JDS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 30 No. 9 723-731
© 1947 by American Dairy Science Association ®
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Claydon, T. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Claydon, T. J.

The Efficiency of the Farm-Size Mechanical Separator in Withholding Extraneous Matter from Cream1,2

T. J. Claydon

Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station, Manhattan

ABSTRACT

The problem of extraneous matter in farm-separated cream is becoming increasingly important. In order to develop effective control measures, information is needed on the amount of contamination occurring at the various stages of production and marketing of cream. The possible sources of contamination of milk are fairly well established. The first stage of study on sources of sediment contained in cream when it arrives at the creamery would seem to be as the cream comes from the separator. The centrifugal action of the mechanical cream separator bowl together with the accumulation of separator slime during the separation process raised the question regarding the efficacy of the separator as a means of removing extraneous matter from cream during the separation process. The question also arises as to whether the mechanical cream separator will remove some types of material and not others. The amount of sediment found in cream as it comes from the separator will indicate whether primary emphasis should be placed on production practices prior to separation or on later stages of handling, if cream relatively free from sediment is to be obtained.


FOOTNOTES

1 Contribution no. 168, Department of Dairy Husbandry.

2 This study was supported by a grant from Swift and Company, Chicago, Illinois.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1947 by the American Dairy Science Association ®.