Preparation of milk protein concentrates by ultrafiltration and continuous diafiltration: effect of process design on overall efficiency


  • Année de publication : 2018-01-01

Référence

C. Gavazzi-April, S. Benoît, A. Doyen, M. Britten, Y. Pouliot. 2018. Preparation of milk protein concentrates by ultrafiltration and continuous diafiltration: effect of process design on overall efficiency. Journal of Dairy Science, 11, 9670-9679.

Information Complémentaire

Lien vers l'article : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030218307860 

Mot(s) Clé(s)

Concentré protéique Protéines Lait bovin Ultrafiltration Diafiltration Efficience Consommation énergétique

Résumé

High-milk-protein concentrates (>80% on a dry weight basis) are typically produced by ultrafiltration (UF) with constant-volume diafiltration (DF). To maximize protein retention at a commercial scale, polymeric spiral-wound UF membranes with a molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) of 10 kDa are commonly used. Flux decline and membrane fouling during UF have been studied extensively and the selection of an optimal UF-DF sequence is expected to have a considerable effect on both the process efficiency and the volumes of by-products generated. The objective of this study was to characterize the performance of the UF-DF process by evaluating permeate flux decline, fouling resistance, energy and water consumption, and retentate composition as a function of MWCO (10 and 50 kDa) and UF-DF sequence [3.5×–2 diavolumes (DV) and 5×–0.8DV]. The UF-DF experiments were performed on pasteurized skim milk using a pilot-scale filtration system operated at 50°C under a constant transmembrane pressure of 465 kPa. The results showed that MWCO had no effect on permeate flux for the same UF-DF sequence. Irreversible resistance was also similar for both sequences, whatever the MWCO, suggesting that soluble protein deposition within the pores is similar for all conditions. Despite lower permeate fluxes and greater reversible resistance for the 5×–0.8DV sequence, the overall energy consumption of the 2 UF-DF sequences was similar. However, the 3.5×–2DV sequence required more water for DF and generated larger volumes of permeate to be processed, which will require more membrane area and lead to greater environmental impact. A comparative life cycle assessment should however be performed to confirm which sequence has the lowest environmental impact.