Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jfoodeng

Determination of suitable thin layer drying curve model for some vegetables and fruits
Ebru Kavak Akpinar
*
Mechanical Engineering Department, Firat University, 23279 Elazig, Turkey Received 16 August 2004; accepted 7 January 2005 Available online 25 February 2005

Abstract This study presents a mathematical modeling of thin layer drying of potato, apple and pumpkin slices in a convective cyclone dryer. In order to estimate and select the appropriate drying curve equation, 13 dierent models, which are semi-theoretical and/or empirical, were applied to the experimental data and compared according to their coecients of determination (r, v2), which were predicted by non-linear regression analysis using the Statistica Computer Program. Moreover, the eects of drying air temperature, velocity and sample area on the model constants and coecients were also studied by multiple regression analysis. Consequently, of all the drying models, a semi-theoretical MidilliKucuk model was selected as the best one, according to r and v2. 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Drying; Thin layer; Mathematical modelling

1. Introduction Drying of moist materials is a complicated process involving simultaneous, coupled heat and mass transfer phenomena, which occur inside the material being dried (Yilbas, Hussain, & Dincer, 2003). Thin layer drying mean to dry as one layer of sample particles or slices. Thin layer drying models that describe the drying phenomenon of agricultural materials mainly fall into three categories, namely theoretical, semi-theoretical and empirical (Midilli, Kucuk, & Yapar, 2002; Panchariya, Popovic, & Sharma, 2002). The rst takes into account only internal resistance to moisture transfer while the other two consider only external resistance to moisture transfer between product and air (Bruce, 1985; Ozdemir & Devres, 1999; Parti, 1993). The most widely investigated theoretical drying model has been

Tel.: +90 424 237 5343; fax: +90 424 241 5526. E-mail addresses: eakpinar@rat.edu.tr, kavakebru@hotmail.com

Ficks second law of diusion. Drying of many food products such as rice (Ece & Cihan, 1993) and hazelnut (Demirtas, Ayhan, & Kaygusuz, 1998) has been successfully predicted using Ficks second law. Semi-theoretical models oer a compromise between theory and ease of use (Fortes & Okos, 1981). Simplifying general series solution of second law Ficks or modication of simplied models generally derives semi-theoretical models. But they are only valid within the temperature, relative humidity, and airow velocity and moisture content range for which they were developed. They require small time compared to theoretical thin layer models and do not need assumptions of geometry of a typical food, its mass diusivity and conductivity (Parry, 1985). Among semi-theoretical thin layer drying models, the Newton model, Page model, the modied Page model, the Henderson and Pabis model, the logarithmic model, the two-term model, the two-term exponential, the diusion approach model, the modied Henderson and Pabis model, the Verma et al. model and the MidilliKucuk model are used widely (Table 2). Empirical models derive

0260-8774/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.01.007

76

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

Nomenclature A sample area, the area having the product before drying process start, m2 a, b, c, g, h, n empirical constants in the drying models k, k0, k1 empirical coecients in the drying models n number constants N number of observations MR moisture ratio MRexp experimental moisture ratio MRpre predicted moisture ratio M local moisture content, %dry basis Mt Me Mi r r t T V v2 mean moisture content at t, %dry basis mean equilibrium moisture content, %dry basis initial moisture content, %dry basis correlation coecient the diusion path (m) time, min temperature, C velocity, m/s chi-square

a direct relationship between average moisture content and drying time. They neglect fundamentals of the drying process and their parameters have no physical meaning. Therefore they cannot give clear accurate view of the important processes occurring during drying although they may describe the drying curve for the conditions of the experiments (Ozdemir & Devres, 1999). Among them, the Wang and Singh model (see Table 2) has been found application in the literature. Recently, there have been many studies on the thin layer drying and mathematical modeling of various vegetables, fruits and agro-based products such as potato (Diamante & Munro, 1993), onion (Rapusas & Driscoll, 1995; Sarsavadia, Sawhney, Pangavhane, & Singh, 1999), hazelnut (Ozdemir & Devres, 1999), green pepper, green bean and squash (Yaldiz & Ertekin, 2001), tea (Panchariya et al., 2002), green chilli (Hossain & Bala, 2002), banana (Dandamrongrak, Young, & Mason, 2002), pistachio (Midilli & Kucuk, 2003) red

pepper (Akpinar, Bicer, & Yildiz, 2003). Moreover, the eects of some parameters related to the product or drying conditions such as slice thickness, drying air temperature, relative humidity, etc. were investigated by many researchers (Hossain & Bala, 2002; Midilli & Kucuk, 2003; Midilli et al., 2002; Ozdemir & Devres, 1999; Sarsavadia et al., 1999; Yaldiz & Ertekin, 2001). The main objective of this study was to determine and test the most appropriate thin layer drying model for understanding the drying behavior of potato, apple and pumpkin slices.

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Experimental set-up Fig. 1 illustrates the schematic diagram of the cyclone type dryer, developed for experimental work (Akpinar,

Fig. 1. Experimental set-up: 1Drying chamber; 21st tray; 32nd tray; 4digital balance; 5Observed windows; 6digital thermometer; 7 the balance bar; 8control panel; 9thermocouples; 10digital thermometer and channel selector; 11rheostat; 12resistance; 13fan; 14wet and dry thermometers; 15adjustable ab; 16duct; 17the outlet of air from dryer.

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

77

2002). The system was introduced in the literature (Akpinar, Midilli, & Bicer, 2003). Briey, it consists of fan, resistance and heating control systems, air-duct, drying chamber in cyclone type, and measurement instruments. The heating system consisted of an electric 4000 W heater placed inside the duct. The rectangular duct included air fan and resistance was constructed from sheet iron in 1000 mm length, 200 mm width and 250 mm height. The drying chamber was constructed from sheet iron in 600 mm diameter and 800 mm height cylinder. The inside and outside surfaces of the drying chamber was painted with a spray dye to prevent rust in the sheet iron surface. The drying chamber was constructed in concentric form and 30 mm annulus was isolated by polystyrene. Both topside and bottom side of drying chamber was closed. Also, the covers made of the steel were isolated by polystyrene. This top cover was used to load or unload the chamber. In the measurements of temperatures, J type ironconstantan thermocouples were used with a manually controlled 20-channel automatic digital thermometer (ELIMKO, 6400, Turkey), with reading accuracy of 0.1 C. A thermo hygrometer (EXTECH, 444731, China) was used to measure humidity levels at various locations of the system. A 015 m/s range anemometer (LUTRON, AM-4201, Taiwan) measured the velocity of air passing through the system. Moisture loss was recorded at 20 min intervals during drying for determination of drying curves by a digital balance (BEL, Mark 3100, Italy) in the measurement range of 03100 g and an accuracy of 0.01 g. 2.2. Procedure Before drying process, the products were peeled, potato and apple cut into slices of 12.5 12.5 25 mm and 8 8 18 mm (width thickness length) and

pumpkin cut into slices of 5 mm thickness and 35 mm diameters with a mechanical cutter. The trays were loaded as thin layer. The rst weight of the potato, apple and pumpkin was approximately 250, 125 and 200 g, respectively. The product slices were carefully and orderly placed on the trays that are made of nylon so that the airow could pass across the trays. The initial and nal moisture contents of the products were determined at 80 C by using an Infrared Moisture Analyzer (METTLER, LJ16, Switzerland). After the dryer is reached at steady state conditions for operation temperatures, the samples are put on the trays of dryer and dried there. Drying experiments were carried out at 60, 70, and 80 C drying air temperatures and 1, 1.5 m/s drying air velocities. The velocities and temperatures were measured in the centre of drying chamber. In the velocity measurements, the values of the velocity in the centre of the drying chamber were taken into account. The tangential airow was across the layer during drying process. Drying was continued until the nal moisture content of the potato, apple and pumpkin reached to approximately 10% (wb), 13% (wb), 6% (wb), respectively. During the experiments, ambient temperature and relative humidity, inlet and outlet temperatures of drying air in the duct and dryer chamber were recorded. Drying air was tangentially entered in drying chamber. In this way, the samples were dried in swirl ow in place of uniform ow. The ow diagram of the thin layer drying process is presented in Fig. 2.

2.3. Experimental uncertainty Errors and uncertainties in the experiments can arise from instrument selection, condition, calibration, environment, observation, and reading, and test planning (Akpinar, 2002; Akpinar et al., 2003). In drying

Fig. 2. The ow diagram of thin layer drying process of products.

78

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

Table 1 Uncertainties of the parameters during drying of products Parameter Uncertainty in the temperature measurement Fan inlet temperature Heaters outlet temperature Cyclone inlet temperature Cyclone outlet temperature Centre temperature of product Temperature between of trays Ambient air temperature Inlet of fan with dry and wet thermometers Uncertainty in the time measurement Mass loss values Temperature values Uncertainty in the mass loss measurement Uncertainty in the air velocity measurement Uncertainty of the measurement of relative humidity of air Uncertainty in the measurement of moisture quantity Uncertainty in reading values of table (q, cp. . .) Unit Comment

With the appropriate initial and boundary conditions t 0; t > 0; 0 < r < L; r 0; r L; M Mi

C C C C C C C C

0.3800.576 0.576 0.380 0.380 0.380 0.380 0.380 0.5590.707

dM 0 dt M Me

t > 0;

The solution of Eq. (1) for a slice, for a constant diusivity, D, in terms of innite series is given in literature. MR Mt Me Mi Me 1 8 X p2
n1

min min g ms1 RH g %

0.1 0.1 0.5 0.14 0.1 0.001 0.10.2

2n 12 p2 Dt exp 2 4L2 2n 1 1

"

# 2

experiments of the apple slices, the temperatures, velocity of drying air, weight losses were measured with appropriate instruments. During the measurements of the parameters, the uncertainties occurred were presented in Table 1.

3. Mathematical modeling of drying curves It has been accepted that drying phenomenon of the biological products during the falling rate period is controlled by the mechanism of liquid and/or vapour diusion. This behavior suggested strongly an internal mass transfer type drying with moisture diusion as the controlling phenomena. Assuming that the resistance to moisture ow is uniformly distributed throughout the interior of the homogeneous isotropic material, the diffusion coecient, D is independent of the local moisture content and if the volume shrinkage is negligible, Ficks second law can be derived as follows (Khraisheh, Cooper, & Magee, 1997): dM d2 M D 2 dt dr 1

where, MR is the fractional moisture ratio, Mi is the initial moisture, Mt is the mean moisture at time t, Me is the mean moisture at equilibrium and L is the half thickness of the slice for drying from both sides or the thickness of the slice for drying from one sides. For slices shapes, the rst boundary condition states that moisture is initially uniformly distributed throughout the sample. The second implies that the mass transfer is symmetric with respect to the centre of the slice. The third conditions states that the surface moisture content of the samples instantaneously reaches equilibrium with the conditions of surroundings air. The theoretical and the semi-theoretical models are summarized in Table 2. Semi-theoretical thin layer drying models are generally derived by simplifying general series solution of Ficks second law. For example, the Henderson and Pabis model is the rst term of a general series solution of Ficks second law (Doymaz, 2005). For mathematical modeling, the thin layer drying models in Table 2 were tested to select the best model for describing the drying curve equation of potato, apple and pumpkin slices during drying process by the convective type cyclone dryer (Akpinar et al., 2003; Diamante & Munro, 1993; Hossain & Bala, 2002; Midilli & Kucuk,
Table 2 Thin layer drying curve models Model name Newton Page Modied Page Modied Page Henderson and Pabis Logarithmic Two term Two-term exponential Wang and Singh Diusion approach Modied Henderson and Pabis Verma et al. MidilliKucuk Model MR = exp(kt) MR = exp(ktn) MR = expb(kt)nc MR = expb(kt)nc MR = a exp(kt) MR = a exp(kt) + c MR = a exp(k0t) + b exp(k1t) MR = a exp(kt) + (1a)exp(kat) MR = 1 + at + bt2 MR = a exp(kt) + (1a)exp(kbt) MR = a exp(kt) + b exp(gt) + c exp(ht) MR = a exp(kt) + (1a)exp(gt) MR = a exp(ktn) + bt

where, M is the local moisture content (kg water/kg dry solids), r is the diusion path (m), t is the time (s) and D is the moisture dependent diusivity (m2/s). Crank (1975) gave the analytical solutions of Eq. (1) for various regularly shaped bodies such as rectangular, cylindrical and spherical.

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

79

2003; Midilli et al., 2002; Mujumdar, 1995; Ozdemir & Devres, 1999; Yaldiz & Ertekin, 2001). The regression analysis was performed using Statistica Computer Program. The correlation coecient (r) was primary criterion for selecting the best equation to describe the drying curve equation (Guarte, 1996; Midilli et al., 2002). In addition to r, the reduced chi-square (v2) was used to determine the best t (Midilli & Kucuk, 2003). This parameter can be calculated as following: Pn 2 MRexp;i MRpre;i 2 3 v i1 N n where, MRexp,i is the ith experimentally observed moisture ratio, MRpre,i the ith predicted moisture ratio, N the number of observations and n is the number constants (Midilli et al., 2002; Sarsavadia et al., 1999). Modeling the drying behavior of dierent agricultural products often requires the statistical methods of regression and correlation analysis. Linear and non-linear regression models are important tools to nd the relationship between dierent variables, especially, for which no established empirical relationship exists. In this study, the constants and coecients of the best tting model involving the drying variables such as temperature, velocity of the drying air and product size were determined. The eects of these variables on the constants and coecients of drying expression were also investigated by multiple linear regression analysis.

air under dryer conditions, beyond which any changes in the mass of sample could not occur. The moisture content data at the dierent drying conditions were converted to the more useful moisture ratio expression and then curve tting computations with the drying time were carried on the 13 drying models evaluated by the previous workers (see Table 2). The statistical analyses results applied to these models at drying process at 80 C drying air temperature and 1.5 m/s drying air velocity are given in Table 3 for potato slices, apple slices and pumpkin slices. The best model describing the thin layer-drying characteristic was chosen as the one with the highest r-value and the lowest v2 values. From Table 3, it was determined that r = 0.99989, v2 = 1.79 105 for potato slices, r = 0.99996, v2 = 1.00 105 for apple slices, r = 0.99967, v2 = 8.38 105 for pumpkin slices by the MidilliKucuk model. The results have shown that the v2 values of the MidilliKucuk model lower than the values determined

1 0.9 0.8

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2

V = 1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V = 1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V = 1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V = 1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V = 1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V = 1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V = 1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm,1st tray V = 1m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Diffusion approach model

T=60 C Potato

4. Results and discussion Potato slices of 83% (wb), apple slices of 87% (wb), pumpkin slices of 93% (wb) average initial moisture content were dried to 10% (wb), 13% (wb), 6% (wb), respectively, at temperatures of 60, 70 and 80 C in the velocities of drying air of 1 and 1.5 m/s by using a convective dryer. The nal moisture contents represent moisture equilibrium between the sample and drying

0.1 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800

Drying time (min)

Fig. 3. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratio by the MidilliKucuk model and diusion approach model with drying time at 60 C of drying air for potato slices.

Table 3 Values of the drying constants and coecients of dierent models determined through regression method for potato, apple and pumpkin slices T = 80 C, V = 1.5 m/s; 1st tray Model name Newton Page Modied Page Modied Page Henderson and Pabis Logarithmic Two term Two-term exponential Wang and Singh Diusion approach Modied Henderson and Pabis Verma et al. Midilli and Kucuk Potato (12.5 12.5 25) R 0.99871 0.99942 0.99942 0.99871 0.99915 0.99917 0.99970 0.99970 0.95661 0.99970 0.99970 0.99969 0.99989 v
2 4

Apple (12.5 12.5 25) R 0.99875 0.99930 0.99930 0.99876 0.99885 0.99993 0.99885 0.99869 0.98977 0.99941 0.99885 0.99940 0.99996 v
2 4

Pumpkin R 0.98973 0.99930 0.99930 0.98973 0.99235 0.99757 0.99235 0.98952 0.99902 0.99912 0.99234 0.99911 0.99967 v2 2.14 103 1.55 104 1.55 104 2.26 103 1.69 103 5.72 104 1.91 103 2.31 103 2.17 104 2.08 104 2.21 103 2.09 104 8.38 105

1.88 10 8.92 105 8.92 105 1.97 104 1.30 104 1.34 104 5 105 5.56 105 6.63 103 4.77 105 5.56 105 4.78 105 1.79 105

2.35 10 1.43 104 1.43 104 2.53 104 2.34 104 1.6 105 2.76 104 2.68 104 2.07 103 1.31 104 3.38 104 1.31 104 1.00 105

80

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

1 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Logarithmic model

by other models. It was noticed that the MidilliKucuk model gave the highest r and the lowest v2 for all drying conditions. Figs. 311 present the variations of moisture ratio versus drying time for potato, apple and pumpkin slices dried at the dierent drying air temperatures, velocities and sample size. Additionally, Figs. 311 show the comparison of experimental and predicted moisture ratio by the MidilliKucuk model and the model has correlation coecient and chi-square, which is near to this model. The results of non-linear regression analyses and of statistical analyses applied to the MidilliKucuk model for all drying conditions have shown in Table 4 for potato slices, Table 5 for apple slices, Table 6 for

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 50 100 150 200

T=60C Apple

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

Drying time (min)

1 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Diffusion approach model

Fig. 6. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and Logarithmic model with drying time at 60 C of drying air for apple slices.

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

T=70C Potato

1 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Logarithmic

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.2 0.1 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 50 100 150 200

T=70 C Apple

Drying time (min)

Fig. 4. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and diusion approach model with drying time at 70 C of drying air for potato slices.

250

300

350

400

450

500

Drying time (min)

1 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Diffusion approach model

Fig. 7. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and Logarithmic model with drying time at 70 C of drying air for apple slices.

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 50

T=80 C Potato

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650

Drying time (min)

Fig. 5. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and diusion approach model with drying time at 80 C of drying air for potato slices.

pumpkin slices. Generally, r-values obtained by using this model were varied between 0.999770.99995 for potato slices, 0.999650.99997 for apple slices and 0.999400.99985 for pumpkin slices (see Tables 46). As shown in Figs. 311, the MidilliKucuk model showed good agreement with the experimental data and gave the best results for potato, apple and pumpkin slices according to r and v2. Therefore, the Midilli Kucuk was selected to represent the thin layer-drying behavior of these agricultural products according to the highest r and the lowest v2. Consequently, it can be said that the MidilliKucuk model could suciently dene the thin layer drying of potato, apple and pumpkin slices.

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

1 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1.5 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 8x8x18 mm, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 12.5x12.5x25 mm, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Logarithmic model

81

1
V=1.5 m/s, 1st tray

0.9 0.8

V=1.5 m/s, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Page model

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 50 100 150

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

T=80 C Apple

T=70C Pumpkin

200

250

300

350

400

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

Drying time (min)

Drying time (min)

Fig. 8. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and Logarithmic model with drying time at 80 C of drying air for apple slices.

Fig. 10. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratio by the MidilliKucuk model and Page model with drying time at 70 C of drying air for pumpkin slices.

1
1 V=1.5 m/s, 1st tray 0.9 0.8 V=1.5 m/s, 2nd tray

V=1.5 m/s, 1st tray

0.9 0.8

V=1.5 m/s, 2nd tray V=1 m/s, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

V=1 m/s, 1st tray V=1 m/s, 2nd tray Midilli-Kucuk model Page model

MR=(Mt-Me)/(Mi-Me)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

Page model

T=60 C Pumpkin

T=80C Pumpkin

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Drying time (min)

Drying time (min)

Fig. 9. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratio by the MidilliKucuk model and Page model with drying time at 60 C of drying air for pumpkin slices.

Fig. 11. Variation of the experimental and predicted moisture ratios by the MidilliKucuk model and Page model with drying time at 80 C of drying air for pumpkin slices.

The tting procedure indicated that the mentioned results of the MidilliKucuk model could be used to model the thin layer drying behavior of these agricultural products, but it did not indicate the eect of drying conditions. To take into account the eect of the drying variables on the MidilliKucuk model constants a, k, n and b were regressed against those of drying air temperature, velocity and sample area using multiple regression analysis. All possible combinations of the dierent drying variables were tested and included in the regression analysis. Based on the multiple regression analysis, the accepted model, the constants and coecients were as follows: MRa; k; b; t Mt Me a expktn bt Mi Me 4

where for potato,

a 0:986173 0:000069 T 0:005702 V 0:098206 A k 0:015582 0:000156 T 0:013467 V 0:266761 A n 1:218379 0:000802 T 0:162776 V 138:525 A

5 6 7 8

b 0:0000085 0:00000029 T 0:0000393 V 0:0203022 A

for apple,

9 k 0:006391 0:000065 T 0:009775 V 1:576723 A 10 n 1:187734 0:002467 T 0:128878 V 202:536 A 11 b 0:000082 0:000002 T 0:000041 V 0:041667 A 12
a 1:004084 0:000073 T 0:001960 V 3:944759 A

82

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

Table 4 Values of the drying constant and coecients of the MidilliKucuk model determined through regression method for potato slices at all drying conditions Drying air temperature T, C 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 Air ow rate V, m/s 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sample area A, m2 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 Tray no. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a 0.9989 0.9995 0.9989 0.9973 1.0069 0.9957 1.0001 0.9991 0.9968 0.9966 0.9971 0.9963 0.9996 0.9985 0.9967 0.9977 1.0047 1.0016 0.9976 0.9991 0.9936 0.9963 0.9957 0.9934 k 0.0169 0.0166 0.0149 0.0170 0.0176 0.0134 0.0115 0.0080 0.0085 0.0120 0.0117 0.0084 0.0171 0.0149 0.0161 0.0174 0.0158 0.0119 0.0100 0.0080 0.0058 0.0093 0.0087 0.0071 n 0.9804 0.9457 0.9351 0.8893 0.8484 0.8459 1.0214 1.0594 1.0109 0.9153 0.8992 0.9283 0.9686 0.9559 0.9095 0.8756 0.8564 0.8623 1.0341 1.0594 1.0678 0.9568 0.9438 0.9532 b 0.000052 0.000048 0.000038 0.000051 0.000049 0.000075 0.000041 0.000018 0.000022 0.000041 0.000038 0.000034 0.000016 0.000049 0.000030 0.000045 0.000051 0.000074 0.000017 0.000018 0.000025 0.000022 0.000032 0.000034 r 0.99994 0.99989 0.99994 0.99989 0.99980 0.99980 0.99993 0.99993 0.99995 0.99993 0.99992 0.99995 0.99994 0.99984 0.99992 0.99985 0.99987 0.99977 0.99992 0.99995 0.99990 0.99994 0.99990 0.99991 v2 1.17 105 2.05 105 1.01 105 1.79 105 3.14 105 2.93 105 1.25 105 1.03 105 7.65 106 9.73 106 1.19 105 6.33 106 9.05 106 2.98 105 1.15 105 1.86 105 1.98 105 3.53 105 1.28 105 8.63 106 1.72 105 8.68 106 1.53 105 1.29 105

Table 5 Values of the drying constant and coecients of the MidilliKucuk model determined through regression method for apple slices at all drying conditions Drying air temperature T, C 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 Air ow rate V, m/s 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sample area A, m2 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 0.000544 0.000544 0.000544 0.001250 0.001250 0.001250 Tray no. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a 0.9987 0.9970 0.9988 1.0014 1.0028 1.0003 0.9991 0.9990 0.9996 1.0011 0.9988 1.0076 0.9971 0.9993 0.9982 0.9998 1.0018 0.9990 0.9999 0.9983 0.9984 0.9998 0.9973 1.0071 k 0.0167 0.0140 0.0164 0.0126 0.0147 0.0157 0.0112 0.0076 0.0058 0.0108 0.0125 0.0115 0.0164 0.0121 0.0118 0.0116 0.0144 0.0140 0.0108 0.0062 0.0054 0.0100 0.0107 0.0094 n 1.0520 1.0325 0.9681 0.9893 0.9348 0.8898 1.1375 1.1481 1.1445 0.9859 0.9261 0.9145 1.0546 1.0514 1.0220 1.0021 0.9277 0.9040 1.1289 1.1746 1.1558 0.9896 0.9496 0.9435 b 0.000185 0.000156 0.000130 0.000137 0.000051 0.000046 0.000078 0.000119 0.000057 0.000098 0.000108 0.000056 0.000130 0.000123 0.000072 0.000110 0.000076 0.000055 0.000071 0.000143 0.000068 0.000103 0.000073 0.000059 r 0.99990 0.99974 0.99995 0.99996 0.99987 0.99990 0.99997 0.99991 0.99997 0.99994 0.99993 0.99982 0.99965 0.99994 0.99991 0.99992 0.99982 0.99983 0.99998 0.99984 0.99997 0.99994 0.99989 0.99987 v2 3.50 105 7.63 105 1.11 105 1.00 105 2.42 105 1.67 105 9.35 105 2.63 105 7.29 106 1.20 105 1.30 105 3.00 105 1.16 104 1.71 105 2.14 105 1.86 105 3.40 105 2.80 105 4.30 106 4.68 105 8.18 106 1.24 105 1.99 105 2.33 105

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584

83

Table 6 Values of the drying constant and coecients of the MidilliKucuk model determined through regression method for pumpkin slices at all drying conditions Drying air temperature T, C 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 80 70 60 Air ow rate V, m/s 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1 1 1 Tray no. 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 a 0.9798 0.9932 0.9936 0.9979 0.9883 0.9698 0.9878 0.9928 0.9922 0.9901 0.9867 0.9854 k 0.0021 0.0056 0.0067 0.0037 0.0031 0.0021 0.0021 0.0056 0.0062 0.0024 0.0026 0.0030 n 1.3114 1.0561 0.9786 1.1320 1.1269 1.1793 1.2951 1.0404 0.9804 1.2057 1.1321 1.0800 b 0.000071 0.000100 0.000054 0.000061 0.000084 0.000017 0.000068 0.000098 0.000058 0.000081 0.000084 0.000050 r 0.99967 0.99961 0.99965 0.99985 0.99940 0.99956 0.99967 0.99972 0.99975 0.99976 0.99967 0.99967 v2 8.38 105 8.13 105 6.04 105 3.18 105 1.25 104 7.92 105 8.38 105 5.54 105 4.25 105 5.42 105 6.74 105 6.05 105

for pumpkin, a 0:966467 0:000184 T 0:007014 V k 0:005645 0:000095 T 0:003791 V n 0:572175 0:009074 T 0:064652 V b 0:000050 0:000001 T 0:000024 V 13 14 15 16

ture range 6080 C and a velocity range 11.5 m/s of drying air.

Acknowledgement The author thanks Prof. Ibrahim Dincer from the University of Ontario Institute of Technology and Dr. Adnan Midilli from Nigde University, and Firat University Research Foundation (FUNAF) nancial support, under project number 357.

These expressions can be used to estimate the moisture ratio of potato, apple and pumpkin slices at any time during the drying process with a great accuracy. The consistency of the model and relationship between the coecients and drying variables evident with rpotato 0:9984; rapple 0:9976; rpumpkin 0:9955;
4 v2 potato 2:26 10 4 v2 apple 4:03 10

and and

References
Akpinar, E. K. (2002). The development of a cyclone type dryer for agricultural products. PhD Thesis. Firat University, Elazig, Turkey. Akpinar, E. K., Bicer, Y., & Yildiz, C. (2003). Thin layer drying of red pepper. Journal of Food Engineering, 59, 99104. Akpinar, E., Midilli, A., & Bicer, Y. (2003). Single layer drying behavior of potato slices in a convective cyclone dryer and mathematical modeling. Energy Conversion and Management, 44, 16891705. Bruce, D. M. (1985). Exposed-layer barley drying, three models tted to new data up to 150 C. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 32, 337347. Crank, J. (1975). The mathematics of diusion. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Dandamrongrak, R., Young, G., & Mason, R. (2002). Evaluation of various pre-treatments for the dehydration of banana and selection of suitable drying models. Journal of Food Engineering, 55, 139146. Demirtas, C., Ayhan, T., & Kaygusuz, K. (1998). Drying behaviour of hazelnuts. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 76, 559564. Diamante, L. M., & Munro, P. A. (1993). Mathematical modeling of the thin layer solar drying of sweet potato slices. Solar Energy, 51, 271276. Doymaz, I. (2005). Drying behaviour of green beans. Journal of Food Engineering, 69(2), 161165. Ece, M. C., & Cihan, A. (1993). A liquid diusion model for drying rough rice. Transactions of American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 36, 837840.

4 v2 pumpkin 7:76 10

5. Conclusion In order to explain the drying behavior and develop the mathematical modeling of agricultural products as potato, apple and pumpkin, 13 models in the literature were applied. Among these models, in each of three products, the MidilliKucuk model gave the best results and showed good agreement with the experimental data obtained from the experiments including the thin layer drying process. When the eects of drying air temperature, velocity and sample area on the constants and coecients of the MidilliKucuk model were examined, the resulting model gave an r of 0.9984 and v2 of 2.26 104 for potato slices, and an r of 0.9976 and v2 of 4.03 104 for apple slices, and an r of 0.9955 and v2 of 7.76 104 for pumpkin slices. According to results, it can be said that the MidilliKucuk model adequately described the drying behavior of potato, apple and pumpkin slices in the drying process at a tempera-

84

E.K. Akpinar / Journal of Food Engineering 73 (2006) 7584 Panchariya, P. C., Popovic, D., & Sharma, A. L. (2002). Thin-layer modelling of black tea drying process. Journal of Food Engineering, 52, 349357. Parry, J. L. (1985). Mathematical modelling and computer simulation of heat and mass transfer in agricultural grain drying. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 54, 339352. Parti, M. (1993). Selection of mathematical models for drying grain in thin layers. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 54, 339 352. Rapusas, R. S., & Driscoll, R. H. (1995). The thin-layer drying characteristics of white onion slices. Drying Technology, 13(89), 19051931. Sarsavadia, P. N., Sawhney, R. L., Pangavhane, D. R., & Singh, S. P. (1999). Drying behavior of brined onion slices. Journal of Food Engineering, 40, 219226. Yaldiz, O., & Ertekin, C. (2001). Thin layer solar drying of some vegetables. Drying Technology, 19, 583596. Yilbas, B. S., Hussain, M. M., & Dincer, I. (2003). Heat and moisture diusion in slab products to convective boundary condition. Heat and Mass Transfer, 39, 471476.

Fortes, M., & Okos, M. R. (1981). Non-equilibrium thermodynamics approach to heat and mass transfer in corn kernels. Transactions of American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 22, 761769. Guarte, R. C. (1996). Modeling the drying behavior of copra and development of a natural convection dryer for production of high quality copra in the Philippines. PhD Dissertation. 287, Hohenheim University, Stuttgart, Germany. Hossain, M. A., & Bala, B. K. (2002). Thin-layer drying characteristics for green chilli. Drying Technology, 20(2), 489505. Khraisheh, M. A. M., Cooper, T. J. R., & Magee, T. R. A. (1997). The transport mechanism of moisture during air drying processes. Trans IChemE, 75(C), 3439. Midilli, A., & Kucuk, H. (2003). Mathematical modelling of thin layer drying of pistachio by using solar energy. Energy Conversion and Management, 44, 11111122. Midilli, A., Kucuk, H., & Yapar, Z. A. (2002). New model for singlelayer drying. Drying Technology, 20(7), 15031513. Mujumdar, A. S. (1995). Handbook of industrial drying (Vol. I). New York: Marcel Dekker, pp. 71111. Ozdemir, M., & Devres, Y. O. (1999). The thin layer drying characteristics of hazelnuts during roasting. Journal of Food Engineering, 42, 225233.