A comparison of different particle size analysis techniques
A. L. Baldridge, T L Stainbrook, Jason C Woodworth, Michael D Tokach, Jim L Nelssen, Robert D Goodband
Abstract
Open-access reader
A. L. Baldridge, T L Stainbrook, Jason C Woodworth, Michael D Tokach, Jim L Nelssen, Robert D Goodband
Abstract
Open-access reader
In this study, we compared different methods of testing particle size of ground corn. Forty-four corn samples were analyzed for particle size with a Ro-Tap tester equipped with a 13-sieve stack (53 to 3,350 :m tyler mesh screens). Mean particle size of the 44 samples ranged from 422 to 1,143 :m. These samples were then analyzed by placing 280 g on a #14 sieve (1,400 :m). The sieve was shaken by hand as the manufacturer recommended (one-sieve method). In a second procedure, samples were analyzed by placing 50 g of corn on a stack of three sieves: US #12 (1700 :m), #30 (600 :m), and #50 (300 :m: three-sieve method) with balls and carnucles. The three-sieve method was much more reliable in predicting average particle size of ground corn than the one-sieve method when compared to the 13- stack standard operating procedure. In summary, the three-sieve procedure may be a more accurate method to quickly determine particle size than the one-sieve method.; Swine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 15, 2001
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In this study, we compared different methods of testing particle size of ground corn. Forty-four corn samples were analyzed for particle size with a Ro-Tap tester equipped with a 13-sieve stack (53 to 3,350 :m tyler mesh screens). Mean particle size of the 44 samples ranged from 422 to 1,143 :m. These samples were then analyzed by placing 280 g on a #14 sieve (1,400 :m). The sieve was shaken by hand as the manufacturer recommended (one-sieve method). In a second procedure, samples were analyzed by placing 50 g of corn on a stack of three sieves: US #12 (1700 :m), #30 (600 :m), and #50 (300 :m: three-sieve method) with balls and carnucles. The three-sieve method was much more reliable in predicting average particle size of ground corn than the one-sieve method when compared to the 13- stack standard operating procedure. In summary, the three-sieve procedure may be a more accurate method to quickly determine particle size than the one-sieve method.; Swine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 15, 2001
Key concepts: Sieve (category theory), Particle size, Sieve analysis, Particle (ecology), Materials science, Particle-size distribution, Stack (abstract data type), Mathematics