Experimental Determination of The Moisture Content Pattern in Yam During Drying
Experimental Determination of The Moisture Content Pattern in Yam During Drying
Experimental Determination of The Moisture Content Pattern in Yam During Drying
net/publication/228652159
CITATIONS READS
10 4,212
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Adekunle Adelaja on 20 December 2015.
Abstract: In this study, a forced convection solar dryer was designed, constructed and tested for the
purpose of drying yam in order to study the moisture removal pattern. Some pieces of yam fillets
weighing, 0.52kg, were dried in the dryer while an equal mass was dried in the open sun (control) and
the profiles obtained in both cases were compared. Also, evaluating the performance of the dryer; the
collector and system efficiencies of 65.6% and 54.8% were obtained respectively. The moisture content
removal of 75.0% was achieved as against 61.5% (control), indicating 13.5% difference. The percentage
of the difference in final moisture content to that obtained by dryer gave about 53.9% while the average
drying rate for the dryer was 0.0481kg/hr as against 0.0447kg/hr for open sun drying. Though the profiles
are similar in pattern, a uniform and better drying was achieved with the aid of the developed dryer.
Key words: solar energy, thermal analysis, yam, solar dryer, forced convection
Corresponding Author: A.O. Adelaja, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Lagos, Akoka, Yaba, Lagos,
Nigeria
E-mail: ao_adelaja@yahoo.com
1171
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
In this study, we have developed a solar dryer in 319K, being the average of the maximum of the inlet
order to study the moisture content pattern of yam and outlet temperatures of the system during no load
during drying and compare it with the traditional test.
method of drying, (sun drying). The forced convection
solar dryer designed was evaluated for its performance Reynolds number, Re
and also compared with the traditional method.
VDh
MATERIAL AND METHOD Re (1)
The study was carried out in October/November, 4 Ac
2008. The season was characterized by cloud cover and Where, Dh
unpredictable weather conditions. The system set up is P
shown in figure 1. The dryer comprises three main
components namely the solar collector, the drying Nusselt number, Nu
chamber and the pv-extractor assembly. Firstly, the 1
solar collector assembly comprises the collector box, Nu 0.023Re0.8 Pr 3
(2)
absorber plate, glazing material and the heat reservoir
(a collection of granite stones painted black) set at the The following air properties were used (extracted
upper part of the collector. The drying chamber houses from Holman[22]);
the loading trays, access door and the extractor hole.
Thirdly, the pv-extractor assembly comprises the pv 1.1092kg / m3 ,
module, extractor, battery and the charge controller.
The framework is made basically from wood, painted
black on the inside except for the insulated sides and C p 1.00695kJ / kg . oC ,
the top of the solar collector which is glazed to allow
direct heating of the plate and the heat reservoir. The
battery stores excess energy during the sunshine hours 2.1552 105 kg / m.s ,
when the extractor is powered by the photovoltaic
system. At this time, the heat reservoir stores its heat
both by direct radiation from the sun and through 18.3296 106 m 2 / s ,
convection from the moving heated air passing over the
collector plate until equilibrium is reached with the
plate. During protracted cloud cover or non sunshine k 0.02777W / m. oC ,
hours, the charge controller reverses the operation of
the assembly and the extractor is being powered by the
battery while the moving air extracts some heat energy 0.25075m 2 / s , Pr 0.70382 .
from the heated plate and reservoir before getting into
the chamber. Expectedly, the plate loses its heat faster Convective coefficient of heat transfer, hc
than the reservoir which later contributes a larger
percentage of the heat energy in the chamber until Nu * k
equilibrium is reached with the environment. Table 1 hc (3)
below shows the design considerations and assumptions Dh
while Table 2 contains the technical specifications.
Total heat loss coefficient, UL
Design Analysis: In this work we shall focus on the
thermal and drying analyses only. The structural 1
analysis of the dryer may not be necessary because it UL (4)
is not a heavy load bearing structure. R1 R2 R3 R4
Thermal Analysis: The performance of a solar 1
collector and system is described by energy balance where, R1 ,
that indicates the distribution of incident solar energy hco hr p co
into useful energy gain and various losses leading to
the calculations of the efficiencies. The thermal
analysis here follows the procedures as in Duffie and
Beckman[21]. The properties of air are evaluated at
1172
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
1173
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Fig. 1: Schematic diagram of solar dryer assembly set up indicating the main components and air
1 x
R2 , R3 , I c U L (Tave Ta )
hw hr coa kin FR (5)
I c U L (Ti Ta )
1 1
R4 , hc hco , p co Collector’s efficiency, c
hco ,b a hco
or,
T T2 2
T Tco
hr , p co
p co p
Qu Ac FR I c U L Tave Ta
1 1
1
p co useful energy gain over time
c
Total Incident solar energy over same time period
and
1174
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Qu m.h fg
m (8) (17)
C p (Tav Ta ) Gcd
where, G 3600 IAc td
Volume flow rate, V
Experimental Procedure and Testing: The pv module
m was tilted such that its surface area became
V (9) perpendicular to the rays of the sun. Five thermometers
air were set in place to measure the ambient, Ta, entry, Ti,
plate, Tp, collector air, Tc, and chamber, Td
Drying Analysis: The drying analysis was carried out temperatures. The experiment was carried out in
in the following order: October/November, 2008. The season was characterized
Percentage moisture removed from product, % by rain, cloud cover and fewer hours of sunshine.
The load test involved cutting 1.04kg of yam into
100(mw md ) slices of about 3mm, washed and weighed. This was
% wet basis (10) divided into two parts, 0.52kg each. One part was
mw spread into the first tray of the chamber which had
earlier been checked for air tightness so as to avoid
Final moisture content of product, m f heat and moisture losses. The second part was spread
in the open sun. An hourly measurement of the
100 temperatures at specific locations and mass of the
m f mi % (11) specimen was carried out between 10.00 and 17.00
100 hours each day for three days.
Amount of moisture removed, m Results: The no load test result, Table 3, reveals the
maximum, average and minimum temperatures
mw (mi m f ) measured for Ta, Ti, Tp, Tc and Td before the specimen
m (12) was weighed and loaded into the drying chamber. The
100 m f highest temperature readings were observed at the plate
with 62oC maximum, 56.6 +/- 2.09oC average and 50oC
Quantity of heat used in evaporating moisture, Qe minimum. This was followed by the collector, dryer,
inlet and of course the ambient in that order
respectively. This is in agreement with the results
Qe mh fg (13) obtained by Adelaja et al[8] and Bolaji and Olalusi[10].
For the load test, Table 4 shows the same
where, temperature pattern was observed around the plate as
in the case of the no load test but this time with a
h fg 4.186 x103 (597 0.56 xTd ) [23]
(14) maximum of 75oC and average of 57.04 +/- 1.81oC.
The drying chamber which of course is our focus has
Efficiency of dryer, d a maximum of 55oC. However, the 55oC limit may
have been occasioned by the extractor’s passive control
Qe over the air flow and hence the drying temperature.
d (15) This was also reported by Mumba [12] and
Ac I Wisniewski[15]. Figures 2-4 show the profiles of the
temperatures recorded for the three days. The general
Average drying rate, mave patterns show an increase in the temperatures from
10.00 to between 12.00 and 14.00 before a decline.
m In the three figures, the highest temperatures were
mave (16) observed between 13.00 and 14.00. These are in good
td agreement with Adelaja et al[8] and Bolaji and
Olalusi[10].
where, td = sunshine hours per day The calculated parameters used for the design and
evaluation of the system are presented in Tables 5 and
Determination of drying time, δ 6. The heat removal factor of 0.9429, useful energy
1175
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Table 3: No load test, the average, maximum and minimum temperatures recorded during no load test.
Time Ta Ti Tp Tc Td
Ave 34.60 +/-0.51 35.60 +/- 0.75 56.60 +/- 2.09 49.40 +/- 2.86 46.80 +/- 2.63
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max 36.00 37.00 62.00 58.00 55.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Min 33.00 33.00 50.00 40.00 39.00
Source: analysed from data collected
rate collected, 391.50 W, collector efficiency, 65.6% Discussion: The percentage moisture contents profiles
and mass flow rate of 0.01944kg/s were obtained for in figure 5 reveal that there is usually an increase in
the system. The collector efficiency is greater than the the loss of moisture from the early hours to between
57.5% obtained by Bolaji and Olalusi[10] but lower than 13.00 and 14.00 after which a reduction in rate is
80%[8,12]. For the performance evaluation of the system, observed. This can be attributed to low sunshine at the
some parameters obtained from the dryer and the early and late hours of the day, hence low heat
control are compared. The moisture content removal transfer. This explains the section of the profile
indicated a difference of about 13.5%. The percentage between 6.00 and 7.00, 15.00 and 16.00 and 20.00 and
of the difference in the final moisture to that obtained 21.00 drying time. The two profiles representing the
by dryer gives about 53.9%. The average drying rates moisture content pattern of yam during drying with
are 0.0481kg/hr as against 0.0447kg/hr (control). The solar system and open sun, show that the solar dryer is
drying efficiency obtained was 54.76%. more efficient compared to open sun drying apart from
1176
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Fig. 2: Recorded ambient, inlet, plate, collector and chamber temperatures for day 1.
Fig. 3: Recorded ambient, inlet, plate, collector and chamber temperatures for day 2.
the contamination and degradation associated with open 65.6% and 54.76% respectively, moisture content
sun drying. The moisture content removed by the solar removal of 75% and average drying rate of 0.0481kg/hr
dryer was 75% while the control was 61.54% which were recorded during solar drying of yam. The
translates to about 13.5% difference. Comparing the appearance of the yam as captured in figure 6a reveals
physical appearance of the dried products the end uniform and better drying as compared with open sun
product of the solar dryer, figure 6a reveals a uniform drying. The efficiency of the dryer however can be
drying compared with the control, figure 6b. improved among other things by using a glass with
higher transmittance and a collector plate with higher
Conclusion: The photovoltaic powered solar dryer thermal diffusivity like aluminum.
designed, constructed and tested here can function on
a continuous basis, that is, both during high intense
sunshine and non insolation hours especially during
cloudy weather. The collector and dryer efficiencies are
1177
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Fig. 4: Recorded ambient, inlet, plate, collector and chamber temperatures for day 3.
Fig. 5: Moisture content removal pattern in yam fillet during drying using open sun and solar dryer.
1178
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
1179
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
Dh Hydraulic diameter for non circular tubes such as 214, The American Society of Agricultural
square ducts, m Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.
k Thermal conductivity, W/ m. oC 7. Abdel-Rehim, Z.S. and F.H. Fahmy, 1998.
Pr Prandtl number “Photovoltaic Dryer with Dual Picked Beds for
μ Coefficient of dynamic viscosity, kg/ms Drying Medical Herb”, Drying Technology, 16(3-
5): 799-811.
h fg Latent heat of vaporization, MJ/kg 8. Adelaja, A.O., B.Y. Ogunmola and P.O. Akolade,
2009. “Development of a Photovoltaic Powered
G Daily radiation, MJ Forced Convection Solar Dryer”, Advanced
Materials Research, 62-64: 543-548.
R1 Heat loss coefficient by convection & radiation 9. Bala, B.K. and J.L. Woods, 1995. Optimization of
from plate to cover, m2.K/ W a Natural Convection Solar Drying System,
R2 Convective heat loss coefficient from cover to Energy, 2(4): 285-294.
ambient, m2.K/ W 10. Bolaji, B.O. and A.P. Olalusi, 2008. “Performance
R3 Conductive heat loss coefficient Evaluation of a Mixed-Mode Solar Dryer”, AU. J.
through insulator, m2.K/ W T., 11(4): 225-231.
R4 Convective heat loss coefficient from back of 11. Janjai, S., T. Keawprasert, C. Chaicheet, P.
insulator, m2.K/ W Intawee, B.K. Bala and W. Muhlbaner, 2004.
x Insulator thickness “Simulation Model of a PV-Ventilated System for
a Solar Dryer”, Technical Digest of the
Subscript International PV SEC-14, Bangkok, Thailand,
a Ambient 2004, pp: 861-862.
i Inlet, initial 12. Mumba, J., 1995. “Development of a Photovoltaic
p Plate Powered Forced Circulation Grain Dryer Used in
e Collector the Tropics”, Renewable Energy, 6(7): 885-862.
co Cover 13. Oosthuizen, P.H., 1995. The Design of Indirect
s Sky Solar Rice Dryer, Journal of Engineering for
d Drying chamber, dryer, dried product International Development, 2(4): 20-27.
ave Average 14. Sharma, V.K., A. Colangelo and G. Spagna, 1995.
f Final Experimental Investigation of Different Solar Drier
w Wet product Suitable for Fruits and Vegetables Drying,
u Per unit area Renewable Energy, 6(4): 413-424.
p-coPlate to cover 15. Wisniewski, G., 1997. “Drying of Medicinal Plants
co-aCover to air with Solar Energy Utilization”, Drying Technology,
b-a Back of cover to insulator 15(6-8): 2015-2024.
in Insulation 16. Wisniewski, G. and S.M. Pietruszko, 1997.
REFERENCE “Development of Solar Agricultural Dryers
Combined with PV Modules and Solar Collectors”,
1. Purseglove, J.W., 1998. Tropical Crops International Conference on Solar Energy at High
Monocotyledon, Longman Singapore, Publishers’ Latitude N0 7, Espoo-Otanrmi, FINLANDE, pp:
Limited, pp: 97-117. 215-221.
2. FAOSTAT, 2002. FAO Statistical Databases, 17. Fagbenle, R.O., 1991. “Optimum Collector Tilt
URL:http://www.fao.org, FAO, Rome, Italy. Angles and Average Annual Global Radiation for
3. IITA Publication, 2007. Yam Research for Nigerian Locations”, Nigerian Journal of
Development, 1: 1-10. Renewable Energy, 2: 9-17.
4. Food and Agricultural Organization, FAO, 2001. 18. Fagbenle, R.L., 1992. “Comparative Study of some
Production 1995, Rome, Italy, 50. Simple Models for Global Solar Irradiation in
5. Akissoe, N.H., D.J. Hounhouigan, C. Mestres and Ibadan, Nigeria”, International Journal of Energy
G.M. Nago, 2003. How Blanching and Drying Research, 16: 583-595.
Affect the Colour and Functional Characteristics of 19. Osunde, Z.D. and B.A. Orhevba, 2009. Effect of
Yam (Dioscorea Cayenensis-Rotundata) Flour, Storage Conditions and Storage Period on
Food Chem., 82: 257-264. Nutritional and Other Qualities of Stored Yam
6. Opara, L.U., 1999. Yam Storage in: Bakker- (Dioscorea spp) Tubers, African Journal of Food,
Arekema et al (eds). CIGR Handbook of Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 9(2):
Agricultural Engineering, Agro Processing, 4: 182- 678-690.
1180
J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(8): 1171-1181, 2010
20. Kordylas, J.M., 1990. Processing and Preservation 23. Youcef-Ali, S., H. Messaoudi, J. Desmons, Y.
of Tropical and Sub Tropical Food, MacMilan Abene and M. Le Ray, 2001. “Determination of
Publishers Limited, London and Basingstoke, 49- the Average Coefficient of Internal Moisture
71. Transfer During the Drying of a Thin Bed of
21. Duffie, J.A. and W.A. Beckman, 1980. “Solar Potato Slices”, Journal of Food Engineering, pp:
Engineering of Thermal Processes”, New York, 95-101.
John Wiley and Sons.
22. Holman, J.P., 2002. Heat Transfer, Ninth Edition,
Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited,
pp: 602.
1181