Analyses of HQCF quality at NRIin 2012

Aurelie Bechoff & Louise Abayomi

Samples analysedLocation (Country) Company

Variety(s) of cassava used Drying method

Production date

Collection date Analysis

Ghana Caltech Ventures Dokuduade (improved)

flash 15-Feb 23-Feb 01-Mar

Cassacosa local variety (red skin)

sun (3 days) 22-Feb 23-Feb 01-Mar

St Baasah mix of varieties hot-air tray dried for 2h & sun dried for 6h

22-Feb 23-Feb 01-Mar

Nigeria Thai Farm unknown flash 14-Feb 21-Feb 29-FebEagle Baba unknown flash 17-Feb 17-Feb 29-FebMicMakin unknown flash 15-Feb 16-Feb 29-Feb

Peak Products unknown flash 15-Feb 22-Feb 29-FebTanzania Daldo Nat Wara unknown sun Jan 31-Jan 23-Feb

Kejo Ent Masasi unknown sun Jan 02-Feb 23-FebUngawo Muhogo unknown sun Jan 31-Jan 23-Feb

Uganda PATA NASE 1 sun 23-Feb 24-Feb 05-MarSOSPA NASE 3 sun 24-Feb 25-Feb 05-Mar

Malawi CMRTE unknown sun 07-Feb 15-Feb 19-MarTiamike unknown sun 23-Nov-11 17-Feb 19-Mar

HQCF is:

• White in colour• Bland in taste, not sour• Low in cyanide (<10mg/Kg)• Has particle size <0.25mm• Odorless• Free of foreign matter• Free of mould, with low microbial count• Has a moisture content of 10-12%• Not fermented (pH >5.5)

The Process high Quality Cassava Flour (HQCF):STEP 1. Always use good quality cassava roots;

this is to ensure optimum recovery of HQCF and white colourSTEP 2. Within 12 hours of harvest peel roots removing any rots;

this is to minimize waste-roots will start to deteriorate after 12 hours of harvestSTEP 3. Wash peeled roots in clean water;

this is to achieve low microbiological levels in flourSTEP 4. keep peeled washed roots in clean water for short period (1 hour) until grating;

this is to avoid discoloration and ensure white colourSTEP 5. Produce a wet mash by grating (never use a chipper!);

this is to facilitate water removal and also minimize cyanide levels in flourSTEP 6. Remove as much water from grated mash as possible using a hydraulic press;

this is to speed up the drying processSTEP 7. Dry pressed cassava cake as quickly as possible (6 hours) and completely

this is to avoid fermentation, bad odor, sour taste and mouldSTEP 8. Mill dried cassava grits to 0.25mm

this is to produce a fine flourSTEP 9. Sieve to produce fine free flowing flour

this is to produce a fine free flowing flour and remove foreign matterSTEP 10. Bag in polypropylene bags with liner and keep in hygienic dry aerated store

this is to prolong the qualityTHE WHOLE PROCESS MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 24 HOURS

Specifications for HQCF        analyses White in colour Bland in taste, not sour Low in cyanide (<10 mg/kg) 90% has particle size <250 um Odorless Free of foreign matter Free of mould with low microbial 

count Has a moisture content of 10‐12% Not fermented (pH > 5.5)

• Colour• pH• Particle size• Moisture

content• RVA

Orange = quality needs improvement

Green = quality ok

Colour

Location (Country)

Company Colour

Ghana Caltech Ventures yellowishCassacosa yellowishSt Baasah yellowish

Nigeria Thai Farm whiteEagle Baba whiteMicMakin white

Peak Products whiteTanzania Daldo Nat Wara yellow

Kejo Ent Masasi not pure whiteUngawo Muhogo yellow

Uganda PATA yellowishSOSPA white

Malawi CMRTE whiteTiamike white

pH

pH value was measured in triplicate

Location (Country)

Company pH value

Ghana Caltech Ventures 5.7Cassacosa 7.0St Baasah 6.2

Nigeria Thai Farm 6.0Eagle Baba 6.2MicMakin 4.9

Peak Products 4.4Tanzania Daldo Nat Wara 5.7

Kejo Ent Masasi 5.8Ungawo Muhogo 6.0

Uganda PATA 6.3SOSPA 6.5

Malawi CMRTE 6.2Tiamike 5.7

Moisture content

Moisture content was measured in triplicate

Location (Country) Company Moisture content %

Ghana Caltech Ventures 12.8%Cassacosa 14.7%St Baasah 8.2%

Nigeria Thai Farm 10.1%Eagle Baba 8.5%MicMakin 7.0%

Peak Products 13.8%Tanzania Daldo Nat Wara 15.1%

Kejo Ent Masasi 12.4%Ungawo Muhogo 14.6%

Uganda PATA 8.9%SOSPA 6.9%

Malawi CMRTE 15.1%Tiamike 14.3%

Particle size

Particle size (by sieving) was measured in duplicate

Location (Country)

Company Particle size (% <0.25um)

Ghana Caltech Ventures 78.9%Cassacosa 77.0%St Baasah 91.0%

Nigeria Thai Farm 95.4%Eagle Baba 96.3%MicMakin 95.5%

Peak Products 93.4%Tanzania Daldo Nat Wara 54.1%

Kejo Ent Masasi 74.7%Ungawo Muhogo 77.8%

Uganda PATA 93.6%SOSPA 98.9%

Malawi CMRTE 96.7%Tiamike 96.7%

RVA: rapid visco‐analyser 

Starch properties

For samples destined to  adhesive paperboad or plywood industries.

RVA profile

Example: profile of SOSPA vs PATA ‐ Uganda

‐500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 500 1000 1500

Viscosity

 (cP)

SOSPA

PATA

Example: profile of Thai Farm, Peak Products & Caltech

‐500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 500 1000 1500

Viscosity

 (cP)

Peak Products

Thai Farm

Caltech

RVA

RVA was done in duplicate

Location (Country) Company

Peak viscosity cP Trough Breakdown

Final viscosity Setback

Pasting temp °C

Ghana Caltech Ventures 1769.0 123.5 1645.5 285.0 161.5 67.9Cassacosa 1780.5 544.5 1236.0 880.5 336.0 67.8St Baasah 1956.5 810.5 1146.0 1246.5 436.0 69.1

Nigeria Thai Farm 3082.5 1127.5 1955.0 2136.0 1008.5 65.9Eagle Baba 2697.0 862.0 1835.0 1498.0 636.0 69.2MicMakin 1821.0 566.5 1254.5 912.5 346.0 68.0

Peak Products 1977.0 589.5 1387.5 918.5 329.0 70.5Uganda PATA 1824.5 616.5 1208.0 1004.0 387.5 66.8

SOSPA 3059.0 1061.0 1998.0 1630.5 569.5 64.8Malawi CMRTE 2326.5 1344.5 982.0 2090.5 746.0 70.8

Tiamike 2669.0 1259.0 1410.0 1945.5 686.5 67.1

Conclusion Not all the HQCF samples meet the specificities – still effort to make on the quality

Some sun‐dried sample (e.g. SOSPA) very good quality – therefore sun‐drying not a obstacle to quality (although the size of production is limited)

Way forward Put into place a quality control system in the different countries ‐ all these analyses easy to carry out but RVA

Where are we? Across C: AVA countries, only 20% (3 of 15) of samples met the full HQCF specification

2 (of 4  samples sent) from Nigeria, and 1 (of 2 samples sent) from Uganda

57% met particle size spec. 86% met pH spec. 58% met moisture content spec. 67% met foreign matter spec. 86% met odour spec. 57% met fibre content spec. 87% met colour spec.

What have we done?Local training in TQM/Quality Management (Nigeria, Ghana, Tanzania)

Quality management workshop/demonstration with measurement tools‐ particularly particle size and pH, traceability and documentation (Uganda, Malawi)

Tanzania‐ No field audit

What have we done?Uganda‐Field audit undertaken with follow up

Malawi‐Field audit undertaken with follow up

Ghana‐ No field auditNigeria‐Field audit undertaken, no follow up

HQCF samples tested in‐country/ at NRI (few)

Why are we here?Lack of tools for assessing quality Incorrect screens within millPoor peeling and/or opportunity for product contamination

Non‐adherence to recommended processing times‐leading to fermentation

Why are we here?Overmature roots Insufficient pressing/dryingLack of focus on importance of quality (Team)

Most issues appear in countries with no audit (i.e. Ghana and Tanzania)

Where do we want to be?

Positive feedback from end‐usersFit for purpose‐ a quality product fit as a partial substitute for wheat flour/substitute for corn starch

Consistent quality<5% total defects is the normAchieve the same quality standard across processors and ALL countries

How do we get there

Not just about training‐ but attitude!May need to hand‐hold (processors)‐initiallyNeed for simple tools (processors and end‐users) for objective measurement of main parameters (particle size and pH)

How do we get there? Is there sufficient time to raise standards? Next 6 months criticalObtain regular feedback from end‐users by BDA Scheduled analyses by NRI  Scheduled analyses by CM’s In‐house (processors) quality control NRI backstoppingOther

How do we get there

Need to ensure correct screens available Increased technical backstoppingTraining on equipmentMonitor output volumes CM’s need to spot check (processors)‐until confident‐ all CMs/BDA should have 250m sieve and pH measurement tool

How do we get there

Bring main processors and end‐users together to reaffirm what HQCF is‐ visibly objectively confirming particle size and pH‐only once you can achieve it!

Quality control during peeling, improved handling practices/processing environment to eliminate presence of ‘black spots’

Eliminate cross contamination during milling

How much will it cost? 250m sieve (UK) = £150pH strips (UK) = £15 Cost of training/backstopping by NRI = 1 flight, 5 days  = £3, 500

HQCF sample analysis (NRI) = £5000/country/yr 

Screens for mill = ? In‐country training costs = (based on Malawi, 20 people x 2days) = £8, 000

Processors = daily labour rate

How much will it cost?

Lost sales (‐ve impact on targets/beneficiaries)Loss in confidence by both consumers and industrial end‐usersLow price offered for high cost of production (relative to makaka, kokonte) Image 

How much will it cost?

Reduced potential for aggregation/supplying larger volumesCost of rejected flourSlow market growth Increased cost of C: AVA promotional activities

How much will it cost? 250m sieve (UK) = £150pH strips (UK) = £15 Cost of training/backstopping by NRI = 1 flight, 5 days  = £3, 500

HQCF sample analysis (NRI) = £5000/country/yr 

Screens for mill = ? In‐country training costs = (based on Malawi, 20 people x 2days) = £8, 000

Processors = daily labour rate

Who to target?

Tanzania* – Kejo Ltd (aggregator), individual processorsUganda – Second and third sites of associationsMalawi – 8 additional groups (CMRTE & Tiyamike failed only on %MC)

Who to target?

Ghana*‐ Caltec, Cassacoxa,Marbert, St baasah, First door, MajesticNigeria‐ Peak & MicMakin,  Naiji Lucas, Blopamed, Sunshine, +23 additional retro‐fitted processors?Main end‐users*

THANK YOU