Investigation of Some Physical Properties of Two Varieties of Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam)

Year 2021, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 230 - 238, 30.06.2021

Olufemi Adetola , Oluwatusin Adeniyi , Deji Akindahunsi

Abstract

Physical properties of agricultural materials are essential in the development of machineries, equipment and devices. In this research, forty sample each of two unique varieties namely Jewel-orange flesh sweet potatoes (JOFSP) and Oriental-purple flesh sweet potatoes (OPFSP) physical properties were determined using standard methods and equations. The results show that JOFSP gave the mean length (110.68±24.59 mm), width(61.40±8.09 mm), geometric mean (39.72±8.19 mm), volume (187.78±73.85 ml), surface area (4950.00±203.32 mm2) and roundness (1.81±0.50) which were of higher values compared to that of OPFSP which gave the length (68.46±10.16 mm), width (59.32±5.82 mm), geometric mean (36.32±3.90 mm), volume (137.83±10.97 ml), surface area (4320.20±98.00 mm2) and roundness (1.41±0.30) respectively. JOFSP gave moisture content, thickness, mass, sphericity and true density of 58.00±10.17 %, 37.60±7.17 mm, 202.87±65.12 g, 0.35±0.08, and 1.17±0.27 g cm-3 which were of lower values compared to that of OPFSP which gave 79.32±3.84 %, 45.94±9.04 mm, 271.87±15.72 g, 0.53±0.08, and 1.89±0.14 g cm-3 for OPFSP respectively. The mean of the angle of repose and the static coefficient of friction considered for the three-separate surfaces namely plywood (9.35±2.87°, 0.17±0.05), stainless steel (8.50±3.50°,0.15±0.05) and galvanized steel (8.30±3.20°) of lower values for JOFSP compared to that of plywood which gave (11.80±2.25°, 0.21±0.04), stainless steel (9.90±2.02°, 0.19±0.05), galvanized steel (10.90±2.28°) for OPFSP while the coefficient static of friction of stainless steel for JOFSP gave a higher value of 0.20±0.13 compared to that of 0.17±0.04 for OPFSP respectively. These findings provide engineers with valuable information for designing different handling, grading, and drying systems for industrial processing.

Keywords

Investigation , Parameters , Physical properties , Sweet potato , Varieties

Supporting Institution

Federal University of Technology Akure

Project Number

0026

Thanks

Thanks

References

• Akaaimo DI and Raji OA (2006). Some physical engineering properties of prosopsis Africana seed. Biosystems Engineering, 95(2): 197-205.
• Anazado UGN (1983). Force deformation analysis for biomaterials in radial compression: Maximum Contact Stress: apricot pit and its kernel. Journal of Food Engineering, 56: 49-57.
• Aviara NA, Gwandzang MI and Haque MA (1999). Physical properties of guna seeds. Journal of Agricultural Research, 73: 105-111.
• Balami AA, Mohammed IA, Adebayo SE, Adgidzi D and Adelemi AA (2012). The relevance of some engineering properties of cocoyam (Colocasia esculenta) in the design of postharvest processing machinery. Academic Research International, 2(3): 104-113.
• Bart-Plange A and Baryeh EA (2003). The physical properties of category B cocoa beans. Journal of Food Engineering, 60: 219-227.
• Baryeh EA (2000). Strength properties of avocado pear. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 76(4): 389-397.
• Baryeh EA (2001). Physical properties of Bambara groundnuts. Journal of Food Engineering, 47(4): 321-326.
• Burum S (2004). American cinematographer manual (9th ed). ASC Press. ISBN 0-935578-24-2.
• Desphande SD, Bal KN and Ojha TP (1993). Physical properties of soybean. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 56: 89-98.
• Isik E I and Unal H (2007). Moisture dependent physical properties of white speckled red kidney bean grains. Journal of Food Engineering, 82: 209-206
• IBM SPSS (2012). IBM Corp. Released 2012. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
• Joshi DC, Das SK and Mukherjiee RK (1993). Physical properties of pumpkin seeds. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 54(3): 222- 229.
• Kachru RP, Gupta RK and Alan A (1994). Physio-chemical constituents and engineering properties of food crops. Scientific Publishers, Jodhpur, India.
• Kashaninejad MLG, Tabil AM and Kordi AS (2003). Effect of drying methods on the quality of pistachio nuts. Drying Technology 21(5): 821-838.
• McClue JE and Morrow CT (1987). Computer vision sorting of potatoes. ASAE Paper, No 87-6501.
• Mohsenin NN (2010). Physical properties of plant and animal materials, structure, physical characteristics and mechanical properties. 2nd edition (Revised); Gordon & Breach Science Publishers, New York.
• Naskar SK, Nedunchezhiyan M and Rao KR (2008). Evaluation of sweet potato cultivars for quality traits. In: New R and D Initiative in Horticulture for Accelerated Growth and Prosperity. 3rd Indian Horticultural Congress. Bhubaneswar, p: 340, Orissa, India.
• Oke MO, Awonorin SO, Sanni LO, Akanbi CT and Abioye AO (2007). Determination of some selected engineering properties of sweet potato cuts as a function of temperature. Journal of Food Technology, 5(1): 66-70.
• Olukunle OJ and Akinnuli BO (2012). Investigating some engineering properties of coffee seeds and beans. Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences, 3(5): 743-747.
• Oluwamukomi MO and Akinsola OO (2015). Thermal and physicochemical properties of some starchy foods: Yam (Dioscorea rotundata), Cocoyam (Xanthosoma sagittifolium), and Plantain (Musa paradisiacal). Food Science and Technology, 3(1): 9-17.
• Ozguven F and Vursavus K (2005). Some physical, mechanical and aerodynamics properties of pine nuts. Journal of Food Engineering, 68: 191-196.
• Ramesh CR and Tomlins KI (2010). Sweet potato: Post harvest aspect in food, feed and industry. Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York.
• Ray RC and Ravi V (2005). Post-harvest spoilage of sweet potato and its control measures. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 45(7-8): 623-644.
• Singh KK and Goswami TK (1996). Physical properties of cumin seed. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 64: 93-98.
• Suthar SH and Das SK (1996). Some physical properties of karingda [Citrullus lanatus (Thumb) Mansf] seeds. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 65: 15-22.
• Tabatabaeefar A (2003). Moisture-dependent physical properties of wheat. International Agrophysics, 17: 207-211.
• Tabatabaeefar A and Rajabipour A (2005). Modeling the mass of apples by geometrical attributes. Scientia Horticulturae, 105(3): 373-382.
• Thompson RA and Isaac GW (1967). Porosity determinations of grains and seeds with an air-comparison pycnometer. Transaction of ASAE, 10: 693-696.
• Yalcin I, Ozarslan C and Akbas T (2007). Physical properties of pea seed. Journal of Food Engineering, 79: 731-732.
• Zewdu AD and Solomon WK (2007). Moisture dependent physical properties of tef seed. Biosystems Engineering, 96(1): 57-63.