Macrowine 2021
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Intelligent article to control the internal pressure in continue in bottles

Intelligent article to control the internal pressure in continue in bottles

Abstract

An intelligent packaging might, among others, provide information and allow monitoring of the quality of the packed product or its surrounding environment. A recent project on micro-flow wine bottles closed with aluminium screw cap and tightness liner, highlighted the importance of monitoring the internal overpressure continuously, in real-time and at least for 72 hours, since the internal pressure on the tightness liner and the micro-flow are related. Real-time and continuous measurements are not the standard methods of measurement of the overpressure, yet. The most used equipment for the determination of the pressure in wine bottle is the aphrometer, a destructive device that supplies a single value of pressure. This paper describes a new intelligent measurement system (namely prototype) that permits real-time and continuous monitoring of the wine bottles headspace pressure. The prototype is composed of two parts. The first part (to be introduced into the headspace of the bottle) is composed by one low-volume transmitting module (4.5cm3) and one measurement system for temperature and pressure (7 bar max). The second part (outside of the bottle) is made of one data-receiving module and one acquisition module. The prototype is validated mainly by comparison with the aphrometer, both in laboratory and in real conditions (wine bottles). In the first test series, an overpressure is generated inside the bottles with dry ice (that melting increased pressure from 0.5 to 3.0 bar). A linear correlation between the aphrometer results and the prototype results is showed, confirming the correctness of the new device measurements. In the second test series, industrial tests are performed directly with the industrial partner by integrating a conditioning wine production and the prototypes are installed inside the wine bottles. The internal overpressures determined with the prototypes are confirmed by these one controlled by the aphrometer.

Publication date: May 17, 2024

Issue: Macrowine 2016

Type: Poster

Authors

Eric Martine*, Benoit Bach, Bertrand Hochet

*HES-SO

Contact the author

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Macrowine | Macrowine 2016

Citation

Related articles…

Impact of heating must before fermentation on Chardonnay wines

Prefermentation steps of white winemaking are very important for controlling the stability and the sensory attributes of wines. Usually musts are clarified by cold settling to prevent the start of the fermentation, before racking big lees and thus limiting the appearance of vegetable or reduction off flavour while favouring an aromatic expression with low turbidity. Besides, to reach the protein stability, some white wines further require a bentonite fining, sometimes associated with negative effects on the sensory quality. This study aims to know the impact of musts heating after pressing on a Chardonnay wine in northern conditions by comparison with a classic cold racking of the must.

Supramolecular approaches to the study of the astringency elicited by wine phenolic compounds

The objective of this study is to review the scientific evidences and to advance into the knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of astringency. Astringency has been described as the drying, roughing and puckering sensation perceived when some food and beverages are tasted (1). The main, but possibly not the only, mechanism for the astringency is the precipitation of salivary proteins (2,3). Between phenolic compounds found in red wines, flavan-3-ols are the group usually related to the development of this sensation. Other compounds, phenolic or not, like anthocyanins, polysaccharides and mannoproteins could act modifying or modulating astringency perception by hindering the interaction between flavanols and salivary proteins either because of their interaction with the flavanols or because of their interaction with the salivary proteins.

DNA and type of grain: which factor does better explain sensory differences of sessile and pedunculate oaks?

Sessile oak and pedunculate oak have shown several differences of interest for enological purposes. Tannic and aromatic composition among sessile oak or pedonculate oak has been well studied. Sessile oak is generally more aromatic than pedunculated, while the later is more tannic. This scientific point of view is rarely applied to classify oak in cooperages. Most coopers use the type of grain to distinguish wide and thin grain.

Influence of SO2 and Zinc on the formation of volatile aldehydes during alcoholic fermentation

Laboratório de Análisis del Aroma y Enologia (LAAE). Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Sciences, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009, Zaragoza, Spain, During alcoholic fermentation, fusel (or Strecker) aldehydes are intermediates in the amino acid catabolism to form fusel alcohols following the Ehrlich Pathway (1). One of the main enzymes involved in this pathway is Alcohol Dehydrogenase (ADH), whose activity is highly strain dependent and determines the rate of conversion of aldehydes into fusel alcohols (2). This enzyme has a Zn2+ catalytic binding site, which suggests that the must Zn2+ levels will most likely influence the rate of reduction of aldehydes into alcohols. On the other hand, SO2 is commonly used in winemaking for its antiseptic and antioxidant properties.

Removal of Fumonisin B1 and B2 from red wine using polymeric substances

The Ability of PVPP (Polyvinylpolypyrrolidone), PVP-DEGMA-TAIC (copolimerization of N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidinone with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate and triallyl isocyanurate) and PAEGDMA
(poly(acrylamide-co-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate)) polymers was tested as removal agents for Fumonisin B1 (FB1) and Fumonisin B2 (FB2) from model solutions and red wine. The polymers removal capacity was checked at three different resident times (2, 8 and 24 hours of contact time between the polymer and the sample), showing no differences in the percentage of FB1 and FB2 removal. Then, different polymer concentrations (1, 5 and 10 mg mL-1) were tested in model solution with and without phenolics (i.e. gallic acid and 4-methylcatechol).