Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
DEEP BEDS
using natural air, but now a days, agro industry requires to dry large amounts of
grain in a short time. Burning the fossil fuels is the main energy source for drying
energy sources, biomass or sun, is not commonly used because they are neither
reliable nor cheap. Heat pumps and microwaves are other ways to reduce the
higher. Moreover, they use electricity which is several times more expensive than
thermal energy from fossil fuels depending on the location and the mode of
The energy consumed for drying grains is mainly used in three process
steps: warming up of the grain, evaporating water, and heating the humid air. In
order to make the drying process really efficient, it is necessary to recover the
energy from these three steps, or to extract the water in liquid form from the
2
kernel. However, developing these alternatives has taken several decades.
grains. The model describes how the grain and air conditions change during the
as: ambient air temperature and humidity, initial grain moisture, bed depth, and
drying air flow and temperature on the performance of the drying process. The
3
RSUM
couches paisses
Afin dassurer leur conservation, les grains frachement rcolts doivent tre
Dans les pays industrialiss, les combustibles fossiles sont la principale source
biomasses ou lnergie solaire ne sont que rarement utiliss parce qu'ils ne sont
pas assez fiables ou plus coteux. Des travaux de recherche ont dmontr quil
tait possible de scher les grains laide de pompes chaleur ou avec des
4
L'nergie utilise pour le schage des grains permet de les rchauffer et
sous forme dair chaud et humide. Il est possible daccrotre lefficacit des
le processus de schage.
effets des paramtres du procd sur la cintique de schage des grains et sur
5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Two years ago, I did not know that grain had to be dried safely for storage
purposes. Now, with the help of Dr. G. S. Vijaya Raghavan and Mr. Yvan
6
CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE AUTHORS
The work reported here was performed by Jorge Alonso Daz Martnez and
The authorship of the first and second papers (chapters 3 and 4 respectively)
7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
8
3.3.1. Equations used .........................................................................................................50
3.3.2. Model Validation .......................................................................................................54
3.3.2.1. Thin Layer: ..........................................................................................................54
3.3.2.2. Deep Bed ............................................................................................................55
3.4. Results and discussion .................................................................................................56
3.4.1. Thin Layer .................................................................................................................56
3.4.2. Deep bed (in bin batch dryer- study case) ................................................................59
3.4.3. Deep bed (in bin batch dryer- general performance) ................................................60
3.5. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................66
3.6. Acknowledgement .........................................................................................................66
3.7. References ....................................................................................................................66
CONNECTING TEXT .....................................................................................................................68
4. INCREASING THE IN-BIN BATCH DRYER PERFORMANCE BY MONITORING
THE EXHAUST AIR ...............................................................................................................69
4.1. Abstract .........................................................................................................................69
4.2. Introduction....................................................................................................................70
4.3. Materials and methods ..................................................................................................71
4.3.1. Reference conditions ................................................................................................72
4.3.2. Regulating Temperature ...........................................................................................72
4.3.3. Regulating Airflow .....................................................................................................73
4.4. Results and discussion .................................................................................................73
4.4.1. Reference conditions ................................................................................................73
4.4.2. Regulating drying temperature .................................................................................74
4.4.3. Regulating airflow .....................................................................................................76
4.4.4. Reference versus regulating results. ........................................................................78
4.5. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................80
4.6. References ....................................................................................................................80
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.........................................................................................82
6. REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................85
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Allowable storage time for shelled corn. Adapted from Sauer (1992). ....................... 21
Figure 2-2: Energy requirements for production of corn in the Midwestern United States as
a percentage of the total. Adapted from Brooker et al. (1992). ................................. 22
Figure 2-3: Comparing Samapundo et al. (2007) desorption data with modified
Hendersons equation ................................................................................................ 25
Figure 2-4: Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) enhances or inhibits the crops ability to
transpire(Prenger & Ling, 2000). .............................................................................. 27
Figure 2-5: Modified psychometric chart showing the vapour pressure values (Prenger &
Ling, 2000). ................................................................................................................ 28
Figure 2-6: Constant and falling rate periods in thin-layer drying of high moisture grain
(Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986) ............................................................................ 30
Figure 2-7: Thin layer test setup used by Farkas and Rendik (1997) ........................................... 31
Figure 2-8: Illustration of a deep bed as a series of thin layers. (T and H are temperature
and humidity ratio of drying air, respectively. Subscripts n, n + 1, and n + 2
represent the corresponding grain layer.) from Morey et al. (1978). ......................... 33
Figure 2-9: Schematic diagram of basic simulation approach, adapted from Thomson et al.
(1968). ........................................................................................................................ 33
Figure 2-10: Dimensionless drying rate curves, (Hukill, 1947) ...................................................... 34
Figure 2-11: A typical batch dryer bin (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007) ................................................ 35
Figure 2-12: A typical stationary continuous flow dryer with an air recirculating system
(Raghavan & Sosle, 2007). ........................................................................................ 36
Figure 2-13: Schematic of a continuous-flow two-stage concurrent flow dryer by Ferrell-
Ross CCF (Bakker-Arkema et al., 1981). .................................................................. 38
Figure 2-14: Solar dryer with collectors used by Stratford (1984) ................................................. 40
Figure 2-15: Schematic view of solar cabinet and open drying setup (Perumal, 2007) ................ 41
Figure 2-16: Vacuum assisted solar and open sun drying set up for tomato slices (Perumal,
2007) .......................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 2-17: Two configurations of the heat exchangers vis--vis the drying chamber. The
dark, thick streams indicate airflow (Sosle, 2002). .................................................... 42
Figure 2-18: Comparison of energy consumption among the different modes drying (Sosle,
2002). ......................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 3-1: Schematic diagram of basic simulation approach, adapted from Thomson et al
(1968) ......................................................................................................................... 50
10
Figure 3-2: Corn thin layer test results taken from Misra and Brooker (1980), and
simulation curves from SEDA .................................................................................... 57
Figure 3-3: Corn batch drying test results taken from Martnez-Vera et al. (1995), and
simulation curves from SEDA .................................................................................... 58
Figure 3-4: In bin batch dryer case Grain moisture (simulation results). .................................... 61
Figure3-5: In bin batch dryer case Grain temperature (simulation results). ............................... 61
Figure3-6: In bin batch dryer case Exhaust air properties (simulation results). ......................... 62
Figure 3-7: In bin batch dryer case Energy demand (simulation results). .................................. 62
Figure 3-8: Energy demand. Initial Grain Moisture 0.316db (24%wb), Dryer Air Temp.
54 C, Air Flow 15 m3min-1ton-1 ............................................................................. 63
Figure 3-9: Energy demand at three weather scenarios . Initial Grain Moisture 0.316 db
(24% wb). ................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 3-10: Drying Time . Ini. Moisture 0.316 db (24% wb), RH 75%, Amb. Temp. 10 C. ........ 64
Figure 3-11: Moisture Difference . Initial Moisture 0.316 db (24%wb), RH 75%, Amb. Temp.
10 C. ......................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 4-1: Reference setup Simulation results. ........................................................................ 74
Figure 4-2: Regulating drying temperature Simulation results ................................................... 75
Figure 4-3: Regulating airflow Simulation results ....................................................................... 77
Figure 4-4: Setups with the best performance from the three scenarios. ..................................... 79
11
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Dryer Types, from (1Bakker-Arkema et al., 1981; 2Raghavan & Sosle, 2007;
3Sauer, 1992) ............................................................................................................ 37
Table 3-1: SEDA Parameters for corn. .......................................................................................... 54
Table 3-2: Drying conditions and R2 value for the thin layer tests and model curves shown
in Figure 3-2. .............................................................................................................. 58
Table 3-3: Drying conditions, and R2 values for the batch drying tests and its model
curves are shown in ................................................................................................... 59
Table 3-4: Drying conditions shown in Figure 3-9. ........................................................................ 65
Table 4-1: Conditions of the four reference cases. ....................................................................... 72
12
NOMENCLATURE
13
STVPD1 Surface Transfer VPD Coefficient #1 (kPa-1).
STVPD2 Surface Transfer VPD Coefficient #2.
t Time (s)
t Delta Time (s)
T Temperature (C)
T Delta Temperature (C)
Tg Grain Temperature (C)
Ta Air Temperature (C)
vpair Vapour Pressure of the air moisture (kPa)
VPD Vapour Pressure Deficit of air (kPa).
vpsat Water Saturation Vapour Pressure (kPa)
WVa Air Water Vapour (g)
WT Surface Water transfer between grain and air (g)
1.1. Subscripts
a dry air
A Average
af air flow
c constant coefficient
C Center
d Diffusivity
e equilibrium
g grain
t temperature correction factor
v water vapor
w water
1,2.. Consecutive
14
CHAPTER I
1. INTRODUCTION
More than 70 million tons of water have to be removed from grain crops
annually to ensure their safe storage and delivery (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007); It is
like evaporating a water cube with a side of more than 400 m. Moreover, the total
terms of energy consumption for grain production, the drying of grain is the
largest factor. The agricultural industry is among the worlds greatest energy
corn, has been used as an important energy source in the form of biofuel for a
sources of energy.
The present commercial drying methods are very energy inefficient; they are
designed to obtain the highest drying capacity with the lowest initial investment
cost; especially in countries where it is only possible to harvest once per year, in
15
the fall, like in Canada, the whole grain crop has to be harvested in a short period
of time, and dried as soon as possible to prevent spoilage. The basic principle for
removing water from grains is to expose the grain to airflow, thereby decreasing
its moisture content. The energy invested in evaporating the water is dissipated
to the air; this drying principle requires a theoretical minimum of 2500 kJ per kg
however, the practical value is between 3000 and 8000 kJ per kg (Gunasekaran
More energy efficient methods for drying grain are available; unfortunately,
these are unreliable or expensive (Sauer, 1992); they have not reached, in the
last 20 years, the reliable and productive levels required by agro industry. Sauer
argues that solar power is a free energy source for drying grain; however, it is
available. Heat pumps reduce energy consumption, but the increase in the
equipment investment is similar to the reduction in the energy cost. Heat pumps
also require more drying time, which increases the risk of spoilage. Microwave-
vacuum can dry grain fast and with higher quality, but it requires more energy
from the water vapor or extracting water inside the kernel in liquid form.
16
The fastest way to improve the grain drying efficiency is finding how the
traditional drying method, which involves blowing hot air, uses the energy
the best dryer configuration, has been tried for decades by running field tests;
unfortunately, the results from different tests are not comparable due to the
importance of variable factors. There are too many factors that impact dryers
performance, the main ones are pressure, ambient temperature and relative
humidity, initial grain moisture and temperature, retention time, and drying air
simulation, however, can predefine the required values for each one of the main
efficiency of the drying process. The system could be validated using thin layer
lab tests, and it could simulate the air flow through several grain layers. While
tools to dryer users and manufactures to help them achieve the most efficient
17
1.1. Hypothesis
Drying kinetics have been studied for many years, and several models have
(Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986). Thin layer is the basic drying model, and the
deep bed model was developed based upon this concept. The air output of a thin
layer will be the incoming air for the next layer. Deep bed drying models have
been developed based on differential equations of thin layer models, and solved
using numerical methods like Runge- Kutta (Trrez et al., 1998). Some models
are focus in the water diffusion inside grain (Aguerre & Suarez, 2004;
Samapundo et al., 2007); other models are based in the heat and mass balance
for the grain surface evaporation (Lopes et al., 2005). This result in models that
surface water evaporation simultaneously. This system correspond with the finite
difference approach for the deep bed model based on the drying kinetics of thin
In this model, each of the two main components of the system (grain and
18
difference equations, are to be used to change air and grain arrays from a time
range of t to t+1. The air output from one grain element will be the incoming
air for the next one as noted earlier. With the above in mind, one can now
1.2. Objectives
finite-element array of corn with the drying air, which allows us to identify how the
1.2.1. Sub-objectives:
To develop three types of equations for corn drying: heat and mass
1.3. REFERENCES
19
Gunasekaran, S., & Thompson, T. L. (1986). Optimal energy management in
grain drying. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25(1),
1-48.
Lopes, D. d. C., Martins, J. H., Neto, A. J. S., & Filho, A. J. S. (2005). Simulao
da secagem de gros com baixas temperaturas utilizando-se o modelo de
Hukill: uma nova abordagem. exacta, 3, 85-93.
Raghavan, V. G. S., & Sosle, V. (2007). Grain Drying. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial drying (pp. 563-573). Boca Raton, FL ::
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Samapundo, S., Devlieghere, F., Meulenaer, B. D., Atukwase, A., Lamboni, Y., &
Debevere, J. M. (2007). Sorption isotherms and isosteric heats of sorption
of whole yellow dent corn. Journal of Food Engineering, 79(1), 168-175.
doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.040
Sauer, D. B. (1992). Storage of cereal grains and their products. St. Paul, Minn.,
USA :: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
Sosle, V. (2002). A heat pump dehumidifier assisted dryer for agri-foods.
Trrez, N., Gustafsson, M., Schreil, A., & Martnez, J. (1998). Modeling and
simulation of crossflow moving bed grain dryers. Drying Technology,
16(9), 1999 2015.
20
CHAPTER II.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Grain has been a key link in the food chain throughout human history; its
drying and storage, then, are essential for human well being (Raghavan & Sosle,
2007). Safe storage time depends on the grain moisture and temperature. High
140
27 C (80F)
120 15.6 C (60F)
100 10 C (50F)
Storage Time - Days
4.4 C (40F)
80
60
40
20
0
18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Moisture Content - %wb
Figure 2-1: Allowable storage time for shelled corn. Adapted from
Sauer (1992).
21
Corn at 18% moisture content (wb) and 4.4 C can be safely stored for more
than 140 days; however, if its conditions are 30% (wb) and 27 C, spoilage can
occur in less than one day. Keeping grain moisture and temperature at low levels
HARVESTING TRANSPORT
6% 6%
PLANTING AND
CULTIVATION
12%
TILLAGE DRYING
16% 60%
drying is an intensive energy demand process compared with the rest of the
grain production process. For example, in the Midwest of United States, 60% of
the energy required to produce corn is used to dry it (Brooker et al., 1992) (See
22
water is evaporated. However, actual energy requirements for evaporating water
from grain range from 3 to 8 MJ/kg of water (Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986).
Any reduction in the energy use for grain drying will be an important improvement
2.3.1. Desorption
To understand how grains are dried, one must first understand how water is
held inside grain. Grains are hygroscopic materials; they retain water through
form into the solid structure of the grain; adsorption is the adherence between
forces that pushes water outside the grain are higher than the sorption forces. In
the grain drying process with air, sorption and desorption forces are related to a
air relative humidity, and air velocity (Aguerre & Suarez, 2004; Kaymak-Ertekin &
When sorption and desorption forces are equal, the grain moisture remains
23
temperature, and pressure are the main factors that define the Me (Samapundo
et al., 2007); however, the equations found in the literature only use water activity
take into account the pressure factor. In the grain drying with air, water activity is
the centesimal part of the air relative humidity (RH). Kaymak-Ertekin and Gedik
(2004) relate water activity with moisture content through moisture sorption
isotherms; For food materials these isotherms give information about the
range. Modified Hendersons equation [2.1] represents the isotherms for corn as
et al., 1968). Samapundo et al. (2007) have used the gravimetric method to
determine the isotherms for yellow dent corn, and they fitted the test results with
Figure 2-3, Samapundos lab test results are compared with Hendersons
modified equation with the constants used by Lopes et al. (2005); the advantage
24
1
1.8634
Me = 0.01
ln( 1 - RH)
-5 [2.1]
-8.65 10 ( T + 49.81)
0.3
T ( C) 25 30 37
Grain Equilibrium Moisture db
0.25 Samapundo
25C 30C 37C
Henderson
25 30 37
0.2
0.15
0.1
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Air Relative Humidity
2.3.3. Diffusion
Water is distributed inside the grain mass, and it has to reach the grain
depends on the nature of the material, moisture content and moisture bonding
moisture migrates from high partial pressure zones to lower ones. When the air
relative humidity that surrounds a kernel is lower than the RH for equilibrium
into the air. This reduction in the surface water creates a partial pressure
25
difference within the kernel which drives the diffusion process associated with
water.
Vapor Pressure of the air moisture (vpair) is a key factor for drying of grass
in swaths (Haghighi, 1990) and grains (Fenton, 1941); however, it is not taken
into account in drying models; the author could not find an equation that relates
vpair with grain drying in the scientific literature. There are two main concepts
related with vpair that are important to understand the drying phenomena. The
first is Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) of air; the second is Vapor Pressure
VDP is the difference between the Saturation Vapor Pressure (vpsat) and the
Vapor Pressure of air (vpair). According with Prenger and Ling (2000) Vapor
pressure deficit (VPD) is the difference (deficit) between the amount of moisture
in the air and how much moisture the air can hold when it is saturated, and it is
of temperature; equation [2.2] describes this relation. vpair is found based on air
temperature and RH; this relation is part of a psychometric chart (Figure 2-5).
VPDI is the difference of the pressure between the water vapor in grain and
the vapor in air. This pressure difference leads the migration phenomena, and it
26
recognize the importance of VPDI by citing two key principles from Fenton
(1941):
difference between the grain itself and the surrounding air. If the vapor
surrounding the grain, moisture will flow out of the grain. If the reverse is
true, moisture will flow into the grain and there will be a gain in moisture
content.
Dry air
Water Vapor
Higher VPD
- Transpiration is
unhindered
- Plants can dry out
Lower VPD
- Transpiration is stifled by
inability to release moisture
to the air
- Moisture on plant surfaces
leads to disease problems
Figure 2-4: Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) enhances or inhibits the crops
ability to transpire(Prenger & Ling, 2000).
27
7235
77.3450 + 0.0057 ( T + 273.15 ) -
( T + 273.15 )
vp sat = [2.2]
8200( T + 273.15 )
28
The rate at which a grain gains or loses moisture is roughly
prevails between the grain and the surrounding space. This rate is
there is no way to measure the vapor pressure in the grain; however, VPD can
be calculated, and it can be expected that higher VPD values increase moisture
The drying grain process has two phases, constant and falling rate. The first
one is proportional to the air capacity to carry moisture, while the second one is
limited by the water diffusivity inside the kernel. Cereals drying process occurs
Grain drying with air involves heat and mass interchange between grain and
air. The incoming air brings energy to the process, and the exhaust air carries the
water removed from the kernels. This transfer occurs at the grain surface. Water
inside the kernel is in liquid form, but air carries moisture as vapor. The water
29
phase changes from liquid to vapor, absorbing heat. This heat comes from the
temperature reduction of grain and air. Aguerre and Suarez (2004) describe the
drying process as a simultaneous relation between heat and mass transfer; this
Figure 2-6: Constant and falling rate periods in thin-layer drying of high
moisture grain (Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986)
In the thin layer test a constant air flow goes through a layer having a single
kernel depth. The air conditions (pressure, flow, temperature, and humidity)
30
remain constant during the drying time, and the sample weight is taken
periodically to determine the moisture content. The moisture content vs. time
data is plotted to obtain the drying curves for a specific grain in determined air
conditions as shown in Figure 2-6. Sometimes, thin layer lab tests also measure
the conditions of the exhausted air, temperature and moisture; these are useful
to validate the heat and mass balance equations. One of this setup is shown in
Figure 2-7.
Figure 2-7: Thin layer test setup used by Farkas and Rendik (1997)
The Thin Layer is the basic drying lab test for grains; this is mainly used to
find the constant values for the drying or rewetting empirical equations. Misra &
Brooker (1980) have listed several of these equations Chittenden, 1961; Chu,
31
Sabbah, 1968; Thompson, 1967; Troeger, 1967; del-Giudice, 1959. However,
they point out these equations to have several limitations such as: narrow
temperature range, not considering the air flow, or changing the parameters for
the same drying process. These partial differential equation models did not
1986). Aguerre and Suarez (2004) found that to reduce the complexity of the
that drying is an isothermal process, where only one parameter, the diffusion
Thompson, 1986; Misra & Brooker, 1980). In a Deep Bed Model, each thin layer
modifies the quality of the air; therefore, only the first thin layer receives an
invariable air flow reducing its moisture faster than subsequent layers. Hukill
and time in the deep bed (Figure 2-10); it has been used by several authors to
al., 2010; Lopes et al., 2005). The mathematical approach can be seen in
32
Figure 2-8 and Figure 2-9. The deep bed model is the basic concept to simulate
grain dryers.
Figure 2-8: Illustration of a deep bed as a series of thin layers. (T and H are
temperature and humidity ratio of drying air, respectively. Subscripts n, n + 1, and
n + 2 represent the corresponding grain layer.) from Morey et al. (1978).
Exhaust Air
Temp. = Ta- Ta (C)
Humidity Ratio = WR + (g/kg dry air)
Drying Air
Temp. = Ta(C)
Humidity Ratio = WR (g/kg dry air)
barn lofts; in the last century, rapidly growing population has pushed agro
33
industry to develop mechanical methods for drying grains on a large scale
(Raghavan & Sosle, 2007). Today, most commercial dryers use fossil fuels to dry
grain quickly; choosing the adequate dryer depends mainly on the amount of
grain to be dried and not necessarily on the required efficiency of the process.
However, there are a few more efficient alternatives that use biomass, solar
All the commercial dryers are based on a hot air current going through the
grain to remove moisture. The two main factors that characterize commercial
34
dryers are air temperature and grain flow type. Air temperature range is typically
between ambient air and 140 C; however, it can reach 315 C in some dryers.
Flow processes are batch, or continuous. Drying selection depends mainly on the
annual grain production of the farm. In Table 2-1, the main commercial dryers are
summarized. A small scale dryer can be found in the In-Bin Batch Dryer,
presented in Figure 2-11, and one of the most complex is the continuous-flow
two-stage concurrent flow dryer, presented in Figure 2-13. The dryer type that is
most commonly used in agro industry is the continuous flow dryer with an air
Figure 2-11: A typical batch dryer bin (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007)
35
2.5.1. Alternative Dryers
In order to reduce the fossil fuel consumption in the grain drying industry,
several alternatives have been tested such as solar energy, heat pumps and
their high cost and low reliability (Sauer, 1992). The following describes their
36
Table 2-1: Dryer Types, from (1Bakker-Arkema et al., 1981; 2Raghavan & Sosle, 2007; 3Sauer, 1992)
Ambient
1.5 4 1 to 3 weeks - Recommended for farms with 60 to 445 tons of annual
production
In Bin
2,3
Batch / - For annual productions up to 500 tons.
35 65 10 25 12 - 24 hours - Moisture of the dried batch varies around 5% from bottom to
Counter
top.
3
Continuous - For annual productions up to 750 tons.
/ Up to 80 10 25 6 12 hours - Grain recirculation is used with the last portion of grain that will
Counter be storage in the bin.
Cross Flow - The great drying rate produces grain quality problems
Figure 2-12
Column
See
1
Recycling - For annual productions above 1250 tons.
See Figure 2-13
Batch/ 150 - 315 - The continuous process has three air temperatures, around
Concurrent
12 m /min
3 - 5 hours - The hottest air is in contact with the wettest grain; this reduces
1,2
per ton/hr
Continuous the grain breaking susceptibility compare with high temperature
150 - 290 column dryers.
/Concurrent
Figure 2-13: Schematic of a continuous-flow two-stage concurrent flow dryer
by Ferrell-Ross CCF (Bakker-Arkema et al., 1981).
2.5.1.1. Solar Energy
Solar energy for crop drying is weather dependent and may be least
successful during the period of the years when it is needed most (Sauer, 1992).
The drying time is usually too long in a solar dryer, and the product can be
damaged when it is not covered (Perumal, 2007). A solar dryer can increase
solar dryers: direct and indirect. The second one uses solar collectors to heat air,
and the hot air is moved through the grain bed as illustrated in Figure 2-14. In
the first type, the sunlight heats directly the grain. Perumal (2007) compared the
drying kinetics of tomatoes in solar cabinet and vacuum assisted solar dryers, as
illustrated in Figure 2-15 and Figure 2-16, and found that The higher diffusion
values in both the solar cabinet and vacuum assisted solar dryers were due to
the higher temperature and lower relative humidity which prevailed in the drying
A heat pump moves thermal energy from a cold source to a hotter sink. This
process requires an input of energy which drives the process. The advantage of
this process is that for each unit of energy invested, it is transferred several times
to the heat sink; this ratio is known as the coefficient of performance (COP). The
most common type of heat pump is a reversed refrigeration cycle. First, a fluid, in
39
gaseous state, is compressed to increase its pressure and temperature. Then, a
condenser releases the energy to the heat sink and the fluid returns to its liquid
phase but remains warm. When the fluid is in liquid form, a strangle valve
reduces its pressure. Finally, the low pressurize liquid is evaporated; this process
extracts energy from the surroundings. And the process starts again.
Sosle (2002) tested a Heat Pump Dehumidifier (HPD) for drying apples
under several conditions; the basic scheme of the process can be seen in
Figure 2-17. These tests gave specific energy consumptions (SEC) higher than
the energy consumption of the commercial dryers. While lower the SEC value is,
the drying process is more energy efficient. The inverse of the SEC is the
the graphic, the two modes with the lowest energy consumtion, Hor Air + HPD
40
at 45 and 65 C, did not take into account the energy for heating the air; this
extra energy increases the SEC to 6.58 and 4.68 MJ per kg of water removed
respectively.
Figure 2-15: Schematic view of solar cabinet and open drying setup
(Perumal, 2007)
Figure 2-16: Vacuum assisted solar and open sun drying set up for tomato
slices (Perumal, 2007)
41
2.6. Conclusion
Industrial grain drying is an important process in the human food chain, but
its impact, from energy consumption and emissions, on food quality and
improve the drying processes; however, their cost and/or low productivity have
restricted their implementation to the agro-food industry. While more efficient and
Figure 2-17: Two configurations of the heat exchangers vis--vis the drying
chamber. The dark, thick streams indicate airflow (Sosle, 2002).
42
Figure 2-18: Comparison of energy consumption among the different modes
drying (Sosle, 2002).
2.7. References
43
Brooker, D. B., Bakker-Arkema, F. W., & Hall, C. W. (1992). Drying and storage
of grains and oilseeds. New York :: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Farkas, I., & Rendik, Z. (1997). Intermittent thin layer corn drying. Drying
Technology: An International Journal, 15(6), 1951 - 1960.
Fenton, F. C. (1941). Storage of grain sorghums. Agric. Eng.(22), 185.
Gunasekaran, S., & Thompson, T. L. (1986). Optimal energy management in
grain drying. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25(1),
1-48.
Haghighi, K. (1990). Finite element simulation of the thermo-hydro stresses in a
viscoelastic sphere during drying. Drying Technology, 8(3), 465-498. doi:
10.1080/07373939008959896
Hukill, W. V. (1947). Basic principles in drying corn and grain sorghum. Agric.
Eng, 28, 335-338, 340.
Kaymak-Ertekin, F., & Gedik, A. (2004). Sorption isotherms and isosteric heat of
sorption for grapes, apricots, apples and potatoes. Lebensmittel-
Wissenschaft und-Technologie, 37(4), 429-438. doi:
10.1016/j.lwt.2003.10.012
Lecorvaisier, E., Darche, S., da Silva, Z. E., & da Silva, C. K. F. (2010).
Theoretical model of a drying system including turbulence aspects.
Journal of Food Engineering, 96(3), 365-373. doi: DOI:
10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.08.008
Lopes, D. d. C., Martins, J. H., Neto, A. J. S., & Filho, A. J. S. (2005). Simulao
da secagem de gros com baixas temperaturas utilizando-se o modelo de
Hukill: uma nova abordagem. exacta, 3, 85-93.
Martinez-Vera, C., Vizearra-Mendoza, M., Galin-Domingo, O., & Ruiz-Martinez,
R. (1995). Experimental Validation of a Mathematical Model for the Batch
Drying of Corn Grains. Drying Technology, 13(1-2), 333-350. doi:
10.1080/07373939508916956
44
Misra, M. K., & Brooker, D. B. (1980). Thin-Layer Drying and Rewetting
Equations for Shelled Yellow Corn. Transactions of the ASAE, 0001-
2351/80/2305-1254$02.00, 1254-1260.
Morey, R. V., Keener, H. M., Thompson, T. L., White, G. M., & Bakker-Arkema,
F. W. (1978). The present status of grain drying simulation. American
Society of Agricultural Engineers, paper No. 78-3009.
Perumal, R. (2007). Comparative performance of solar cabinet, vacuum assisted
solar and open sun drying methods. Master of Science Thesis, McGill
University, Montreal, Canada.
Prenger, J. J., & Ling, P. P. (2000). Greenhouse Condensation Control-
Understanding and Using Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) Fact Sheet
(Series) AEX-800. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Extension.
Raghavan, V. G. S., & Sosle, V. (2007). Grain Drying. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial drying (pp. 563-573). Boca Raton, FL ::
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Samapundo, S., Devlieghere, F., Meulenaer, B. D., Atukwase, A., Lamboni, Y., &
Debevere, J. M. (2007). Sorption isotherms and isosteric heats of sorption
of whole yellow dent corn. Journal of Food Engineering, 79(1), 168-175.
doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.040
Sauer, D. B. (1992). Storage of cereal grains and their products. St. Paul, Minn.,
USA :: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
Sosle, V. (2002). A heat pump dehumidifier assisted dryer for agri-foods. Ph.D.
Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Stratford, C. J. (1984). A solar wall and roof air preheater for in situ hay drying for
the Province of Quebec. M.Sc. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Canada.
Thompson, T. L., Peart, R. M., & Foster, G. H. (1968). Matllematical Simulation
of Corn Drying - A New Model. Transactions of the ASAE, 11(4), pp. 582-
586.
45
CONNECTING TEXT
The present paper deals with the mathematical model development of a thin
layer of grain, and a deep bed; and it shows a sensibility study of several
parameters that impact the in bin batch dryer performance: ambient temperature
and relative humidity, air flow and temperature, and initial grain moisture. This
46
CHAPTER III
Keywords: Grain Drying, Corn, Model Simulation, Thin Layer, Deep Layer, VPD
3.1. Abstract
A System of Equations for Drying with Air (SEDA) was developed to predict
the drying kinetics of grains, and its energy consumption. SEDA is based on heat
and mass transfer between dried grain and air; it simulates an air flow through
predict the drying kinetics: air temperature, initial grain moisture content, relative
humidity (RH), dry air mass flow. A new factor included in SEDA is the Vapor
corn moisture migration. Results from SEDA permitted to identify how energy
invested is distributed during grain drying. Grain heating, water evaporation, and
humid air heating are the main energy sinks of the drying process; however, in
spite of energy associated with evaporation being a constant value, the total
efficiency was higher when the exhaust air was hotter and hence it was able to
support a higher humidity ratio before it got saturated. This implied a higher
grain temperature leading to grain quality changes. SEDA was validated using
eleven thin layer test data sets available from the literature with an R2 higher than
0.84 for ten tests during the initial few hours of drying. Commercial dryers
usually take less time than this to dry corn. Results for deep layer drying were
validated with in-bin batch dryers data; drying time and moisture differences
3.2. Introduction
reduce the dependency and pollutant impact of fossil fuels; in both cases, grain
drying has an important role. As an alternative energy source, grain is one of the
main inputs for biofuels production, but the grain drying process consumes large
amounts of energy (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007). Several new drying methods are
being developed; however, hot air drying remains as the main agro industrial
process to reduce grain moisture before storage. Even when air can be warmed
up with sun light or biomass, fossil fuel equipments are the most reliable and
cheapest alternative (Sauer, 1992), and this has not changed in the last 20
years. While new drying technologies reach the level of productivity desired by
the agro industry, it is important to develop tools that help to increase the energy
48
Several equations have been developed to predict the drying kinetics of
presented illustrate the drying process of cereal grain precisely over the full
theoretical, and empirical are the mathematical simulation models for grain drying
(Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986). The more precise models become very
complex to resolve, and some assumptions are made to simplify their complexity
(Brooker et al., 1992; Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986; Jumah, 1995). Jumah
(1995) found two simplified assumptions in the previous theoretical studies, the
first is to assume a thermal equilibrium between air and grain, and the second
System of Equations for Drying with Air (SEDA) uses several equations to
represent grain drying kinetics. Such equations are not complex, but can result in
greater accuracy. There are three types of equations: heat and mass balance,
empirical, and literature based. The simplicity of the model allows for finding
solutions with spreadsheet software, and can run several simulations with
language.
49
3.3. Materials and methods
SEDA is based on the energy and mass balance between air and several
thin layers of grain, see Figure 3-1. The exhaust air from a thin layer is the
incoming air for the next one. On each layer, air changes temperature and
Exhaust Air
Temp. Tn+1 = Tn- T(C)
Water Vapor. WV n+1 = WVn + WT (g)
Corn After Drying
Corn Before Drying Timeoft.
Moist. Content = Ma (% db) Thin Layer of Corn Moist. Content = Ma - Ma (% db)
Temp = Tg (C) Temp = Tg - Tg(C)
Drying Air
Temp. Tn (C)
Water Vapor. WVn (g)
Surface Moisture (Ms): During the drying process, the grain surface moisture
value is between the average grain moisture (Ma) and the equilibrium moisture. It
is dependant on the grain diffusivity which changes with grain temperature and
moisture. The empirical equation [3.2] was developed to express this relation
50
MA
Ms
M e + MA - Me kd Dt Dm
[3.2]
MC
has a more profound effect on the vapor pressure than the moisture content.
This is particularly true when moisture content is more than 20%. Therefore,
assumed0whengraintemperaturewas0C,andreached1asymptoticallyas
1
Dt = 1 -
1 + Dtc Tg
[3.3]
content (Aguerre & Suarez, 2004; Thompson et al., 1968). In equation [3.4], the
reaches faster than the grain surface when there was more water inside the
grain.
1
Dm = 1 -
1 + Dmc Ma [3.4]
Exhaust air temperature: The exhaust air temperature is between initial air and
grain temperatures; it varies depending on the mass ratio of these two elements.
51
= Tg + Ta - Tg 1 -
1
Ta [3.5]
n+ 1 n ma
1 + 0.1Tc
mg
Surface Water Transfer: Equation [3.6] shows the predicted water transfer
between grain and drying air. It is directly proportional to the difference between
surface and equilibrium moisture. There are two correction factors; one for the air
Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) and the other for the air flow.
WT = STc Ms - Me mg t STVPD STaf [3.6]
Vapor Pressure Deficit Correction Factor STVPD: VPD represents how much
water the air can hold before reaching saturation. In equation [3.7], the correction
Air flow correction factor STaf: Larger amounts of air produces faster drying rates;
however, at some point, the moisture transfer do not increase significantly with
airflowis0,andaproaches asymptoticallyto1asairflowincreases.
1
STaf = 1 -
ma [3.8]
STaf1 + STaf2
10 t mg
Mass Balance
Air Humidity Ratio HR: The lost moisture from corn increases the air humidity, as
WV a = WV a + WT [3.9]
n+ 1 n
52
WV a
HR =
n+ 1 [3.10]
n+ 1 ma
Grain Moisture Ma: The moisture taken by air reduces the water inside the grain,
see equation [3.11]; therefore, the grain moisture decreases Equation [3.12].
mw = mw - WT [3.11]
n+ 1 n
mw
n+ 1
Ma = [3.12]
n+ 1 mg
Heat Balance - Air and grain Enthalpy: Once the air Temperature and HR are
estimated, its enthalpy is calculated, see equation [3.13]. This allows to balance
the energy of the system to obtain the grain enthalpy (Equation [3.14]), and
Ha = ca Ta + c T + l w ma
HR
1000 v a
[3.13]
Hg = Hg + Ha - Ha [3.14]
n+ 1 n n n+ 1
Hg - Hg
n+ 1 n
Tg
n+ 1
= Tg +
n cg mg + cw mw
[3.15]
n+ 1
kernel by keeping a record of the centers grain moisture (MC) using Equation
[3.16]. MC tries to reach the average grain moisture even if there is no water
transferonkernelssurface.
53
Mc - Mc - Ma 1 -
1
Mc
n+ 1 n n n 1 + t Dc2
[3.16]
Thin layer lab tests for yellow dent corn found in scientific literature were
used for the SEDA validation; these had to report several drying conditions. In
the scientific literature there are several thin layer tests reported; however, they
report only the grain moisture curve versus time, and the air temperature. The
additional required parameters are: drying air humidity and flow rate. Misra and
Brooker (1980) reported all these information in eight thin layer tests (Figure 3-2).
Martinez-Vera et al (1995) reported the results for a batch dryer of 1200 g of corn
Figure 3-3); however, they did not report the room temperature and RH.
These were assumed as 20C and 40% respectively. The SEDA parameters
SEDA is written in Microsoft Excel for thin layer validation. Lab tests and
constants that match most of the lab tests were found. To find the air/grain mass
54
ratio, a bulk density of 721 kg m-3 (ANSI/ASAE, 1998), and a kernel diameter of
7.8 mm (Pabis & Henderson, 1962) were used. For all the thin layer simulations,
The physical parameters for water were: liquid heat capacity (cw) 4.18
kJkg-1K-1, vapor heat capacity (cv) 1.84 kJkg-1K-1, latent heat of evaporation
(lw) at 0C 2501 kJkg-1. Drier air heat capacity (ca) 1.006 kJkg-1K-1; and Heat
capacity of dry grain mass (cg) 1.885 kJkg-1K-1 (Jayas & Cenkowski, 2007).
several thin layer elements represented by SEDA. Each element had 1 kg of dry
mass of corn. The results were plotted to see the changes with time of moisture,
temperature, and energy demand for an in-bin batch dryer. The initial grain
moisture was fixed at 0.176 db (15 % wb). The drying effect of the end cooling
phase was considered when the ambient RH was less than 70% (Brooker et al.,
1974). The moisture transfer between grain and air was limited when the
SEDA does not take in to account the heat losses. These are mainly
through bin walls, and increase the energy demand. Heat losses are very specific
of the type of bin, and its insulation. Therefore, to estimate the heat loss impact in
55
the drying process, it is necessary to have the performance data from the specific
dryer.
The simulations were ran at three time intervals (t), 1, 10 and 60 seconds.
As expected, the 1 second simulation gave the most accurate results, but it is
with a higher computational time. The final results from the 60 second simulation
were acceptable and fast. However, at the beginning of the simulation, the data
reported was not consistent, and it highly fluctuated. This was noticed mainly in
the tests with hot air while the temperature difference between air and grain was
high. Once the grain temperature was near to the air temperature, the results
were consistent. Finally, the 10 second simulation gave good results in fair time;
Figure 3-3, the R-square was higher than 0.84; see Table 3-2 and
Table 3-3. These were obtained with simulation results at air temperatures and
RH between 16 and 120C, and 4.8 and 83.2% respectively. The only test, where
the R2 was not relevant was the one with a very low air temperature (2C). In this
case, R2 was negative (-0.146); the average of the data gives a closer result than
56
balance, and at 2C, air does not have enough energy to be the main factor that
can drive the drying process. The grain respiration could be the factor that leads
0.6 0.6
3 1
4 2
0.5 0.5
5 6
8 7
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
Grain Moisture (db)
0.1 0.1
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
Figure 3-2: Corn thin layer test results taken from Misra and Brooker (1980),
0 120240360480600
and simulation curves time
from(min)
SEDA
VPD is one of the main factors that drives drying at higher grain moisture.
While grain moisture is far away from its equilibrium moisture (Me), high VPD
values produce higher drying rates. However, when grain moisture is closer to its
Me, the sorption forces inside the kernel limit the drying process.
High humidity simulation, number 3 in Figure 3-2 and Table 3-2, shows a
moisture increase in the first minutes because warm and humid air touches grain
at 20 C. The air goes below its dew point, and condensation on grain surface
occurs.
57
Table 3-2: Drying conditions and R2 value for the thin layer tests and model
curves shown in Figure 3-2.
Number 1 2 3 4
High Low
Description Temperature Temperature High Humidity Low Humidity
Temperature C 71.0 2.22 50 50
RH % 11.8% 80.0% 83.2% 4.8%
Speed m/s 2.295 0.84 0.8 0.8
Coefficient of
determination R2 0.980 -0.146 0.990 0.836
VPD kPa 27.2 0.1 1.9 11.7
Me db 0.038 0.237 0.176 0.026
Number 5 6 7 8
Description High Moisture Low Moisture High Airflow Low Airflow
Temperature C 27 32 21 16
RH % 43.0% 42.0% 83.0% 50.0%
Speed m/s 2.295 2.295 2.295 0.025
Coefficient of
determination R2 0.991 0.919 0.978 0.997
VPD kPa 2.0 2.7 0.4 0.9
Me db 0.109 0.104 0.211 0.133
0.5
50 C
0.4 75 C
Grain Moisture (db)
120 C
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0 100 200 300
Time (min)
Figure 3-3: Corn batch drying test results taken from Martnez-Vera et al.
(1995), and simulation curves from SEDA
58
Table 3-3: Drying conditions, and R2 values for the batch drying tests and its
model curves are shown in
Figure 3-3.
Temperature C 50 75 120
3
Specific Air Flow m /min-ton of dry corn 1177 1146 1196
Coefficient of determination R2 0.984 0.978 0.987
Figure 3-4 to Figure 3-7 are plotted for in-bin batch dryer cases. Drying
moisture 0.333 db (25% wb), final grain moisture 0.176 db (15% wb), bed depth
96 cm, air flow 25 m3min-1ton-1 of dry corn mass, drying air temperature 50 C,
air flow direction up. Hot air starts to dry the bottom layer at the onset of the
process; however, the top layer increases its moisture due to condensation. The
air gets wet in the first layers; when it reaches the top layers, the cold grain cools
the air down below its dew point. The condensation on the top layer finishes
when it reaches 22 C at 120 min; however, its moisture does not change to
reach equilibrium for at least 30 min more. The exhaust air temperature follows
the same top layer temperature pattern; hence both are cooled by the water
evaporation during the first few minutes, and reach 22 C relatively fast. While
the drying front moves from the bottom to the top layer, the exhaust air
temperature remains very stable. When the top layer starts to be dried, after
220 min, the exhaust air temperature starts to get increased, and its RH goes
down. Despite the fact that the energy to heat the air up is constant; the specific
59
energy demand is high while the whole grain mass is warmed up which is up to
60 min. During this time, water removed from the grain is also low; hence air HR
Energy invested to warm up the grain is difficult to recover. When the grain
is cooling down in a separate bin, around 20% of the energy can be saved
(Raghavan & Sosle, 2007); however, this implies more equipment (Brooker et al.,
1992), and management (Sauer, 1992). Other option is to recycle the output air
(Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986), but it is not useful during the whole process.
In the current simulated case, the exhaust air is saturated during the first 4 hours,
it does not enhance the drying rate when it is recycled. One can think of reusing
part of the exhaust air when its RH is below its respective grain equilibrium
moisture at the desired final moisture. Doing this, the energy to warm the air up
would be lower. In the present study, air recirculation can reduce the energy
consumption during the second half of the drying process; however, by following
but others may not be possible. Dryer air temperature, air flow, and bed depth
can be adjusted (Brooker et al., 1992; Raghavan & Sosle, 2007; Sauer, 1992);
however, ambient conditions, and fresh grain moisture onlfy can be forecasted.
60
Due to the large amount of possible combinations, this paper presents only some
general tendencies.
0.4
Top
Average
Bottom
0.2
0.1
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
time (min)
Figure 3-4: In bin batch dryer case Grain moisture (simulation results).
50.0
45.0
40.0
Grain Temperature (C)
35.0
30.0
25.0
Top
20.0
Average
15.0
Bottom
10.0
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
time (min)
61
50.0 110%
Temperature
35.0
Air RH (%)
30.0 70%
25.0
20.0 50%
15.0
10.0 30%
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
time (min)
18000
Instant
16000
Accumulated
Energy demand (kJkg-1 H2O)
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720
time (min)
Figure 3-7: In bin batch dryer case Energy demand (simulation results).
Dry and warm ambient conditions reduce considerably the energy demand
compared with a cold and wet atmosphere. In Figure 3-8, the energy required to
62
remove one kg of water is almost twice when ambient air is at 5 C@95 %RH
Air flow and temperature can be adjusted to change drying time and
efficiency. Larger amount of air and high temperature reduce the drying time;
however, this can increase energy consumption, and damage the grain
(Raghavan & Sosle, 2007). It is more efficient to dry at low air rates, as illustrated
in Figure 3-9 and Table 3-4; however, this does not take into account the higher
price of the electric energy required to operate the fan for longer time (Sauer,
1992), see drying time in Figure 3-10. Grain drying is more efficient at higher
drying temperatures when the weather is cold; however, with warm weather, it is
6.5
6.0
Energy Demand (MJkg-1 H20)
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
30% 50% 70% 90%
Ambient Air Relative Humidity
Figure 3-8: Energy demand. Initial Grain Moisture 0.316db (24%wb), Dryer
Air Temp. 54 C, Air Flow 15 m3min-1ton-1
63
Air Flow (std m3min-1ton-1)
10 15 20 25
7.0
Cold and Wet
6.5
4.5
4.0
3.5
Warm and Dry
3.0
40 50 60 70 80
Dryer Air Temperature ( C)
30
Drying Time (Hours)
20
10
0
40 50 60 70 80
Dryer Air Temperature (C)
Figure 3-10: Drying Time . Ini. Moisture 0.316 db (24% wb), RH 75%, Amb.
Temp. 10 C.
64
Table 3-4: Drying conditions shown in Figure 3-9.
Cold and Wet Warm and wet Warm and dry
Ambient Temperature C 5 20 20
Relative Humidity % 95% 95% 35%
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
40 50 60 70 80
Dryer Air Temperature (C)
Differential moisture is increased when hotter air is used to dry, and the air
flow is low, see Figure 3-11. Raghavan & Sosle (2007) explain the temperature
effect, For a given grain depth, raising the air temperature speeds up drying but
increases the chance of over drying near the floor. When the air flow is reduced,
it gets saturated with moisture more easily for the first few corn layers. Therefore,
last layers start to be dried later in the process, or not dried at all. When this
happens, the first layers have to be over dried to get the desired average
65
3.5. Conclusions
The SEDA simulated consistently the main parameters of the grain drying
(energy demand, moisture differential, and drying time) for a given drying
temperature, and bed depth). SEDA can be used to identify control strategies to
improve the performance of the drying process. Exhaust air temperature and/or
3.6. Acknowledgement
3.7. References
66
Gunasekaran, S., & Thompson, T. L. (1986). Optimal energy management in
grain drying. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25(1),
1-48.
Jayas, D. S., & Cenkowski, S. (2007). Grain Property Values and Their
Measurement. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.), Handbook of industrial drying (pp.
575-600). Boca Raton, FL :: CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Jumah, R. Y. (1995). Flow and drying characteristics of a rotating jet spouted
bed. Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, Montreal QC, Canada.
Lopes, D. d. C., Martins, J. H., Neto, A. J. S., & Filho, A. J. S. (2005). Simulao
da secagem de gros com baixas temperaturas utilizando-se o modelo de
Hukill: uma nova abordagem. exacta, 3, 85-93.
Martinez-Vera, C., Vizearra-Mendoza, M., Galin-Domingo, O., & Ruiz-Martinez,
R. (1995). Experimental Validation of a Mathematical Model for the Batch
Drying of Corn Grains. Drying Technology, 13(1-2), 333-350. doi:
10.1080/07373939508916956
Misra, M. K., & Brooker, D. B. (1980). Thin-Layer Drying and Rewetting
Equations for Shelled Yellow Corn. Transactions of the ASAE, 0001-
2351/80/2305-1254$02.00, 1254-1260.
Pabis, S., & Henderson, S. M. (1962). Grain drying theory III.The grain/air
temperature relationship. J. Agric. Eng. Res., 7, 2126.
Raghavan, V. G. S., & Sosle, V. (2007). Grain Drying. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial drying (pp. 563-573). Boca Raton, FL ::
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Sauer, D. B. (1992). Storage of cereal grains and their products. St. Paul, Minn.,
USA :: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
Thompson, T. L., Peart, R. M., & Foster, G. H. (1968). Matllematical Simulation
of Corn Drying - A New Model. TRANSACTIONS of the ASAE, 11(4), pp.
582-586.
67
CONNECTING TEXT
temperature of exhausted air means that the inlet air is bringing more energy
than that required to remove the available moisture on grain surface. Controlling
the inlet air temperature or flow, based on the exhaust air temperature, could
4.1. Abstract
The System Equations for Drying with Air (SEDA) (Daz et al., 2012) was
Batch Dryer. Two control strategies were tested: one regulated the drying air
temperature while the other regulated the air flow. The latter gave the best
balance between energy efficiency and drying time. At the beginning of the
process, maximum air flow and temperature were required to heat the grain up
rapidly and to remove the surface moisture of the fresh grain. When the grain
surface was dry and the moisture migration inside the grain had limited water
transfer, less airflow was necessary; however, the air had to be hot to maximize
its Vapor Pressure Deficit, which enhances the drying rate, to carry the maximum
69
4.2. Introduction
energy every day, and it is necessary to supply the first without compromising the
second. Grains are basic to human diet; however, their production consumes
large amounts of energy, this is, especially, true of the grain drying process,
which uses more than half of the total energy for grain production (Raghavan &
Sosle, 2007; Sauer, 1992). The standard industrial process for drying grain
involves heating air and blowing it through kernels, a process that burns large
quantities of fossil fuels. Although more efficient drying technologies have been
articulated this problem 20 years ago, the situation remains the same. More
farmers; in the short term, it is necessary to adjust the present equipments to get
A System of Equations for Drying with Air (SEDA) (Daz et al., 2012) was
introduced the Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) concept to drying simulations and
was developed to reproduce the main parameters of the drying process, namely
temperature, moisture, energy demand and retention time. In this paper, SEDA is
70
used for identifying simple control strategies that can help to improve the In-Bin
SEDA was used to simulate four reference scenarios; these were compared
with the results from two control strategies. First, the four reference scenarios for
an In-Bin Batch Dryer were simulated with extreme conditions of air temperature
and flow. The parameters compared were the specific energy demand and the
retention time. Second, two control strategies were simulated: one regulated the
drying air temperature while the other regulated the air flow. Both were controlled
by monitoring the exhaust air temperature. Each control strategy was run with
four exhaust air temperature set points. Finally, the best performed set points
The relative humidity (RH) of exhaust air is the best parameter to indicate
how well the energy used to heat air up is invested, but measure it is difficult in
grain drying environments. Exhaust air temperature is a well indicator too, and
thermometers have better accuracy and are more reliable than RH meters.
Relative humidity meters have low accuracy in highly humid mediums, although,
that RH meters are easily clogged by grain dust, increasing measurement errors
even more.
71
For all the simulations, a number of parameters were fixed. The ambient
conditions were 10 C for air temperature and 80% for RH. The grain bed depth
was 96 cm. Final grain moisture was 15% wet basis (wb). The initial grain
moisture was simulated between 21%(wb) and 30%(wb) with intervals of 3%.
The extreme conditions of the drying air were simulated. For air flow, the
two values were 10 and 25 m3min-1t-1 (Sauer, 1992); the air temperature values
were 40 and 80C (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007; Sauer, 1992). This resulted in four
simulations, as presented in Table 4-1. The specific energy demand and the
retention time were plotted versus the initial grain moisture to identify the lowest
Four conditions were simulated; for each one, the controller was set up with
and 32 C. When the exhaust air reached the set point, the drying air
temperature was reduced with a proportional controller to obtain the desired set
point. The initial and maximum value for the drying temperature was 80 C; the
72
minimum value was 40 C. For each case, the specific energy demand and
retention time were plotted to identify the most efficient set point with the shortest
retention time.
As in the case of temperature regulation, four set points were simulated for
airflow control with the same exhaust air temperature. When the exhaust air
reached the set point, the drying airflow was reduced with a proportional
controller to get the desired set point. The initial and maximum value for the
drying airflow was 25 m3min-1t-1. The minimum value was 10 m3min-1t-1. For
each case, the specific energy demand and retention time were plotted to identify
the most efficient set point with the shortest retention time.
As expected, the fastest drying setup was 80@25, as shown in Figure 4-1
. The most efficient setups were 80@10 and 40@10 due to the low ambient
temperature and its high humidity; however, the retention time for 40@10 was
conditions in drying performance is shown in Chapter III (Daz et al., 2012). The
73
Drying Air Quality (C @ std m3min-1ton-1 )
6.5 40
Specific Energy Demand (MJkg-1 H20)
6.0 30
5.0 10
4.5 0
20% 25% 30% 20% 25% 30%
Fresh Grain Moisture (wb) Fresh Grain Moisture (wb)
The grain thermal inertia made it difficult to control the system around the
set point with a proportional controller. The exhaust air temperature fluctuated
several times around the set point before becoming stable. After the exhaust air
temperature reached the target value, the proportional controller changed the
inlet temperature relatively fast. While the incoming air was already at its lowest
value (40 C), the warm grain kept the outlet air temperature above the desired
target for almost one hour. When the exhaust air finally reached the desired
maximum value (80 C) in around ten minutes. However, the relative cold grain
74
kept the exhaust temperature below the set point for another hour, and the cycle
When the set point for exhaust air was adjusted at 28 and 32 C, the dryer
consumed less energy and dried faster, as can be seen in Figure 4-2. When the
drying front reached the top layer, hotter air enhanced the drying rate because it
had larger VPD (Daz et al., 2012). Therefore, the retention time was increased
6.5 40
Specific Energy Demand (MJkg-1 H20)
6.0 30
Retention Time (hours)
5.5 20
5.0 10
4.5 0
20% 25% 30% 20% 25% 30%
Fresh Grain Moisture (wb) Fresh Grain Moisture (wb)
The set points 20 and 24 C had the lowest energy efficiency; this is
explained by the lower VPD and saturation point of the incoming air. When the
grain was hot and the moisture migration limited the drying rate, the exhaust air
75
was hotter, and the controller reduced the drying air temperature. With lower
temperature, the drying air had lower capacity to hold water before getting
saturated, making the air use less efficient (Daz et al., 2012).
drying process by regulating the inlet temperature may lead to a better grain
quality while increasing energy efficiency. At the beginning of the process, the
wet and cold grain was efficiently dried by hot air; the high evaporation rate kept
the first layers of corn warm. When the drying rate decreased, the controller
reduced the incoming air temperature. Therefore, the first layers of corn were not
overheated. At the end of the process the whole mass of grain was below 42 C,
a safe value for producing seeds (Hall, 1980). The three-stage continuous flow
concurrent flow grain dryer (Bakker-Arkema et al., 1981) uses this energy
reduction principle; the hottest air is in contact with fresh grain, and the less hot
air is blown through the grain while this is moving through the dryer.
In this case, the proportional controller kept the exhaust air temperature
relatively close to the set point. When the exhaust air was hotter than the
targeted value, the proportional controller reduced the airflow. With less air going
through the grain, its energy was easily absorbed by water evaporation, and the
76
When the set point for the exhaust air temperature was between 20 and
28 C, the best energy efficiency was obtained; however, the retention time was
longer. Incoming air always had the maximum VPD and capacity to hold moisture
because it was hot, 80 C, during the whole process, and the energy excess was
controlled by reducing the airflow making the energy use more efficient. This
airflow reduction increased the drying time; however, with higher temperature set
points, the retention time was less impacted (See Figure 4-3).
6.0 30
Retention Time (hours)
5.5 20
5.0 10
4.5 0
20% 25% 30% 20% 25% 30%
Fresh Grain Moisture (wb) Fresh Grain Moisture (wb)
between energy efficiency and throughput; however, bottom grain layers may
have inferior quality if there is no grain mixing. During the whole drying process,
the bottom layer was in touch with hot air. At the final part of the process, this
77
layer was overdried. This low evaporation rate allowed grain to reach thermal
equilibrium with the surrounding air, and grain quality was reduced as
Figure 4-4 shows the simulation results for the three scenarios of best
80@25, but it had the highest energy demand. In order to achieve a fast drying
speed with a good energy demand, controlling the airflow with a set point of
32 C was the best option. The simulations Reference 80@10, Flow control
28 C and Temp control 32 C had the best energy efficiency. However, the
first took too much time to dry the grain; the second one had the best drying time
of the three at low initial grain moisture, between 21% and 25% (wb); and the last
one had a better time for high initial grain moisture, 25% to 30% (wb).
Even when three simulations gave almost the same energy efficiency, the
two with constant inlet temperature (80 C), Reference 80@10 and Flow
control 28 C, can improve even more their efficiency in the process after drying.
The grain finished hotter in these two simulations than in the Temp control
32 C scenario. At the end of the drying process, when the grain is hot, there is
an opportunity to remove moisture with the remaining thermal energy inside the
grain. When the exhaust grain is hotter, during the cooling or dryeration step, we
78
can extract more moisture from the grain without investing any thermal energy
(Brooker et al., 1992; Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986; Raghavan & Sosle,
2007; Sauer, 1992). In dryeration, while the grain is resting hot, a natural
convection flow pushes the ambient air through the grain. This gentle flow
removes grain moisture efficiently but slowly; the thermal energy storage in grain
is mainly gone in evaporating its moisture and not for heating air resulting in a
Simulation
Reference (80@10) Reference (80@25) Temp. Control (32C)
20 6.5
Specific Energy Demand (MJkg-1 H20)
Retention Time (hours)
6.0
10 5.5
5.0
0 4.5
20% 25% 30% 20% 25% 30%
Fresh Grain Moisture (wb) Fresh Grain Moisture (wb)
Figure 4-4: Setups with the best performance from the three scenarios.
79
4.5. Conclusions
Deciding the air temperature and flow for drying grain is a compromise
between energy efficiency and throughput. High airflow and temperature leads to
high drying rates but sacrifices the efficiency. Low air flow and high temperature
Regulating the drying air conditions based on exhaust air temperature offers a
better balance between the two parameters. This control strategy ensures a high
energy input at the beginning of the process, when the system is more able to
absorb it by heating the grain and evaporating water; further, the power is
reduced when moisture takes more time to reach the grain surface to be
evaporated.
control can be chosen. To get the best performance in terms of energy efficiency
and throughput, an air flow control is the best choice; this ensures the maximum
VPD and saturation point of the drying air. If the grain quality is the priority when
the grain is not mixed and the energy-time balance is key, a temperature control
has to be chosen.
4.6. References
Bakker-Arkema, F. W., Rodrguez, J. C., & Brook, R. C. (1981). Grain quality and
energy efficiency of commercial grain dryers. American Society of
Agricultural Engineers, 81-3011, 8.
80
Brooker, D. B., Bakker-Arkema, F. W., & Hall, C. W. (1992). Drying and storage
of grains and oilseeds. New York :: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Daz, J., Gariepy, Y., & Raghavan, V. (2012). Modeling of grain dryers: thin
layers to deep beds. Paper presented at the ISAE Convention, Pantnagar,
India.
Gunasekaran, S., & Thompson, T. L. (1986). Optimal energy management in
grain drying. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25(1),
1-48.
Hall, C. W. (1980). Drying and storage of agricultural crops. Westport, Conn. ::
AVI Pub. Co.
Raghavan, V. G. S., & Sosle, V. (2007). Grain Drying. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial drying (pp. 563-573). Boca Raton, FL ::
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Sauer, D. B. (1992). Storage of cereal grains and their products. St. Paul, Minn.,
USA :: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
81
CHAPTER V
The global concern about the use of fossil fuels and its consequences has
led the grain agro industry to find more efficient drying process. Grains are basic
in the food production chain (Raghavan & Sosle, 2007). For safe storage, the
grain has to be dried; this single process consumes more energy than all the
other required process for grain production. Fossil fuels are the main energy
source for grain drying, and electricity is only used for moving conveyors and
fans. In the last decades, more efficient technologies have been developed;
however, they are expensive or not reliable (Sauer, 1992). To improve drying
dryers. Running computer simulations is a fast track to find the optimum setup for
present dryers.
The initial objective of this work was to develop a computation model that
represented the main parameters of the grain drying process. Air temperature
and relative humidity, grain temperature and moisture, and energy invested to
heat the air up were the operational parameters simulated consistently by the
System Equations for Drying with Air (SEDA). This model was validated with thin
layer test results extracted from the scientific literature; R2 values higher than
0.83 were obtained for ten different conditions with air temperature and relative
82
humidity (RH) ranges of [16 C-120 C] and [4.8%-83%] respectively, and grain
a wide range of conditions, the next step was to simulate a grain depth bed
equivalent to an In-bin batch dryer. This was built with a number of thin layers;
the exhaust air from a thin layer was the inlet air to the next one. The simulation
results were consistent with the dryer performance reported by other authors
(Brooker et al., 1992; Gunasekaran & Thompson, 1986; Hall, 1980; Raghavan &
Sosle, 2007; Sauer, 1992); they also permitted to identify where the energy went,
and knowing this condition, it was possible to suggest strategies for reducing
energy consumption. At the beginning of the drying process, most of the energy
is taken by the cold grain to increase its temperature. Then, the fresh grain
surface moisture was easily removed until the drying front reached the top layer.
At this moment, the exhaust air RH started to reduce, and its temperature
increased until the end of the drying process. This means that the energy
incoming to the system is higher than the energy required to evaporate the
control strategies were simulated. The exhaust air quality indicated how
efficiently the drying air is being used; therefore, its temperature was monitored.
83
When this parameter reached the set point, a proportional controller helped in
reducing the energy input to the system. One strategy considered was by
reducing drying air temperature; the other one was by reducing the air flow. The
84
6. REFERENCES
85
Gunasekaran, S., & Thompson, T. L. (1986). Optimal energy management in
grain drying. CRC Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25(1),
1-48.
Haghighi, K. (1990). Finite element simulation of the thermo-hydro stresses in a
viscoelastic sphere during drying. Drying Technology, 8(3), 465-498. doi:
10.1080/07373939008959896
Hall, C. W. (1980). Drying and storage of agricultural crops. Westport, Conn. ::
AVI Pub. Co.
Hukill, W. V. (1947). Basic principles in drying corn and grain sorghum. Agric.
Eng, 28, 335-338, 340.
Jayas, D. S., & Cenkowski, S. (2007). Grain Property Values and Their
Measurement. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.), Handbook of industrial drying (pp.
575-600). Boca Raton, FL :: CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Jumah, R. Y. (1995). Flow and drying characteristics of a rotating jet spouted
bed. Ph.D. thesis, McGill University, Montreal QC, Canada.
Kaymak-Ertekin, F., & Gedik, A. (2004). Sorption isotherms and isosteric heat of
sorption for grapes, apricots, apples and potatoes. Lebensmittel-
Wissenschaft und-Technologie, 37(4), 429-438. doi:
10.1016/j.lwt.2003.10.012
Lecorvaisier, E., Darche, S., da Silva, Z. E., & da Silva, C. K. F. (2010).
Theoretical model of a drying system including turbulence aspects.
Journal of Food Engineering, 96(3), 365-373. doi: DOI:
10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.08.008
Lopes, D. d. C., Martins, J. H., Neto, A. J. S., & Filho, A. J. S. (2005). Simulao
da secagem de gros com baixas temperaturas utilizando-se o modelo de
Hukill: uma nova abordagem. exacta, 3, 85-93.
Martinez-Vera, C., Vizearra-Mendoza, M., Galin-Domingo, O., & Ruiz-Martinez,
R. (1995). Experimental Validation of a Mathematical Model for the Batch
Drying of Corn Grains. Drying Technology, 13(1-2), 333-350. doi:
10.1080/07373939508916956
86
Misra, M. K., & Brooker, D. B. (1980). Thin-Layer Drying and Rewetting
Equations for Shelled Yellow Corn. Transactions of the ASAE, 0001-
2351/80/2305-1254$02.00, 1254-1260.
Morey, R. V., Keener, H. M., Thompson, T. L., White, G. M., & Bakker-Arkema,
F. W. (1978). The present status of grain drying simulation. American
Society of Agricultural Engineers, paper No. 78-3009.
Pabis, S., & Henderson, S. M. (1962). Grain drying theory III.The grain/air
temperature relationship. J. Agric. Eng. Res., 7, 2126.
Perumal, R. (2007). Comparative performance of solar cabinet, vacuum assisted
solar and open sun drying methods. M.Sc Thesis, McGill University,
Montreal, Canada.
Prenger, J. J., & Ling, P. P. (2000). Greenhouse Condensation Control-
Understanding and Using Vapor Pressure Deficit (VPD) Fact Sheet
(Series) AEX-800. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Extension.
Raghavan, V. G. S., & Sosle, V. (2007). Grain Drying. In A. S. Mujumdar (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial drying (pp. 563-573). Boca Raton, FL ::
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Samapundo, S., Devlieghere, F., Meulenaer, B. D., Atukwase, A., Lamboni, Y., &
Debevere, J. M. (2007). Sorption isotherms and isosteric heats of sorption
of whole yellow dent corn. Journal of Food Engineering, 79(1), 168-175.
doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.040
Sauer, D. B. (1992). Storage of cereal grains and their products. St. Paul, Minn.,
USA :: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
Sosle, V. (2002). A heat pump dehumidifier assisted dryer for agri-foods. Ph.D.
Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC.
Stratford, C. J. (1984). A solar wall and roof air preheater for in situ hay drying for
the Province of Quebec. M.Sc. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Canada.
87
Thompson, T. L., Peart, R. M., & Foster, G. H. (1968). Matllematical Simulation
of Corn Drying - A New Model. Transaction of the ASAE, 11(4), pp. 582-
586.
Trrez, N., Gustafsson, M., Schreil, A., & Martnez, J. (1998). Modeling and
simulation of crossflow moving bed grain dryers. Drying Technology,
16(9), 1999 2015.
88