In 1st phase of experiment, Chhattisgarhi Churma was prepared by extruder as well as from traditional method. The variation will occur in screw speed (42 rpm, 63 rpm and 98 rpm) were as the barrel temperature (90ËšC, 100ËšC, 110ËšC, 120ËšC) will remain constant in treatment T1, T2 and T3 and T0 (control sample) was prepared by traditional method. In all the treatments proportion of ingredients is constant Chickpea flour (24.8 g), ghee (15 g), khoa (30 g), sugar (30 g), cardamom (0.1 g) and color (0.1 g) per 100 g of product. The treatment T1, T2 and T3 prepared by extruder in which first chickpea flour and ghee is passed for one time then in second pass chickpea flour, ghee and khoa is passed through extruder then sugar syrup of 72 brix were prepared and cooled down then flavor and color is added in the roasted mixture and mixed gently and pour in a tray for setting and cut into pieces after 6 hours. The treatment T0 is prepared by traditional method by roasting chickpea flour in ghee followed by addition of khoa, sugar syrup of 72 brix were prepared and cooled. The roasted chickpea flour and khoa was mixed gently and pour in tray for setting and cut into pieces after 6 hours. Fresh samples were subjected to sensory analysis. Sample T2 and T3 was most preferred for its sensory attributes color and appearance 7.80 (T2) and 7.82 (T3), body and texture 7.76 (T2) and 7.72 (T3), sweetness 7.36 (T2) and 7.38 (T3), flavor 7.60 (T2) and 7.56 (T3) and overall acceptability 7.42 (T2) and 7.40 (T3) out of nine. However, the treatment T1 scored third highest for these attribute. Therefore, treatment T0, T2 and T3 were selected for the further study in the 2nd phase.

In the 2nd phase, fresh and stored samples T0, T2 and T3 were packed in metalized polyester bags and stored at (37 + 1ËšC). The fresh product were subjected to further study for chemical analysis (moisture, fat, protein, total carbohydrate, ash, acidity, dietary fiber and iron), sensory evaluation (color and appearance, flavor, body and texture, sweetness and overall acceptability) and textural analysis (hardness, adhesiveness, springiness, gumminess, chewiness and cohesiveness).

In sensory analysis of fresh sample, significant difference found in color and appearance, body and texture, flavor, and overall acceptability. The color and appearance, body and texture, flavor and overall acceptability were 7.32 (T0), 7.80 (T2) and 7.82 (T3), 7.08 (T0), 7.76 (T2) and 7.72 (T3), 7.16 (T0), 7.76 (T2) and 7.76 (T3), 6.76 (T0), 7.86 (T2) and 7.82 (T3) respectively. Water activity of sample (T0), (T2) and (T3) were 7.6, 7.6 and 7.6, standard plate count of sample (T0), (T2) and (T3) were 3.82 log10 cfu/g, 3.61 log10 cfu/g and 3.43 log10 cfu/g, yeast and mould count of sample (T0), (T2) and (T3) were 2.07 log10 cfu/g, 1.24 log10 cfu/g and 1.23 log10 cfu/g.