analyzers. The control system solves a set of mass balance simultaneous equations to determine whether the materials passing through the analyzers are in the proper ratios for the final meat product. To the degree that the materials are outside of a short-time-period average balance, the control system 100 will adjust the speed of one or more pumps to hold the mass balance within a tolerable range. These equations may be the same equations that would otherwise be solved by plant personnel in order to adjust the input materials based on the batch sheet, discussed above. By providing the control system 100 with standard known parameters for a mixture that will produce the desired final meat product, the control system 100 can automatically, continuously, and dynamically adjust the mixture so that the output is consistent and properly balanced. As also noted previously, in typical batch systems, the only sampling that can be done is from the mixing vat, at which point it is difficult and tedious to adjust the balances. The control system 100 and mixing device allow for a composition controlled mixture to be consistently and uniformly produced, and the tighter composition control may result in increased product yields and improved product quality.
By one approach, the mixer 10 includes an output port 122 for discharging the mixture, and may include an outlet hopper 124 to receive the mixture and channel it to a delivery pump 126. If it is desired to maintain the process at subatmospheric pressure, one or more vacuum lines may be in communication with the apparatus in one or more points.
As the protein extraction is a function of time and shear force in the presence of a salt solution, the power drive 12 may be a variable speed motor so that the constituents are contained within the housing 20 for mixing for a time necessary to allow both salt solution infusion and shearing action.
In connection with sensing fat, moisture and protein content of meat components, it has been found that moisture content may correlate to fat and protein content. It is believed that the correlation may be sufficient to enable moisture content of meat components from a known source to be used as a predictor of fat and/or protein content with sufficient accuracy that fat and/or protein content may effectively be measured simply by measuring moisture content. Accordingly, in certain embodiments of the invention, the step of measuring fat and/or protein content may consist of measuring moisture content after having calibrated the moisture meter appropriately. The control system can then control fat and/or protein input based on the moisture content readings of one or more input streams.
In utilizing the system described herein, plant personnel may receive a batch sheet from a database for the formulation of a particular meat product. The plant personnel may then select appropriate meats for inputting into the system based on fat, protein, and/or water content. However, the precision with which they are selected need not be as accurate, to the degree that the vendor-provided ratings may generally be relied upon. Furthermore, the system allows the meat chunks to be delivered directly into the pre-input hopper 68 which may or may not perform initial size reduction, thus eliminating the need for the injection and curing stages and their accompanying vats. At this point, the control system 100 takes over the processing of the meat and other constituents. The control system 100 itself receives or pulls automatically the batch sheet from the database and calculates the necessary mass balance equations. As described, the control system 100 monitors and adjusts the system including the pumps and mixing device to produce a generally uniform composition stable protein matrix. The output stream of meat product mixture from the mixing device may first proceed to a surge hopper to take into account minor breakdowns in the system, and may then be easily and simply conveyed to further processing steps, such as casing or form stuffing and cooking/thermal processes. The surge hopper fills from the bottom to the top, so there is very little mixing or aeration issues as a result of its use. The control system analyzes the composition needs and what is present, and adjusts accordingly. Thus, human interaction is reduced to providing the constituents, such as by loading meat into the hoppers 68, and responding to alarms or alerts from the system providing notice that there is a problem such as a constituent running out. The result is a reduction in labor, more accurate and higher yields (less yield loss), greater food safety and reduced likelihood of contamination due to the substantially closed system and lack of transfer, reduced space requirements from the elimination of the vats and coolers, improved product uniformity, and reduced maintenance due to the elimination of vat and transfer traffic, as well as savings from the elimination of the vats themselves and the injection stages.
The communication between the control system 100 and the corporate database is directed in both directions. That is, the control system 100 may receive the batch sheet of base formula, formulation rules (such as maximum fat content), and finished batter targets directly, as well as provide feedback to the database regarding the actual materials used. As the database may have a dated or inaccurate formulation, the information from the control system 100 may be uploaded to correct the formulation. In addition, the control system may provide information detailing the actual compositional rating in comparison with the vendor specific rating which is generally a small sample estimate. This allows a historical view of a specific vendor and can trend changes in meats provided by specific vendors. This feedback can be used by the database to assess materials on-hand and purchasing requirements, as well as compare the yield results to materials usage. The data collection enabled by this system can trend various aspects of the operation to search for inefficiencies and spot for improvements therein. In prior systems, the database tends to have a static formulation, while the present control system allows for dynamic repositioning of that formulation. The control system thus responds to changing materials, compensates for unavailable materials, and provides feedback for re-setting the formulation at the database.
While one approach employs breaking down the meat chunks to increase diffusion of the salt solution into the meat, in certain meat products such as whole-meat products, overly aggressive processing that breaks the meat into many small meat portions may negatively affect the integrity. Thus, it is desirable to increase diffusion of the salt solution without excessively breaking down the structure of the meat.
Conventional batch processing of certain whole muscle meat products, such as ham, corned beef, or turkey, involves the injection of cure, brine, and ingredients followed by about 45 minutes of mixing, forty hours of curing, and then stuffing and cooking of the cured meat. As mentioned above, the apparatus and the continuous method disclosed may be adapted to accommodate the processing of whole muscle meat products. Moving to a continuous process that reduces process and curing time, without negatively affecting the integrity of the final product, is desirable. Balancing the rapidity of the process with the integrity of the meat product produced is important for continuous whole muscle meat processing. The process should facilitate efficient ingredient diffusion and incorporation while retaining the whole muscle characteristics of the meat.
The apparatus 10 for continuously processing meat products disclosed herein is a twin shaft arrangement with a relatively short feed screw 17 used in combination with an array of mixing elements 18 on each shaft 19. The mixing elements 18 that perform the mechanical mixing action may be interchangeable. The particular mixing elements 18 employed, including their arrangement along the shaft 19, are chosen for the processing of whole muscle products based on their ability to efficiently process the meat without unnecessarily reducing the size of the muscle pieces or significantly tearing or cutting the meat pieces, as such destructive actions negatively affect the appearance and texture of the whole muscle products. Further, appearance and texture are considered an important factor for consumer satisfaction. As shown in
Turning now to
As shown in
The frustoconical mixing element 18d, illustrated in
The shaft 19 typically includes a variety of mixing elements 18 as shown in
A configuration of mixing elements may be viewed as a group of functional, processing zones. By one approach, the shafts 19 have an ingredient advancement zone, as illustrated by the feed screws 17 in
The parallel shafts 19 and the mixing elements 18 thereon work together cooperatively to process the whole muscle meat. In choosing the mixing element and its rotation in an array, the configuration on the other parallel shaft 19 is examined. More particularly, the mixing elements 18 on one of the parallel shafts typically impact and work together with the adjacent mixing element 18 positioned on the other parallel shaft. For example, the feed screws 17 positioned at the input end 65 of both parallel shafts 19 work together to move the ingredients forward. With the configuration illustrated in
By working the meat with frustoconical mixing elements 18d and circular-shaped elements 18c arranged in series, the meat processing produces muscle pieces with increased ingredient incorporation, distribution and equilibrium throughout the highly organized cellular structure of the whole muscle meat quickly. The ingredient incorporation into the meat may occur by disrupting or rupturing the membranes of the meat while not destroying the overall integrity of the meat or fully severing the connections within the meat. Thus, without employing high shear or creating a protein exudate, the meat mixer may quickly process whole muscle meat. Reducing the cut-points of the mixing elements 18 assists with prevention of over-working the meat product. The frustoconical elements 18d do not have significant, sharp jutting edges or “cut points” that may work the meat pieces too severely thereby excessively tearing, bruising, shearing, abrading, macerating, or otherwise significantly damaging or changing the integrity of the meat.
Turning now to
As illustrated in
The bore 200e is positioned within blocking element 18e such that as the blocking element 18e is rotated by the rotation of the shaft 19, the second surface 146 extends outwardly toward the wall of the housing 20. This provides minimal space for the ingredients to move past the blocking element 18e around the second surface 146. Thus, the ingredients are slowed from advancing, forced to find an alternative pathway such as around the first U-shaped surface 144 or continuing advancement once the blocking element 19e has rotated out of the pathway. The blocking element 18e may temporarily prevent the ingredients from proceeding downstream. By slowing the advancement of the meat pieces, the meat mixture remains just upstream from the blocking element 18e for a slightly longer period of time and whichever mixing element 18 is positioned just upstream from the blocking element 18e has additional time to work the mixture. In sum, the additional residence of the ingredients provides more exposure to the mixing element 18 and other conditions just upstream from the blocking element 18e. Further, if additional ingredients are desired or if the temperature of the mixture needs altering, an inlet may be positioned just upstream from a blocking element 18e. Thus, the blocking elements 18e work in conjunction with the surrounding mixing elements 18 or inputs.
Several illustrative blocking elements 18e are mounted to the shafts 19 in
As discussed above, the mixing elements can be evaluated as processing zones. For example, the configuration of
Turning now to
The configuration of mixing elements 18 shown in
Having a plurality of ellipsoid mixing elements 18f creates a region when the meat is subjected to a massaging action to increase diffusion and ingredient incorporation. While the ellipsoid elements 18f may be used as a larger zone or region of ellipsoid elements 18f, they may also be employed as a smaller processing area or zone along with other elements. The massaging action impacts the microstructure and membrane tissue of the meat, while maintaining the integrity and larger piece dimensions of the meat that are desired for certain whole muscle products. Depending on the configuration of the elements 18, the massaging region may increase ingredient incorporation or may prepare the meat pieces for further processing.
The configuration of elements illustrated in
As mentioned, the mixing elements 18d, 18e, and 18f are configured to work the meat while limiting or preventing unnecessary destruction, such that the integrity and appearance of the whole muscle meat is retained. The mixing elements 18d, 18e, and 18f may be employed with other mixing elements, such as higher shear elements 18a and 18b, to increase the level of processing done to the ingredients. Having an optimized selection of mixing elements 18 provides whole muscle meat with texture and flavor integrity through a process that efficiently and effectively incorporates the salt solution and other ingredients.
Turning now to the graphical and tabular representations shown in
As mentioned, the configuration evaluations were run on a five-inch diameter prototype and, thus, the distance form the center of the shaft to the barrel wall was 2.5 inches. In preparation, the various mixing elements 18 for each configuration were sized to the five-inch prototype to ensure movement of the mixture through the housing and encourage ingredient diffusion and incorporation into the meat. In the five-inch prototype, the mixing element 18a of
In addition to the five-inch prototype, the barrel opening of a production-scale mixer may have approximately a 4.0 inch to a 10.0 inch diameter. By one approach, the production-scale mixer will have approximately an 8.0 inch diameter shaft, with a distance from the center of the shaft to the barrel wall of 3.94 inches. The elements to be used in an eight-inch production-scale mixer will be sized to ensure movement of the mixture through the housing and encourage ingredient diffusion and incorporation in to the meat, similarly to the five-inch prototype. For example, in the eight-inch diameter shaft, the distance from the center of the mixing element 18a to the tip of the element is 3.88 inches, and the distance from the center of the ellipsoidal element 18f to the outer tip is 3.38 inches.
While the results illustrated in
The first column 160 of
The third column 164 and fourth column 166 are results obtained from the configuration illustrated in
As shown in
As mentioned, the need for sufficient cure distribution and protein extraction must be balanced with muscle piece integrity. Some of the configurations tested were either too aggressive or were not aggressive enough and thus, the element configurations may be adjusted accordingly. For example, meat pieces processed by the configuration of
The mixer 10 including the shafts 19 may be manufactured in a variety of manners. By one approach, the shaft 19 and the mixing elements 18 are produced of stainless steel and specifically milled in a unitary construction from a large piece of material. Such a unitary construction may permit the mixer to be more easily cleaned. By another approach, the shaft 19 and mixing elements 18 are produced individually as single elements. Such a construction allows for increased flexibility such that the configuration may be easily adapted to a different configuration. These individually produced elements may also be constructed of stainless steel. By yet another approach, the construction may facilitate the use of zones or groupings such that the shaft 19 and mixing elements 18 may be constructed in a few sections. For example, the entire shaft 19 and mixing elements 18 may be constructed in four or five sections. The chosen mixer construction may depend on the type and variety of meat products that will be processed, and the conditions in the plant, to note but a few considerations.
The embodiments described above relate to continuous processing, i.e., processes in which ingredients are input during discharge of a combined output. In these processes, the input and/or the output steps may be interrupted periodically or may be intermittent.
From the foregoing, it should be appreciated that the invention provides a new and improved method for effecting protein extraction and mixing of meat components for certain processed meat products. The term “meat” is used broadly herein to refer to meat such as beef, pork, poultry, fish and meat byproducts, including cuts or pieces that are all or primarily all fat, as well as lean cuts or pieces that have relatively higher protein content. The terms “meat product” and “meat ingredient” are used broadly herein to refer to products or ingredients that contain meat, alone or in combination with other components.
The above-described embodiments of the invention are believed to be effective for achieving rapid protein extraction and mixing of food components in a much smaller apparatus than that used in certain prior art batch mixing processes. In addition to reducing floor space requirements, the preferred embodiments of the invention also may reduce cost and cleanup time as compared with these prior art processes and apparatus. The invention may also result in significant cost savings by enabling more precise control of the composition of the combined output stream.
Those skilled in the art will recognize that a wide variety of modifications, alterations, and combinations can be made with respect to the above described embodiments without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, and that such modifications, alterations, and combinations are to be viewed as being within the ambit of the inventive concept.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
377546 | Crane | Feb 1888 | A |
858017 | Pence | Jun 1907 | A |
1452098 | Short | Apr 1923 | A |
2538891 | Zimmerman et al. | Jan 1951 | A |
2607077 | Dulmage | Aug 1952 | A |
2744287 | Parshall et al. | May 1956 | A |
2991870 | Griffith et al. | Jul 1961 | A |
3014437 | Dutchess | Dec 1961 | A |
3050399 | Kielsmeier et al. | Aug 1962 | A |
3216375 | Ernst | Nov 1965 | A |
3326534 | Pryde | Jun 1967 | A |
3360824 | Schippers | Jan 1968 | A |
3377000 | Mason | Apr 1968 | A |
3423074 | Loomans | Jan 1969 | A |
3425640 | Kletschke et al. | Feb 1969 | A |
3446485 | Fischer | May 1969 | A |
3450179 | Golding | Jun 1969 | A |
3530534 | Pomper | Sep 1970 | A |
3548903 | Holly | Dec 1970 | A |
3552978 | Inklaar | Jan 1971 | A |
3565637 | Artar | Feb 1971 | A |
3572646 | Kocher | Mar 1971 | A |
3576675 | Abramson et al. | Apr 1971 | A |
3599687 | Tschantz | Aug 1971 | A |
3612130 | Ponka et al. | Oct 1971 | A |
3618902 | Brennan, Jr. | Nov 1971 | A |
3647190 | Iozzelli | Mar 1972 | A |
3649300 | Olson et al. | Mar 1972 | A |
3653637 | Eckhardt | Apr 1972 | A |
3680844 | Menges et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3684252 | Nissle et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3690623 | Boyne | Sep 1972 | A |
3737151 | Schaeffer et al. | Jun 1973 | A |
3749369 | Landsberger | Jul 1973 | A |
3759105 | Wallace et al. | Sep 1973 | A |
3762693 | DeBoo et al. | Oct 1973 | A |
3799459 | Bakewell | Mar 1974 | A |
3814779 | Wiley | Jun 1974 | A |
3825231 | McFarland | Jul 1974 | A |
3879150 | Brown et al. | Apr 1975 | A |
3881708 | Carle | May 1975 | A |
3885665 | Fisher | May 1975 | A |
3897723 | Lucy, Jr. et al. | Aug 1975 | A |
3901483 | Lasar | Aug 1975 | A |
3917507 | Skidmore | Nov 1975 | A |
3920223 | Krueger | Nov 1975 | A |
3924836 | Bruning et al. | Dec 1975 | A |
3942768 | Hughes | Mar 1976 | A |
3971514 | Martinelli et al. | Jul 1976 | A |
3981658 | Briggs | Sep 1976 | A |
3992985 | McFarland | Nov 1976 | A |
4007545 | Briggs | Feb 1977 | A |
4013234 | Fay | Mar 1977 | A |
4029300 | Morishima et al. | Jun 1977 | A |
4032049 | Roberts | Jun 1977 | A |
4036477 | Sieradzki et al. | Jul 1977 | A |
4085482 | Charron | Apr 1978 | A |
4124306 | Bredeson et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
4168431 | Henriksen | Sep 1979 | A |
4171164 | Groves et al. | Oct 1979 | A |
4175871 | Suh et al. | Nov 1979 | A |
4185060 | Ladney, Jr. | Jan 1980 | A |
4201484 | Sasiela et al. | May 1980 | A |
4226540 | Barten et al. | Oct 1980 | A |
4264631 | Rose | Apr 1981 | A |
4269582 | Mella | May 1981 | A |
4314451 | Leeds et al. | Feb 1982 | A |
4332823 | Buemi | Jun 1982 | A |
4334789 | Eusterbarkey | Jun 1982 | A |
4356206 | Boldt | Oct 1982 | A |
4361081 | Howard | Nov 1982 | A |
4382404 | Hawley et al. | May 1983 | A |
4409165 | Kim | Oct 1983 | A |
4409704 | Seiffhart | Oct 1983 | A |
4423960 | Anders | Jan 1984 | A |
4429836 | Goransson | Feb 1984 | A |
4441231 | Baccetti | Apr 1984 | A |
4443109 | Watts | Apr 1984 | A |
4462691 | Boguslawski | Jul 1984 | A |
4473299 | Guibert | Sep 1984 | A |
4476686 | Madsen et al. | Oct 1984 | A |
4500558 | Fulger et al. | Feb 1985 | A |
4508454 | Anders | Apr 1985 | A |
4508545 | DeLoach | Apr 1985 | A |
4518262 | Bornemann et al. | May 1985 | A |
4519712 | Barr | May 1985 | A |
4523520 | Hofmann et al. | Jun 1985 | A |
4534652 | Stade | Aug 1985 | A |
4539210 | O'Connell et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4544279 | Rudolph | Oct 1985 | A |
4548507 | Mathis et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4556324 | Tynan | Dec 1985 | A |
4573799 | Anders | Mar 1986 | A |
4606647 | Frye | Aug 1986 | A |
4606648 | Coyle et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
4652138 | Inoue et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4659230 | Son et al. | Apr 1987 | A |
4659300 | Schwarz | Apr 1987 | A |
4674887 | Lucke et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
4708268 | Wurtz | Nov 1987 | A |
4708623 | Aoki et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4729666 | Takubo | Mar 1988 | A |
4733607 | Star et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4744669 | Kowalczyk et al. | May 1988 | A |
4747342 | Schack et al. | May 1988 | A |
4813860 | Jonsson et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4844619 | Lesar et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4863363 | Haring | Sep 1989 | A |
4867927 | Funaki et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4875847 | Wenger et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4890996 | Shimizu | Jan 1990 | A |
4904496 | Izzo et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4908234 | Daussan et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
4927661 | Bradshaw et al. | May 1990 | A |
4944657 | Mowli | Jul 1990 | A |
4987850 | McCracken | Jan 1991 | A |
5044757 | Dienst | Sep 1991 | A |
5080922 | Hosokawa | Jan 1992 | A |
5083506 | Horn et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5089193 | Behrens et al. | Feb 1992 | A |
5100067 | Konig et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5110275 | Scheuring | May 1992 | A |
5127741 | Capelle et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5141426 | Capelle | Aug 1992 | A |
5147198 | Capelle | Sep 1992 | A |
RE34172 | Gwinn et al. | Feb 1993 | E |
5217303 | Geyer | Jun 1993 | A |
5234656 | Kniss | Aug 1993 | A |
5240324 | Phillips et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5286514 | Webb et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5292186 | Kubo et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5318358 | Wobbe et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5323694 | Higashimoto | Jun 1994 | A |
5324108 | Baumgarten | Jun 1994 | A |
5332308 | Scheuring | Jul 1994 | A |
5358327 | Derezinski et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5358693 | Brinkmann et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5382444 | Roehrig et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5384149 | Lin | Jan 1995 | A |
5393547 | Balaban et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5401402 | Christy et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5407268 | Henrich | Apr 1995 | A |
5433968 | Zarraga et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5439286 | Kowalczyk et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
RE35048 | Rudibaugh | Oct 1995 | E |
5458901 | Engler et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5490725 | Behrens et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5492499 | Van Haren et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5494351 | Hakasalo | Feb 1996 | A |
5505542 | Braeker et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5516205 | Oda et al. | May 1996 | A |
5527107 | Weibel et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5564332 | Ludwig | Oct 1996 | A |
5597236 | Fasano | Jan 1997 | A |
5599096 | Rog | Feb 1997 | A |
5613774 | Chandra et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5628560 | Eigruber | May 1997 | A |
5641227 | Geyer | Jun 1997 | A |
5652007 | Pleva | Jul 1997 | A |
5657687 | Callebaut et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5673564 | Fradin | Oct 1997 | A |
5698255 | Roehrig et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5707145 | Lucke et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5773070 | Kazemzadeh | Jun 1998 | A |
5775986 | Law et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5800055 | Sato | Sep 1998 | A |
5820041 | Moessmer et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5894999 | Moessmer et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5912039 | Browne | Jun 1999 | A |
5913602 | Steele | Jun 1999 | A |
5925400 | Gundlach et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5939112 | Katayama et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5953984 | Moessmer et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5965173 | Goldup | Oct 1999 | A |
5972398 | Ludwig et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5981269 | Park | Nov 1999 | A |
6043444 | Nutt et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6048088 | Haring et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6090418 | Gundlach et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6099159 | Yoshida et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6106146 | Langecker et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6116770 | Kiani et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6170975 | Andersen | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6220745 | Kobayashi et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6224930 | Inglis et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6265006 | Inglis et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6287188 | Righele et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6322244 | Marchesini et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6387306 | Morohashi et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6513963 | Derezinski | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6550959 | Huber et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6582744 | Babacan | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6588926 | Huber et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6588928 | Huber et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6616320 | Huber et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6635301 | Howsam | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6648501 | Huber et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6688217 | Hauck et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6827005 | Babacan | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6846103 | Okamoto et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
7070495 | Kindermann | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7123685 | Ostergaard et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7169421 | Tomey et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7282235 | Lombard et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7448795 | Wenger et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7488502 | Morin et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7521076 | Wenger et al. | Apr 2009 | B1 |
7607597 | Linn et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7731998 | Morin et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7871655 | Morin et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
20010007690 | Girsh | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020075754 | Huber et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020075755 | Huber et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020093118 | Inoue et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020134317 | Shane et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020176318 | Huber et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020176319 | Huber et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020181321 | Huber et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020181324 | Huber et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030091708 | Garwood | May 2003 | A1 |
20030124221 | Garwood | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030152679 | Garwood | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030165602 | Garwood | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030170357 | Garwood | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030170359 | Garwood | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030175392 | Garwood | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030185937 | Garwood | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030185948 | Garwood | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030207006 | Jurgensen et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040081729 | Garwood | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040136261 | Huber et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040146602 | Garwood | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040185152 | Garwood | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040185154 | Garwood | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040185155 | Garwood | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040185156 | Garwood | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050042361 | Tomey et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050208188 | Garwood | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050249862 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050249863 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050249864 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050255207 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050255221 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050255222 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050255223 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050255224 | Morin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050260311 | Garwood | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050276903 | Morin et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20070292559 | Garwood | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080095910 | Wenger et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080159875 | Wilke | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080223223 | Wenger et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
9924991 | Nov 1999 | AU |
2478152 | Aug 2004 | CA |
2536074 | Aug 1975 | DE |
7540167 | Aug 1976 | DE |
2628858 | Dec 1977 | DE |
0325315 | Jul 1989 | EP |
0356165 | Feb 1990 | EP |
0391492 | Apr 1990 | EP |
0380706 | Aug 1990 | EP |
0479447 | Sep 1991 | EP |
0674539 | Oct 1995 | EP |
0700639 | Mar 1996 | EP |
0700725 | Mar 1996 | EP |
0870431 | Oct 1998 | EP |
0962149 | Dec 1999 | EP |
1100346 | May 2001 | EP |
1295529 | Dec 2001 | EP |
1269853 | Jan 2003 | EP |
1402782 | Mar 2004 | EP |
970904 | Mar 1998 | IE |
358212740 | Dec 1983 | JP |
63209549 | Aug 1988 | JP |
63222656 | Sep 1988 | JP |
1-128764 | May 1989 | JP |
02303806 | Dec 1990 | JP |
3-127966 | May 1991 | JP |
4-104774 | Apr 1992 | JP |
4-206030 | Jul 1992 | JP |
2115319 | Jul 1998 | RU |
2166854 | May 2001 | RU |
2166858 | May 2001 | RU |
2204917 | May 2003 | RU |
1669522 | Aug 1991 | SU |
7900345 | Jun 1979 | WO |
8100956 | Apr 1981 | WO |
8700733 | Feb 1987 | WO |
9001267 | Feb 1990 | WO |
9215393 | Sep 1992 | WO |
9308695 | May 1993 | WO |
9519710 | Jul 1995 | WO |
9805217 | Feb 1998 | WO |
9825984 | Jun 1998 | WO |
0133974 | May 2001 | WO |
0162096 | Aug 2001 | WO |
0162096 | Aug 2001 | WO |
0249748 | Jun 2002 | WO |
0244026 | Jun 2002 | WO |
02065860 | Aug 2002 | WO |
02081922 | Oct 2002 | WO |
02094025 | Nov 2002 | WO |
02094513 | Nov 2002 | WO |
03061400 | Jul 2003 | WO |
03092389 | Nov 2003 | WO |
03101210 | Dec 2003 | WO |
2004016097 | Feb 2004 | WO |
2004082403 | Sep 2004 | WO |
2006078991 | Jul 2006 | WO |
2006135229 | Dec 2006 | WO |
Entry |
---|
U.S. Appl. No. 12/277,154, Titled Method and Apparatus for Continuous Processing of Whole Muscle Meat Products, filed Nov. 24, 2008. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/277,159, Titled Method and Apparatus for Continuous Processing of Whole Muscle Meat Products, filed Nov. 24, 2008. |
Extended European Search Report dated Mar. 31, 2010, from related European Patent Application No. 09252603. |
Irvin F. Snider, Mixing and More: The Continuous Co-Rotating Overlapping Twin-Screw Mixer, Powder and Bulk Engineering Magazine, Jan. 1999, USA, reproduced at http://www.readco.com/Mixing—and More.pdf (last visted Aug. 19, 2009) (4 pages). |
Processing Meat Products, Processing Techniques for Meat Products, http://www.ansci.uiuc.edu/meatscience/Library/processing%20meat%20products.htm (last visited Apr. 24, 2003) (4 pages). |
Sausage Manufacturing, Sausage Manufacturing, http://savell-j.tamu.edu/sausage.html (last visited Apr. 24, 2003) (8 pages). |
C. Lynn Knipe, Phosphates as Meat Emulsion Stabilizers, from Phosphates as Emulsifiers, Encyclopaedia of Food Science, Food Technology, and Nutrition, 1992, Academic Press Limited, London, reproduced at OSU Meat Science: Phosphates as Meat Emulsion Stabilizers, http://www.ag.ohio-state.edu/˜meatsci/archive/phoschap.html (last visited Apr. 24, 2003) (5 pages). |
Weiler and Company, Inc., GMS In-Line Analysis System, Product Brochure, Feb. 2001 (12 pages). |
ESE Inc., ESE Analytical, Product Brochure, Marshfield, Wisconsin (3 pages). |
Gerald Offer & John Trinick, On the Mechanism of Water Holding in Meat: The Swelling and Shrinking of Myofibrils, Meat Science, 1983, pp. 245-281, vol. 8, Applied Science Publishers Ltd., Great Britain (37 pages). |
Alan Sharp & Gerald Offer, The Mechanism of Formation of Gels from Mysoin Molecules, Science Food Agriculture, 1992, pp. 63-73, vol. 1 (11 pages). |
Amendment, filed Aug. 10, 2011, in related U.S. Appl. No. 12/277,159, (15 pages). |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action mailed May 10, 2011, in related U.S. Appl. No. 12/277,159, (13 pages). |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action mailed Sep. 7, 2011, in related U.S. Appl. No. 12/277,159, (8 pages). |
Canadian Patent Office, Office Action dated Oct. 26, 2011, in corresponding Canadian Patent App. No. 2,686,044, 3 pages. |
Response dated May 23, 2011, in related European Patent App. No. 09252603.7, 8 pages. |
Search of Non-Patent Literature conducted before Nov. 24, 2008, 3 pages. |
Excerpt from Meat Processing book, published before Nov. 24, 2008, 1 page. |
Excerpt from J.R. Claus, J.W. Colby G.J. Flick, Processed Meats/Poultry/Seafood, 1994, In: Muscle Foods: Meat, Poultry and Seafood Technology, New York: Chapman & Hall, pp. 106-162. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100129520 A1 | May 2010 | US |