What email address or phone number would you like to use to sign in to Docs.com?
If you already have an account that you use with Office or other Microsoft services, enter it here.
Or sign in with:
Signing in allows you to download and like content, and it provides the authors analytical data about your interactions with their content.
Embed code for: 1-s2.0-S2214157X14000148-main
Select a size
Case studies on the effect of the air drying conditions on the convective drying of quinces Dimitrios A. Tzempelikos a,n, Alexandros P. Vourosb, Achilleas V. Bardakas b, Andronikos E. Filios c, Dionissios P. Margaris a a Laboratory of Fluid Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics, University of Patras, Greece b Laboratory of Fluid Mechanics and Turbomachinery, Department of Mechanical Engineering Educators, School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE), Greece c Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technological Education Institute of Piraeus, Greece a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 8 April 2014 Accepted 6 May 2014 Available online 14 May 2014 Keywords: Convective dryer Quince Mathematical modeling Effective diffusivity Activation energy abstract The objective of the current study is to examine experimentally the thin-layer drying behavior of quince slices as a function of drying conditions. In a laboratory thermal convective dryer, experiments were conducted at air temperatures of 40, 50 and 60 1C and average air velocities of 1, 2 and 3 ms1. Increasing temperature and velocity resulted to a decrease of the total time of drying. The experimental data in terms of moisture ratio were fitted with three state-of-the-art thin-layer drying models. In the ranges measured, the values of the effective moisture diffusivity (Deff) were obtained between 2.671010 and 8.171010 m2 s1. The activation energy (Eα) varied between 36.99 and 42.59 kJ mol1. & 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). 1. Introduction The drying is used for the removal of moisture content of different fruits and vegetables, aiming to the efficient preservation and storage for long periods of time. It is a complex process where a simultaneous heat and mass transfer in transient conditions occurs. Knowledge of the heat and mass transfer mechanisms related to the process and the role of the drying parameters has a direct impact on the improvement of the quality of the dehydrated product. The main parameters affecting the drying process are temperature, velocity and relative humidity of the drying air. There are many published studies dealing with the effect of the drying parameters during the drying process of vegetables and fruits. Drying kinetics of vegetables such as potato, carrot, pepper, garlic, mushroom etc. were studied by Krokida et al. . The authors studied the effect of air drying conditions i.e. air temperature, humidity and velocity, and characteristic sample size on drying kinetics and they concluded that the drying constant and the equilibrium moisture content of the dehydrated product increases with temperature. For the examined cases, the temperature of the drying air was the most important factor affecting the drying rate. Sacilik et al.  studied the thin layer characteristics of organic apples slices in a convective hot air dryer as a single layer with thickness of 5 and 9 mm. Temperatures ranged from 40 to 60 1C while a single air velocity of 0.8 ms1 was utilized. They noticed that both moisture content and drying rate were affected by the drying air temperature and slice thickness and they observed a decrease in the drying time, with the increase of the air drying temperature and an increase in the drying rate, with the decrease of the slice thickness. Babalis et al.  Contents lists available at ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csite Case Studies in Thermal Engineering http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2014.05.001 2214-157X/& 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/). n Corresponding author. Tel.: þ30 2102896838; fax: þ30 2102896838. E-mail address: email@example.com (D.A. Tzempelikos). Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–85 studied the influence of the drying conditions on the drying constants and moisture diffusivity during the thin-layer drying of figs. The authors stated that air velocities greater than 2 ms1 has no significant effect on the drying rate and they concluded that the drying kinetics is most significantly affected by the air temperature, with the airflow velocity having a limited influence on the drying process. Focusing on the drying of quince slices, Kaya et al.  and Barroca et al.  studied the effect of the temperature and velocity of the air stream. The former also conducted measurements by altering the humidity of the drying air. In the study of Kaya et al. , the values of the imposed temperatures varied from 35 1C to 551C, the relative humidity values from 40% to 70% while air velocities from 0.2 ms1 to 0.6 ms1. The authors concluded that increasing the temperature or the velocity of the drying air, the total drying time is decreased, while the relative humidity and the total drying time are related in vice- versa manner. Barroca et al.  carried out experiments in temperatures ranging from 40 1C to 601C and velocities from 0.7 ms1 to 1.2 ms1. The authors stated that the moisture curves followed sigmoidal shape characteristic of the drying processes and gave evidence of a reduction in drying time with the increase in temperature. They also concluded that an increase in air velocities resulted to a higher drying rate; however, the effect of the drying velocity on the drying rate was nearly negligible for lower moisture ratios. The purpose of the present study is the experimental investigation of the drying kinetics of quinces for air drying conditions (temperature 40, 50 and 60 1C, velocity of 1, 2 and 3 ms1, humidity 10%) that have not been studied in the earlier literature and the determination of the effective moisture diffusivity as well as the activation energy for the above conditions. 2. Experimental methods Fresh quinces were stored in a refrigerator at about 6 1C. Before drying, the quinces were cleaned and sliced manually to a thickness of 12 mm. The initial net weight of the quince slices was about 700 g and the initial moisture content (M0) was measured to be 81.04% in wet basis (w.b.) or 4.27 g water/g dry matter in dry basis (d.b.) and was determined by the oven- drying method, for the fresh and for the final dehydrated products at 70 1C for 24 h  with repetition in order to assure accurate moisture content average values. The laboratory thermal convective dryer (LTCD) unit was starting 2 h before each experiment in order to achieve the desired steady state conditions of the drying air flow. Experiments were performed at air drying conditions of 40, 50 and 60 1C, air velocities 1, 2 and 3 ms1, while the relative humidity remained constant at 10%. Product weight, air drying temperature, probe-surface temperature and relative humidity were acquired every 10 min. All experiments were twice repeated and the means of measurements were averaged and used to express the data of the moisture content. Fig. 1 shows the LTCD unit which is equipped with an integrated measurement and control instrumentation. The overall dimensions of the facility are 4.7 m (length), 2.5 m (width) and 2.5 m (height). The air ducts are made from steel of 0.8 mm thickness. All the ducts were insulated with 10 mm of Alveolen (Frelen). The square section drying chamber (0.5 m0.5 m) is of tower (vertical) type and contains a metal tray which is supported on four, side wall mounted, load cells. A set of four refractory glasses of 10 mm thickness are available to replace the side steel walls when optical clarity and precise visual observations are required. A detailed description of the components and the operational characteristics has been presented in a previous publication . The air and drying product temperatures were measured using calibrated PT100 with class A tolerance and accuracy 70.15 1C. A 3-wire transmitter used to connect the probes to the card interface with accuracy 70.2 1C was used. Nomenclature a, n coefficients in thin layer drying models D0 pre-exponential factor of the Arrhenius equation (m2 s1) Deff effective moisture diffusivity (m2 s1) DR drying rate (g water/h) Eα activation energy (kJ mol1) k constants in thin layer drying models (h1) L half-thickness of samples (m) N integer number of terms in Fick's equation M0 initial moisture content (g water/g dry matter) Meq equilibrium moisture content (g water/g dry matter) MR moisture ratio (dimensionless) Mt moisture content at any time t (g water/g dry matter) R2 coefficient of determination Rg gas constant (8.3143 kJ mol1 K1) RMSE root mean square error T drying temperature (1C) t drying time (h) Tabs absolute temperature (K) w weight loss (g) wd dry matter (g) wt dry matter at any time t (g) wtþdt dry matter at time tþdt (g) Greek symbols χ2 reduced chi-square D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–8580 The relative humidity of the drying air was determined using calibrated humidity transmitter with accuracy 72.95%. A differential pressure transmitter with a calibrated accuracy 72% of the selected range of 25 Pa was used to measure dynamic pressure and hence air drying velocity. The weight was quantified using four load cells (total nominal load 10 kg) with accuracy 70.05% and an analog transmitter with accuracy 70.03%. A custom application in Labviews was used to operate and control the LTCD device. 3. Engineering analysis The moisture content of the samples during the drying process is calculated according to the following formula: Mt ¼ wt wd wd ð1Þ where Mt is the moisture content at any time t, g water/g dry matter; wt is the dry matter at any time t, g;wd is the dry matter, g. It is used however to present moisture data in non-dimensional form involving the moisture ratio defined by the following equation: MR¼ Mt−Meq M0−Meq ð2Þ where M0 and Meq are the initial and equilibrium moisture contents, g water/g dry matter, respectively. Meq is quite small compared with M0 and Mt and in the MR definition may be ignored . The drying rate DR of quince slices was calculated using the following equation: DR¼− Mtþdt−Mt dt ð3Þ where Mtþdt is the moisture content at time tþdt, g water/g dry matter and t is time, h. Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the LTCD unit (curved arrow indicate the flow direction when dryer is in full recirculation operation): (a) front view, (b) top view, (c) right side view and (d) perspective view. Numbered items: (1) Ambient air inlet, (2) inlet damper, (3) by pass air damper, (4) outlet damper, (5) air outlet, (6) centrifugal fan, (7) three-phase electric motor regulated by an AC inverter, (8) diffuser, (9) temperature and humidity sensors, (10) tube heat exchanger, (11) guide vanes, (12) metal frame for pressure cells, (13) flow straightener, (14) temperature and humidity sensors, (15) pressure cells, (16) metal tray, (17) temperature and humidity sensors, (18) drying chamber, (19) pitot rake, (20) boiler, (21) air compressor, (22) water and air spray nozzle. D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–85 81 The experimental data were fitted using the following three, thin-layer drying models: (i) Newton, MR¼exp(kt) , (ii) Henderson–Rabis, MR¼αexp(–kt)  and (iii) Page: MR¼exp(ktn) , in order to find the best suitable model for describing the drying behavior of a quince slice in LTCD unit. Non-linear regression analysis was used for the determination of the constants of each model. The effectiveness of each model was evaluated based on statistical criteria i.e. coefficient of determination (R2), reduced chi-square (χ2) and root mean square error (RMSE). The best model describing the thin-layer drying characteristics of quince slices was chosen based on the higher R2 value and the lower χ2 and RMSE values. An analytical solution of Fick's model of mass-diffusion equation for drying biological products in a falling-rate period was developed by Crank . The assumption for the analytical solution were recently reviewed by Lopez . For long drying times a limiting of Crank's equation is expressed in a logarithmic form: ln MR¼ ln 8 π2 −π2Deff t 4L2 ð4Þ where Deff is the effective moisture diffusivity, m2 s1; t is the drying time, h; L is the half-thickness of the samples. To determine Deff, firstly the slope (θ) of the relationship between the experimental drying data in terms of lnMR and drying time, Eq. (4), is computed, and then Deff, is calculated by: θ¼ π2Deff 4L2 ð5Þ The activation energy can be obtained from the Arrhenius correlation, which demonstrates the effective diffusivity reliance on temperature, and taking the natural logarithmic exponential form of Arrhenius, can be expressed as: Deff ¼D0 exp Eα RgTabs ! ð6Þ where D0 is the pre-exponential factor of the Arrhenious equation, m2 s1; Eα is the activation energy, kJ mol1; Rg is the gas constant, kJ mol1 K1; Tabs is the absolute temperature. The above exponential form of Arrhenius can be expressed as: ln Deff ¼ ln D0 − Eα RgTabs ð7Þ A plot of lnDeff versus 1/Tabs, gives a straight line of slope Eα/Rg slope and consequently, the energy activation (Eα). 4. Results and discussion The drying curves for all the drying experiments performed are reported in Figs. 2 and 3. Fig. 2a shows the variation of moisture content with time for different temperatures at 2 ms1 air velocity. Increasing the temperature from 40 1C to Fig. 2. The variation of moisture content with drying time for (a) different temperatures at air velocity of 2 ms1 (b) different air velocities at temperature of 60 1C. D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–8582 50 1C, the drying time is decreased about 25%. A further increase in 60 1C decreased the drying time about 36%, while the total drying time is reduced about 54% in respect of an increase of the drying temperature from 40 1C to 601C. Fig. 2b presents the variation of moisture content for different air velocities at constant air temperature of 60 1C. In this way, the effect of the air drying velocity in the drying time is evident. An increase in the air velocity from 1 to 2 ms1 results to a decrease of the drying time about 30%. It is interesting to note that the curves corresponding to 2 and 3 ms1 coincide during the experiments, showing that for values greater than 2 ms1, the velocity has not a significant effect on the drying process. The results of the above figures indicate that the increase of temperature and velocity affect the heat and mass transfer which seems to be most significant for higher temperature differences of drying air and product and also for higher Table 1 Fitting results for different drying conditions. Air velocity (ms1) T (1C) Model k α nR 2 χ2104 RMSE 1 40 Newton 0.0986 0.9386 0.8721 0.9907 4.92 0.0221 Henderson–Rabis 0.0922 0.9943 3.01 0.0173 Page 0.1363 0.9972 1.50 0.0122 50 Newton 0.1676 0.9734 0.9852 0.9974 1.71 0.0130 Henderson–Rabis 0.1631 0.9974 1.68 0.0129 Page 0.1727 0.9981 1.23 0.0110 60 Newton 0.2139 1.0094 1.0716 0.9958 2.97 0.0172 Henderson–Rabis 0.2158 0.9958 2.96 0.0171 Page 0.1882 0.9971 2.04 0.0142 2 40 Newton 0.1254 0.9448 0.9423 0.9942 3.59 0.0189 Henderson–Rabis 0.1184 0.9955 2.81 0.0167 Page 0.1434 0.9975 1.57 0.0125 50 Newton 0.1736 0.9562 0.9616 0.9955 2.85 0.0168 Henderson–Rabis 0.1660 0.9961 2.49 0.0157 Page 0.1874 0.9975 1.56 0.0124 60 Newton 0.2805 1.0112 1.0768 0.9951 3.57 0.0188 Henderson–Rabis 0.2835 0.9952 3.53 0.0186 Page 0.2497 0.9967 2.40 0.0153 3 40 Newton 0.1031 0.9628 0.9536 0.9946 3.41 0.0184 Henderson–Rabis 0.0990 0.9956 2.83 0.0167 Page 0.1155 0.9966 2.18 0.0147 50 Newton 0.1745 0.9903 1.0123 0.9979 1.42 0.0119 Henderson–Rabis 0.1728 0.9980 1.40 0.0117 Page 0.1703 0.9980 1.37 0.0116 60 Newton 0.2782 1.0024 1.0507 0.9946 3.97 0.0198 Henderson–Rabis 0.2789 0.9946 4.03 0.0198 Page 0.2578 0.9954 3.45 0.0183 Fig. 3. The infulence of drying temperatures on the variation of the drying rate with moisture content at (a) air velocity of 2 ms1 (b) temperature of 60 1C. D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–85 83 air drying velocities. However, for large values of velocity, the most important parameter is the temperature difference, while the effect of the velocity diminishes. Fig. 3a presents the influence of drying temperature on the variation of the drying rate with moisture content at air velocity 2 ms1. Increasing the drying temperature results in an increase of the drying rate and a decrease of the total time of drying. In agreement to the previous plots, the higher temperature difference between the air and the quince accelerates the removal of water. All the curves of the diagram indicate four zones which are characterized by the different rates of drying rate decrease with the decrease of moisture content. Initially, a significant decrease of the drying rates occurs until a moisture content value close to 3.8 g water/g dry matter for all the drying temperatures. After this value of moisture, an intermediate region is observed before a third zone, in which an almost linear decrease occurs, leads to low moisture contents. The third region can be considered to extend from 3 to 0.5 g water/g dry matter for all the temperatures examined. After this value of moisture content, the rates of decrease are sharp, denoting the final stage of drying. For the three different temperatures, two different routes to the equivalent moisture are apparent. The main feature of this plot is evidently the presence of the falling rate period, a behavior which has been also observed in Ref. . Fig. 3b presents the influence of air drying velocity on the variation of the drying rate with moisture content at air temperature 60 1C. It can be observed that the higher the air drying velocity the higher the drying rate especially for greater moisture content (4.27 to 1.5 g water/g dry matter). At lower moisture content, the effect of the velocity on the drying rate seems to be insignificant. In particular, it is evident that the effect of air velocity can be considered negligible for values higher than 2 ms1, since after that limit the drying curves are practically identical. The statistical results in terms of R2, χ2 and RMSE, as well as drying constants k for Newton, a and k for Henderson–Rabis and k, n for Page models, are shown in Table 1, where T is the drying temperature. All the three thin-layer drying models obtain an R240.99 while the small values for the other criteria, show a very good consistence with the experiments. Among Fig. 4. Fitting the moisture ratio with the Page thin-layer drying model for (a) different temperatures at air velocity of 2 ms1 (b) different air velocities at temperature of 60 1C. Table 2 Effective moisture diffusivity coefficient, Deff. Air velocity (ms1) Temperature (1C) Deff1010 (m2 s1) R2 1 40 2.67 0.9993 50 4.42 0.9989 60 6.26 0.9933 2 40 3.23 0.9982 50 4.91 0.9951 60 7.82 0.9958 3 40 3.06 0.9901 50 5.36 0.9940 60 8.17 0.9903 D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–8584 the selected models, the Page model implies an excellent consistency in all the ranges of the drying air temperatures and velocities (bold numbers in Table 1) and thus this model may be assumed to represent the drying behavior of quince slices in a convective dryer within the examined range. All the experimental values of the moisture ratio for the different drying air temperatures and velocities, as well the fittings obtained for each case using the Page model are illustrated in Fig. 4a and b, respectively. Table 2 shows the effective moisture diffusivity (Deff) for each test.Deff values varied from 2.671010 to 8.171010. These values are in a good agreement with those reported in the literature [4,14]. An increase in either the velocity or temperature increases moisture diffusivity due to the higher mass transfer. The energy activation (Eα) and the Arrhenius coefficient (D0) for each value of drying air velocity are presented in Table 3. An increase in air velocity increases both Eα and D0. The value of energy activation ranged between 36.99 kJ mol1 and 42.59 kJ mol1, similar to those given in the literature for the drying of different foods [4,15]. 5. Conclusion In the present study, a LTCD unit was used to assess the drying kinetics of quince. Experiments were carried out at three different drying air temperatures (40 1C, 50 1C and 60 1C) and three drying air velocities (1 ms1, 2 ms1 and 3 ms1) while relative humidity remained constant at 10%. The following conclusions can be drawn from the experimental study: i. Increasing the drying temperature or the velocity of the drying air decreases the total drying time. In particular, an increase from 40 1C to 601C in temperature, at 2 ms1 drying velocity resulted to a decrease of the total time of drying of about 54%. On the other hand at air drying temperature of 60 1C, an increase from 1 ms1 to 2 ms1 in drying velocity resulted to a decrease of the total time of drying of about 30%. ii. At lower moisture content the effect of the air drying velocity on the drying rate is nearly insignificant. iii. A nonlinear regression analysis was performed, indicating that Page's thin-layer drying model is best-fitted to the experimental results. iv. Using the experimental data, the values of Deff were estimated, showing that an increase in drying velocity or temperature increases effective moisture diffusivity. v. The estimated values of Ea and D0 lie within the range reported in the earlier literature for quince slices drying while an increase in drying velocity increases energy of activation. References  Krokida MK, Karathanos VT, Maroulis ZB, Marinos-Kouris D. Drying kinetics of some vegetables. J Food Eng 2003;59:391–403.  Sacilik K, Elicin AK. The thin layer drying characteristics of organic apple slices. J Food Eng 2006;73:281–9.  Babalis SJ, Belessiotis VG. Influence of the drying conditions on the drying constants and moisture diffusivity during the thin-layer drying of figs. J Food Eng 2004;65:449–58.  Kaya A, Aydin O, Demirtas C, Akgun M. An experimental study on the drying kinetics of quince. Desalination 2007;212:328–43.  Barroca MJ, Guine RPF. Study of drying kinetics of quince. In: Proceedings (electronic) da international conference of agricultural engineering CIGR- AgEng. 2012, 8–12 July, Valencia, Spain; 2012 6 pp.  AOAC. Official methods of analysis, 15th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA; 1990.  Tzempelikos DA, Vouros AP, Bardakas AV, Filios AE, Margaris DP. Design, construction and evaluation of a new laboratory convective dryer using CFD. Int J Mech 2013;7:425–34.  Doymaz I. An experimental study on drying of green apples. Drying Technol 2009;27:478–85.  Jayas D, Cenkowski S, Rabis S, Muir W. Review of thin layer drying and wetting equations. Drying Technol 1991;9:551–88.  Henderson S, Rabis S. Grain drying theory. II. Temperature effects on drying coefficient. J Agric Eng Res 1961;6:169–74.  Page G. Factor influencing the maximum rates of air drying shelled corn in thin layer. Master thesis. Purdue University, 1949.  Crank J. The mathematics of diffusion. 2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press; 1975.  Lopez R, de Ita A, Vaca M. Drying of prickly pear cactus cladodes (Opuntia ficus indica) in a forced convection tunnel. Energy Convers Manage 2009;50: 2119–26.  Zogzas NP, Maroulis ZB, Marinos-Kouris D. Moisture diffusivity data compilation in foodstuffs. Drying Technol 1996;14:2225–53.  Erbay Z, Icier F. A review of thin layer drying of foods: theory, modelling and experimental results. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2010;50(5):441–64. Table 3 Energy of activation Eα and Arrhenius coefficient D0. Air velocity (ms1) Eα (kJ mol1) R2 D0 (m2 s1) 1 36.99 0.9925 4.04104 2 38.29 0.9976 7.78104 3 42.59 0.9959 3.97103 D.A. Tzempelikos et al. / Case Studies in Thermal Engineering 3 (2014) 79–85 85 The energy activation (Eα) and the Arrhenius coefficient (D0) for each value of drying air velocity are presented in Table 3. An increase in air velocity increases both Eα and D0. The value of energy activation ranged between 36.99 kJ mol1 and 42.59 kJ mol1, similar to those given in the literature for the drying of different foods [4,15]. 5. Conclusion In the present study, a LTCD unit was used to assess the drying kinetics of quince.