PENGARUH NISBAH PELARUT DENGAN TEPUNG PORANG DAN JUMLAH TAHAPAN EKSTRAKSI GLUKOMANAN DENGAN METODE COUNTER-CURRENT DAN CROSS-FLOW MULTI TAHAP

• Main Author: Lidia Soetanto, Marcelina
• Format: Final Project
• Language: Indonesia
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/84127
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

Glucomannan is a water-soluble dietary fiber used as a hydrocolloid in food and non-food products. Commercial sources of glucomannan usually come from konjac tubers imported from East Asian countries. However, there is another source of glucomannan derived from Indonesia's natural resources. That's from Amorphophallus muelleri Blume (porang) tubers that can be used as an alternative glucomannan source. Currently, most local porang tubers are produced in chips form which has low selling value. If sold in flour form, it will have a higher selling price. Porang glucomannan flour products can compete with konjac glucomannan flour if the production process is developed through the right method to produce higher glucomannan purity. Multi-stage counter-current or cross-flow extraction methods have the potential to increase purity with efficient solvent use. This study aims to determine the effect of extraction stages and methods, as well as solvent-flour ratio on glucomannan purity of porang flour. The three main stages of this research consisted of pretreatment using 70% ethanol and sodium bisulfite, extraction with multistage counter-current and cross-flow methods using 80% isopropyl alcohol with varying solvent-solid ratio, and lastly glucomannan flour characterization.The results showed that the more stages of extraction carried out and the greater the solvent-solid ratio, the higher the purity of glucomannan produced. The best quality of porang glucomannan flour in this study was produced by the sample: 3-stage counter-current extraction method at a solvent-solid ratio of 11 (w/w). It has a yield of 95.22%, viscosity of 7661 cP, glucomannan purity of 75.43%, and whiteness index of 84.94. The results showed that the counter-current method is more efficient than cross-flow. Counter-current extraction is better because it can produce high purity with less solvent use compared to the cross-flow method.