Heat Penetration Studies of Stewed Tomatoes in 6, 8, and 17 Quart Household Pressure Retorts
R.J. Pakola and E.L. Andress, Dept. of Foods and Nutrition, The University of Georgia, 208 Hoke Smith Annex, Athens, GA 30602-4356.
Paper 46B-7. Presented at the Institute of Food Technologists Annual Meeting Anaheim, CA, June 17, 2002.
Abstract
Most current home pressure canning recommendations were developed using standard
17 to 21 quart pressure retorts. Today's marketplace offers a variety
of smaller pressure-based cookers/canners. Retort size has the potential
to affect come up and cooling rates, which contribute to the sterilizing
value of a pressure process. As heating and cooling times are reduced
so is total lethality. The objective of this study was to compare
f(h) values, cumulative lethalities, and potential safe process
times during pressure processing of stewed tomatoes in 6, 8, and
17 quart household pressure retorts. Stewed tomatoes were prepared
and packed into 8 oz glass home canning jars. Jars were processed
at 121.1°C for 25 minutes in 6, 8, and 17 quart pressure retorts
after a 10 minute exhaust of the retort. Heat penetration data were
collected at the cold spot, previously determined to be the geometric
center of the jar. Continuous temperature profiles from 15 replications
were collected using copper-constantan needle thermocouples connected
to an electronic data logger. Potential process times and cumulative
lethal rates were calculated for the destruction of Clostridium
botulinum spores. The cumulative lethal rate did not reach
the target F0 (3.0) during the process. The majority of the lethality
was achieved during cooling. Processing in smaller retorts resulted
in lower f(h) values (p<.001). Calculated process times from
the data collected so far were found to be equivalent but due to
the need to verify some data with additional work, a final conclusion
about process schedules cannot be made at this time, Home canning
in very small retorts should be avoided until safe process recommendations
can be determined.
Introduction
Currently, home canning in smaller pressure retorts is not recommended
by USDA and the Cooperative Extension System (USDA,
1994). Existing recommendations were determined using standard
size home canning pressure retorts that have a 17 or 21 quart capacity.
Smaller pressure retorts are widely available in 4, 6, and 8 quart
capacities. "Pressure canner" is a term usually associated with
16 quart and larger capacities. A recent survey by the National
Center for Home Food Preservation indicates that people are using
smaller pressure retorts to can food at home (Andress,
2001). Past research suggests that 4 quart retorts require a
longer process time to achieve an equivalent lethality (Taube
and Sater, 1948; Nordsiden and others, 1978).
Thus home canning in smaller retorts may not produce a safe product.
Objective
The purpose of this study was to compare heating characteristics and potential process recommendations of a product in standard and smaller size pressure retorts.
Materials and Methods
Stewed tomatoes were selected for this study; the recipe used in
this study is described in Figure 1. Half pint
jars were filled with 200 + 10 grams stewed tomatoes for all experiments.
Each retort load consisted of five jars. Jars were processed at
121.1°C for 25 minutes following a 10 minute exhaust (vent).
Heating profiles were collected in 6, 8, and 17 quart capacity aluminum pressure retorts using Ecklund needle type copper-constantan (type "T") thermocouples.
The cold spot, or slowest heating point in the jar, was determined
from data taken at the center and half inch increments below the
center by using 4 different lengths of needle probes. Data were
recorded using the DAS-TC (Keithley Instruments,
1996) data acquisition system. The rate of heating, expressed
as f(h), was determined and compared using the data analysis software
(SAS Inc., 1999-2001).
For process calculations, heating profiles were collected at the
cold spot in 15 jars of stewed tomatoes per retort size. Data were
recorded using the E-Val™ Monitoring System (Ellab
Inc., 2000). Data were imported into thermal processing software
(TechniCAL Inc., 1998) to determine f(h) values,
potential process times (Bb), and cumulative lethalities. A target
lethality (F0) of 3.0 minutes was selected based on the
choice of Clostridium botulinum as the microorganism of
concern.
Ingredients
- 2 quarts halved tomatoes
- ¼ cup chopped celery
- ¼ cup chopped onions
- 2 teaspoons celery salt
- 2 teaspoons sugar
- ¼ teaspoon salt
Procedure
Select firm, ripe Roma tomatoes. Wash and place tomatoes in boiling water until skins split. Dip in cold water and remove the skins and cores. Slice tomatoes into halves. Combine all ingredients in a large saucepan and cover. Heat to a boil and simmer for 10 minutes. Fill five half-pint canning jars, leaving ½ inch headspace. Remove air bubbles, adjust headspace if necessary, and wipe jar rims. Secure two-piece metal lids. Process jars in a pressure canner.
Results and Discussion
COLD SPOT LOCATION
The f(h) value it the slope of the straight line portion of the
heating curve. A larger f(h) value indicates a slower rate of heating.
The slowest heating point of stewed tomatoes in half pint jars is
the geometric center of the jar (Table
1).
Table 1. Determination of the Cold Spot of Stewed Tomatoes in Half
Pint Jars
| |
|
fh |
| Thermocouple placement |
n |
Mean1 |
Standard deviation |
| center |
15 |
32.5A |
2.0 |
| ½" below center |
15 |
31.5B |
2.0 |
| 1" below center |
13 |
29.0B |
3.3 |
| 1½" below center |
11 |
23.9B |
4.7 |
| 1Means in the same column with different
letters are significantly different (p<.05) |
THERMAL CHARACTERISTICS
Jar temperature did not start to increase until the end of the
10-minute exhaust (Table 2). Mean jar temperatures
achieved by the end of the 25-minute process were the same (p<.001)
in the 6 and 8 quart retorts (Table 2).
Table 2. Mean Jar Temperatures (°C) of Stewed Tomatoes in Half Pint Jars (n=15)
| |
Retort size (quart) |
| |
6 |
8 |
17 |
| Initial |
79.3 ± 5.81 |
80.5 ± 2.1 |
76.8 ± 3.2 |
| Start of exhaust |
76.8 ± 4.4 |
78.3 ± 2.3 |
74.1 ± 2.3 |
| End of exhaust |
79.8 ± 2.9 |
79.4 ± 2.1 |
76.0 ± 1.9 |
| Start of process |
84.8 ± 2.0A2 |
85.7 ± 1.0 A |
81.4 ± 2.1B |
| End of process |
113.7 ± 0.6A |
113.7 ± 0.6A |
112.2 ± 0.7B |
| At 36 min cooling |
72.9 ± 5.2 |
86.0 ± 3.9 |
79.1 ± 6.0 |
1Mean ± standard deviation
2Values in the same row with different letters
are significantly different (p<.001) |
EFFECT OF RETORT SIZE
Retort temperatures across experiments were controlled (Table 3).
The f(h) values increased with retort size (Table 3). The jars processed in the smaller retorts had a faster rate of heating (p<.01). The difference between the f(h) values was not significant between the 6 and 8 quart retorts, probably because there is less difference in size between the 6 and 8 quart retorts as compared to the 8 quart and 17 quart retorts.
Target F0 (3.0) was not achieved in any retort by the end of the process time; at least 2/3 of the cumulative lethality was achieved during cooling (Table 3).
Even though the average calculated process time appears to follow the trend of f(h) values, the maximum achieved in each size retort does not. In practice, home canning process times are rounded off to the next highest 5-minute interval. Therefore, if these results were to be used for recommending a process time, based on the worst-case jar in each retort, the recommended process time for all three sizes would be 40 minutes (Table 3).
Table 3. Effect of Retort Size (n=15) on the Processing of Stewed Tomatoes
| |
Retort size (quart) |
| |
6 |
8 |
17 |
| Retort temperature (°C) |
| End of exhaust |
101.4 ±
0.61 |
102.5 ±
0.4 |
102.7
± 0.1 |
| During process |
121.4 ±
0.1 |
121.2 ±
0.1 |
121.1
± 0.0 |
| f(h) |
30.6 ± 1.4A2 |
31.3 ± 1.5 A |
33.1 ± 1.3sB |
| Cumulative F (min) |
| End of process |
0.9
± 0.2 |
0.9
± 0.1 |
0.6
± 0.1 |
| End
of cool in retort |
n/a3 |
4.8
± 0.6 |
3.0
± 0.5 |
| Calculated process times (min) |
| Mean B(b) |
33.6 ±
1.5 |
33.8 ±
0.9 |
36.0 ±
0.6 |
| Maximum B(b) |
37.3 |
35.9 |
37.0 |
| Potential recommendation |
404 |
40 |
40 |
1Mean ± standard deviation
2Values in the same row with different letters
are significantly different (p<.01)
3Cooling data not available due to equipment failure
4Maximum B(b) rounded up to the next 5 minute increment
|
Conclusions
The target F0 was not achieved during the process. Most of the cumulative lethality was acquired during cooling.
Jars processed in smaller retorts (6 and 8 quart) had smaller f(h) values indicating a faster rate of heating during the process time than occurred in the 17 quart retort. This resulted in higher cumulative lethality for the smaller retorts, which was unexpected. These results are not consistent with past research on smaller retorts.
The 6 quart retort did not provide reliable cooling data. Conclusions cannot yet be drawn about the entire process in all three sizes of retorts.
In addition, the 17 quart retort had shorter come-up and cool down times than
have been previously documented with older models (Toepfer
et al., 1946). The 17 quart retort will hold a much larger volume
than the 6 and 8 quart retorts; this study limited the number and
size of jars to what was determined to be a full load in the smallest
retort. Future work should explore the effect of varying the number
and size of jars in the 17 quart retort.
References
- Andress, E. L. 2001. A
national survey of current home canning practices in the US.
National Center for Home Food Preservation, Department of Foods
and Nutrition, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA. Unpublished
data.
- Ellab Inc., 2000. E-Val Basic, V. 2.0. Software and Documentation, Ellab Inc., Arvada, CO.
- Keithley Instruments Inc., 1996. DAS-TC Data Acquisition System. Keithley Instruments Inc., Cleveland, OH.
- Nordsiden KL, Thompson DR, Wolf ID, Zottola
EA. 1978. Home canning of food: effect of
a higher process temperature (250° F) on the safety of low-acid
foods. J Food Sci. 43:1734-1737.
- SAS Inc., 1999-2001. Statistical Analysis Software, v. 8.02. for Windows, SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC.
- Taube, K. and Sater, V.E. 1948. Canning
vegetables in the pressure saucepan. J Home Econ. 40:197-198.
- TechniCAL Inc., 1998. Carlsoft, V. 1.3.3. Thermal Processing Software, TechniCAL, Inc., New Orleans, LA.
- Toepfer, E.W., Reynolds, H., Gilpin,
G. L., and Taube, K. 1946. Home canning processes
for low-acid foods. USDA Technical Bulletin No. 930. Washington,
DC: Bureau of Home Economics, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
- USDA. 1994. Complete
guide to home canning. Agriculture Information Bulletin
No.539. Washington, DC: CSREES-U.S. Department of Agriculture.
This material is based upon work supported by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under Agreement No. 00-51110-9762.
Document Use:
Permission is granted to reproduce these materials in whole or in part for educational purposes only (not for profit beyond the cost of reproduction) provided the authors and the University of Georgia receive acknowledgment and this notice is included:
Reprinted with permission of the University of Georgia. Pakola, R.J. and E.L. Andress. 2002. Heat penetration studies of stewed tomatoes in 6, 8, and 17 quart household pressure retorts. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia, Cooperative Extension Service.
References to commercials products, services, and information is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by the University of Georgia, U.S. Department of Agriculture and supporting organizations is implied. This information is provided for the educational information and convenience of the reader.
The University of Georgia and Ft. Valley State University, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and counties of the state cooperating. The Cooperative Extension Service, the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences offers educational programs, assistance and materials to all people without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex or disability. An Equal Opportunity Employer/Affirmative Action Organization Committed to a Diverse Work Force.
Contact:
top ^
Home ·
Publications ·
Search ·
Seasonal Tips ·
Info Request ·
Multimedia ·
FAQs ·
Contact ·
Links
|