2 views

Uploaded by Raihanul Haque

- LAb 1 (2)
- Osmosis
- Full Text 01
- CHM12-3 homework
- PEX-01-03
- A Simple Method for the Isolation of Lipids From Animals Tissues J. Biol. Chem.-1957-Folch-497-509
- Water Potential
- 24 Appendix Viii
- Chloride Migration Coefficient
- Activity No.30A
- Operating Instructions and Maintain Edi
- Enriquez Physio Ex1-Act3
- Ultrasonic Investigation and Molecular Interaction Studies in Substitutedoxoimidazoline Drugs Solution at Different Conc
- The Control of Conditioning Atmospheres by Saturated Salt Solutions
- G 44 sal 3.5 %
- The Rate of Solution of Solid Substances in Their Own Solution
- tar 1 - water lesson plan
- 9701_s02_ir_5
- PETSOC-67-02-01
- Modelado de La Transferencia de Masa Durante La Deshidratación Osmótica de Manzanas

You are on page 1of 10

www.elsevier.com/locate/jfoodeng

during osmotic dehydration of carrot cubes

Bahadur Singh

a

a,*

Department of Food Technology, Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering and Technology, Longowal 148 106 (Sangrur), India

b

Department of Processing and Food Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141 004, India

Received 9 February 2005; received in revised form 14 September 2005; accepted 17 January 2006

Available online 11 May 2006

Abstract

The mass transfer kinetics during osmotic dehydration of carrot cubes in ternary solution of sucrose, NaCl salt and water were studied. The osmotic solution concentrations used were 50 B + 5% salt (w/v), 50 B + 10% salt (w/v) and 50 B + 15% salt (w/v), osmotic

solution temperature used were 35, 45 and 55C, fruit to solution ratios 1:4, 1:5 and 1:6 and the process duration varied from 0 to

240 min. Among the models applied, Azuara model well represented the experimental data for water loss; whereas solute gain was well

represented by the Magee model. Eective diusivity of water as well as solute was estimated using the analytical solution of Ficks law of

diusion and iterative technique, which was conducted by a simple computer program, was used to solve the equation with rst six terms.

For above conditions of osmotic dehydration, the eective diusivity of water was found to be in the ranged between 1.594 109 and

2.078 109 m2/s and that of solute between 1.175 109 and 1.645 109 m2/s.

2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Osmotic dehydration; Eective diusivity; Mass transfer kinetics; Carrots

1. Introduction

Carrot (Daucus carota L.) is known for its nutrient contents viz. carotene and carotenoids besides appreciable

amounts of vitamins B1, B2, B6 and B12 vitamins and minerals. The various methods of extending shelf life are fermenting, pickling, canning or cold storage freeze drying

etc. (Mudahar, Toledo, Floros, & Jen, 1989). Out of these

methods, freeze-drying produces the highest quality food

products but it is the expensive method of preservation.

So there is a need for simple and inexpensive alternate process, which are not only energy intensive and low capital

investment but oer a way to make available this low cost,

highly perishable and valuable crop available for the

regions away from production zones and also during o

season. The osmotic dehydration is one of these new methods (Shi & Maguer, 2002).

*

Corresponding author.

E-mail address: bshathan@yahoo.com (B. Singh).

0260-8774/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.074

partially removed from the cellular materials when these

are placed in a concentrated solution of soluble solute.

Osmotic dehydration, which is eective even at ambient

temperature and saves the color, avor and texture of food

from heat, is used as a pre-treatment to improve the nutritional, sensorial and functional properties of food. The

inuence of the main process variables, such as concentration and composition of osmotic solution, temperature,

immersion time, pre-treatments, agitation, nature of food

and its geometry, solution to sample ratio, on the mass

transfer mechanism and product quality have been studied

extensively (Kaymak-Ertekin & Sultanoglu, 2000; Rastogi

& Raghavarao, 1994).

Numerous studies have been carried out to better understand the internal mass transfer occurring during osmotic

dehydration of foods and modeled the mechanism of the

process (Azuara, Cortes, Garcia, & Beristain, 1992;

Kaymak-Ertekin & Sultanoglu, 2000; Magee, Murphy, &

Hassaballah, 1983). A number of investigators used Ficks

472

Nomenclature

M

M0

Me

qn

De

L

t

C

C0

Ce

m

initial moisture content % dry basis (db) in the

carrot cubes

moisture content at equilibrium of osmotic

dehydration process

non-zero positive roots of the equation tan

qn = aqn

eective diusivity (m2/s)

half of the slab thickness (m)

time (min)

total amount of solute in the fruit at time t (g of

solute/100 g of fresh fruit)

initial solute concentration in the fruit (g of solute/100 g of fresh fruit),

amount of solute in the fruit at equilibrium (g of

solute/100 g of fresh fruit)

partition coecient

unsteady state law of diusion to estimate the water or solute diusivity, simulating the experiments with boundary

conditions to overcome the assumptions involved in Ficks

law (Rastogi & Raghavarao, 1994). However, the comparison of water and solute diusivities during dehydration is

dicult because of variation in food composition and

physical structure and also due to the dierent methods

and models employed to estimate diusivity.

The unsteady state Fickian diusion model can be

applied to describe the osmosis mechanism:

oC

o2 C

D 2

ot

oZ

MR moisture ratio

C S1

W0

Wt

S0

St

n

A

K

C Ce

C0 Ce

1

X

2a1 a

De q2n t

exp

1 a a2 q2n

L2

n1

where

qn are the non-zero positive roots of the equation

tan qn aqn

and

Dierent methods have been employed for the determination of diusivities by solving the Fickian diusion model.

For example, Karathanos, Villalobos, and Saravacos

(1990) and Spiazzi and Mascheroni (1997) used Newton

Raphson method, whereas Kaymak-Ertekin and Sultanoglu (2000) used CrankNicholson method to solve the Fickian diusion model. The dierent analytical solutions of

Eq. (1) have been given by Crank (1975) for several geometries and boundary conditions. With uniform initial water

and solute concentration and the boundary conditions for

negligible external resistance and varying bulk solution

concentration with time, analytical solution of Ficks equation for innite slab geometry being placed in a stirred

solution of limited volume is given below:

M Me

M0 Me

1

X

2a1 a

De q2n t

exp

1 a a2 q2n

L2

n1

volume of carrot cubes (solid) (cm3)

volumetric solute concentration (g of solute/

cm3) in solution at innite time

volumetric solute concentration (g of solute/

cm3) in fruit at innite time

initial weight of fruit (g)

weight of fruit after osmotic dehydration for any

time t (g)

initial weight of solids (dry matter) in the fruit

(g)

weight of solids (dry matter) of fruit after osmotic dehydration for time t (g)

number of data points

model parameter or shape factor

rate constant

VL

VS

C L1

am

VL

VS

C L1 mC S1

only rst term of the analytical solution (Eq. (2) or (3))

of Fickian model assuming that the eect of terms other

than rst one on value of diusivity was non-signicant

(Nieto, Salvatori, Castro, & Alzamora, 1998; Rastogi &

Niranjan, 1998; Rastogi, Eshtiaghi, & Knorr, 1999;

Sharma, Prasad, & Datta, 2003), whereas Medina-Vivanco, Sobral, and Hubinger (2002), Park, Bin, and Brod

(2002), Simal, Bauza de Mirabo, Deya, and Rossello

(1997), Telis, Romanelli, Gabas, and Romero (2003) Telis,

Murari, and Yamashita (2004) calculated diusion coecients by tting the experimental data to rst three to six

terms of the Fourier series equations by using non-linear

regression analysis. This regression analysis gave only a

single value of diusivity for the entire process, which

could not predict the kinetics of entire osmotic dehydration

and moisture of the commodity.

Ade-Omowaye, Rastogi, Angersbach, and Knorr (2002)

and Shi and Maguer (2002) calculated eective diusivities

by slope method, in which it has been reported that logarithm on both sides of Eq. (2) or (3) will result in equation

of a straight line between log(MR) and time. But this

method of applying logarithm disobeys the basic principle

of mathematics, because logarithm could be operated on

the equations having multiplication and P

division only,

and not on the operator like summation ( ).1 However,

the equation between log(MR) and time will be a straight

line if only the rst term of the series have been considered.

The Fourier series having the terms n P 2 will not be

straight line between log(MR) and time. Toledo (2000)

has also mentioned

a method in which logarithm has been

P

operated on ( ).

The objectives of present study were to investigate the

osmotic dehydration kinetics of carrot cubes in the solution

of sucrosesalt mixture having dierent process conditions,

and to develop a computer program to solve Eqs. (2) and

(3) for determination of diusivities.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Experimental procedure

Fresh well graded, carrots were washed and peeled manually. A manually operated vegetable dicer was used to prepare carrot cubes of dimensions 1 cm 1 cm 1 cm. The

cubes were washed with fresh water to remove the carrot

nes adhered to the surface of the fruit. The initial moisture

content of the fresh carrot cubes varied from 91% to 92%

(wet basis).

Osmotic dehydration was done in solution of sucrose

salt mixture having dierent concentrations, solution temperatures, process durations and solution to fruit ratios.

To study the eect of osmotic solution concentration

[50 B + 5% NaCl salt, 50 B + 10% NaCl salt and

50 B + 15% NaCl salt (w/v)] and process duration (0

240 min) on water loss and solute gain during osmotic

dehydration, solution temperature was maintained at

45 C and fruit to solution ratio at 1:5. Similarly, to study

eect of process temperature (35, 45 and 55 C), solution to

fruit ratio was kept as 5 and solution concentration

50 B + 10% NaCl salt (w/v). To study the eect of fruit

to solution ratio (1:4, 1:5 and 1:6), the solution temperature

was maintained at 45C and solution concentration as

50 B + 10% NaCl salt (w/v). To study the eect of each

2

P

n1

would be logMP

logA1 eDq1 t A2 eDq2 t and it would never be equal

2

to logM log

n1 An Dqn t.

473

each condition.

No blanching was done prior to osmosis as it has been

reported to be detrimental to osmotic dehydration process

due to the loss of semi-permeability of cell membrane

(Ponting, 1973) and reduction of b-carotene of carrots

(Bao & Chang, 1994; Kalra, 1990). Stain less steel containers containing osmotic solution were kept in hot water bath

agitating at the rate of 52 oscillations per minute. Agitation

was given during osmosis for reducing the mass transfer

resistance at the surface of the fruit and for good mixing

and close temperature control in osmotic medium (Bongirwar & Sreenivasan, 1977).

The volume of the known weights of carrot cubes was

measured by water displacement method and was related

to its weight by equation by regression analysis.

Volume of carrot cubes

0:993 weight of carrot cubes 0:5211

carrot cubes of known weight were put in to the container.

The cubes from each container were removed after a regular interval of between 0 and 240 min and were immediately rinsed with water to remove the solute adhered to

the fruit surface. The cubes were put in to the measuring

cylinder containing known quantity of water for the measurement of fruit volume. The carrot cubes were spread

on absorbent paper to remove the free water from the outer

surface of the fruit and were put in to the pre-weighed petridish for determination of dry matter by oven method.

Similarly, 10 ml of osmotic solution was put in pre-weighed

petridish for the determination of total solids by oven

method. The salt contents of fruit were determined by

Mohr method.

2.2. Osmotic dehydration parameters

The water loss and solute gain during osmotic dehydration were calculated by the equations given by Ozen, Dock,

Ozdemir, and Floros (2002):

% WL water loss/100 g fresh fruit

W 0 W t S t S 0

100

W0

% SG solute gain/100 g fresh fruit

St S0

100

W0

Mass transfer kinetics during osmotic dehydration of

carrot cubes were modeled according to Penetration model

(Kaleemulah, Kailappan, Varadharaju, & Devdas, 2002),

Magee model (Magee et al., 1983; Rahman & Lamb,

1990) and Azuara equations (Azuara, Beristain, & Garcia,

1992; Kaymak-Ertekin & Sultanoglu, 2000):

474

Penetration model

p

WL % or SG % K t

Magee model

WL % or SG % A K

10

p

t

11

following form:

WLt

b1 tWL1

1 b1 t

12

where WLt is the water loss at time t, WL1 is the corresponding quantity at innite time (i.e., at equilibrium)

and b1 is the constant related to the rate of water diusion

out of the carrots (min1):

t

1

1

t

WLt WL1

b1 WL1

13

were estimated

from the slope and intercept of the plot

t

versus t of Eq. (13).

WLt

Similarly for solute gain, it can be written as

b tSG1

SGt 2

1 b2 t

14

t

1

1

t

SGt SG1

b2 SG1

15

where SGt is the water loss at time t, SG1 is the corresponding quantity at innite time (i.e., at equilibrium)

and b2 is the constant related to the rate of solute diusion

in to the carrots (min1).

The equilibrium solute gain (SG1) and model constant

b

2 were

estimated from the slope and intercept of the plot

t

versus t of Eq. (15).

SGt

2.4. Calculation of eective diusivity of water and solute

The C S1 {Volumetric solute concentration (g of solute/

cm3) in fruit at innite time} can be calculated by the following steps:

1. Azuara et al. (1992) equation was used to determine the

fraction of solute gained at innite time (SG1) from the

slope of Eq. (15).

2. From the graphs plotted between density and solute

gain in g/100 g fresh fruit the density of fruit at innite

time was determined:

q1 Density of fruit at infinite time

slope of line solute gain at infinite time

intercept on density axis

was a linear increase of density of the product.

3. Volumetric solute concentration in fruit at infinite time

SG1

16

C S1

q1

4. Then

t

, volumetric concentration

concentration of solution

of solution at innite time (C L1 is calculated from

1/slope of line.

5. Then the partition coecient (m) was calculated from

the equation as

m

C L1

C S1

17

To calculate rst six roots (qn) roots of Eq. (4) at values

of a other than the values given in Crank (1975), following

equations were developed by regression analysis:

q1 1:571410:8535=expa=0:3112

0:5484=expa=1:416

0:1656=expa=9:726; v2 0:00004

18

q2 4:684530:9929=expa=0:1612

0:4868=expa=0:7189

0:1187=expa=10:52; v2 6:076106

19

q3 7:866820:9542expa=0:1014

0:4707expa=0:3646

0:1331expa=2:005; v2 0:00004

20

q4 11:00351:094expa=0:08243

0:3908expa=0:3832

0:07801expa=2:746; v2 0:00001

q5 14:143861:137expa=0:06799

21

0:3579expa=0:3342

0:06891expa=2:212; v2 9:2789106

q6 17:28581:087expa=0:5424

22

0:3886expa=0:2308

0:08849expa=1:478; v2 7:2032106

23

The eective diusivity of solute and moisture was calculated by using rst six terms of the Fourier series by a computer program in C++ language. Eqs. (2) and (3) were

solved by an iteration technique, in which rstly the value

of diusivity (De) was calculated by using only rst term of

the Fourier series. Then the value of De was incremented in

such a manner that the predicted value of moisture ratio

(or Solute gain ratio) approached the experimental one.

The program was executed only for positive values of Fourier number (F0 = De*t/L2) as reported by Sharma et al.

475

START

L(cm),, n=6, MR or SGR

D=D+(D/1000)

n=1 to 6 in steps of 1 and calculate q to q and calculate MR or SGR

1

& calculated MR or SGR is = 0.000001

No

Yes

as reduced chi-square (v2) and root mean square error

(RMSE) were also used as primary criterion to select the

best equation. As these parameters are not a good criterion

for evaluating non-linear mathematical models, therefore

the percent mean relative deviation modulus (E%) was also

used to select the best equation to account for variation in

the drying curves of the dried samples as recommended by

several authors recently in their drying studies (Azoubel &

Murr, 2004) that indicate the deviation of the observed data

from the predicted line. Therefore, the best model was chosen as one with the highest coecient of correlation, R2; and

the least v2, RMSE and mean relative deviation modulus, E.

The average percent dierence between the experimental

and predicted values mean relative deviation modulus, E,

dened by following equation:

E%

The value of D in

D in m2/sec=D/60,0000

100

n

n

X

Experimental value predicted value

Experimental value

i1

25

END

Fig. 1. Flow diagram of main computer program for determination of

eective diusivity using rst six terms of Fourier series.

The average De for solute and water was calculated from

those obtained at each data point as

Pn

De

24

Davg 1

n

values greater than 10 are indicative of a poor t.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Mass transfer kinetics of carrot cubes during osmotic

dehydration

The eects of various process parameters on kinetics of

water loss and solute gain during osmotic dehydration of

carrot cubes is discussed below.

70

70

60

60

50

50

40

40

50B+10% NaCl (Water loss)

30

30

20

20

10

10

0

0

100

200

carried out to observe the signicance of the eect of various process parameters on water loss and solute gain during osmotic dehydration by the software Statistica (1995).

The relative eect of each process parameter was compared

from the b values corresponding to that parameter. The b

coecients were the regression coecients obtained by rst

standardizing the process variables to a mean of zero and

standard deviation to one. The advantage of using b coefcient (as compared to B coecients which are not standardized) was that the magnitudes of these values that

allowed us to compare the relative contribution of each

independent variable in the prediction of the dependent

variable (Statistica, 1995). Higher the positive value of b

of a parameter; higher would be the eect of that parameter and vice versa. For checking the validity of empirical

models for all the osmotic dehydration processes, regression analysis was performed.

0

300

Time (minutes)

Fig. 2. Eect of osmotic solution concentration and time on water loss

and solute gain at 45 C and fruit to solution of 1:5.

solution

It is clear from Fig. 2 that, water loss and solute gain

was increased with an increase in concentration of salt

from 5% to 15% in 50 B sucrose solution at temperature

of 45 C with solution to fruit ratio of 5. The increase in

water loss and solute gain might be due to the synergistic

eect of both sucrose and salt to develop high osmotic

potential, which was in close agreement with the results

of Sacchetti, Gianotti, and Dalla Rosa (2001). The results

were consistent with the ndings of Ade-Omowaye et al.

(2002) and Ozen et al. (2002) for osmotic dehydration of

red paprika and green pepper in sucrosesalt mixture

solution.

70

60

60

50

50

35C (Water loss)

40

40

30

20

55C (Solute gain)

30

20

10

10

0

0

100

200

0

300

Time (minutes)

Fig. 3. Eect of osmotic solution temperature on water loss and solute

gain at 50 B + 10%NaCl concentration and fruit to solution of 1:5.

and solute gain

It is clear from Fig. 3 that there was an increase in rate

of water loss and relatively stable rate of solute gain with

the increase in solution temperature for osmotic dehydration with sucrosesalt mixture solution. Such results have

also been reported by several researchers working on potatoes (Islam & Flink, 1982; Lenart & Flink, 1984), fruits

(Hawkes & Flink, 1978; Lazarides, Katsanidis, & Nickolaidis, 1995). The eect of increasing solution temperature of

highly concentrated solution might be due to decrease in

viscosity of the osmotic solution resulting in high diusion

rates of both water and solute. Kaymak-Ertekin and

Sultanoglu (2000) and Telis et al. (2003) also reported similar results regarding eect of temperature on osmotic

dehydration kinetics.

3.1.4. Eect of solution to fruit ratio on water loss and

solute gain

There was an increase in water loss and solute gain with

increase of fruit to solution ratio (Fig. 4). This behavior

could be explained on the basis that water loss and solute

gain took longer time to acquire equilibrium during osmotic dehydration in solution of sucrosesalt mixture. Islam

and Flink (1982), Pokharkar and Prasad (1998), Rastogi

and Raghavarao (1995) also reported the increased rate

of water loss and solute gain with increase of solution to

fruit ratio.

70

70

60

60

50

50

40

40

FTSR=1:4 (Water loss)

FTSR=1:5 (Water loss)

30

30

FTSR=1:6 (Solute gain)

20

10

20

70

gain in carrot cubes

Increased water loss and solute gain in carrot cubes were

observed with increase in immersion time for all the process

conditions. Figs. 2 and 3 indicate that both water loss and

solute gain were higher in the initial phase of osmosis than

the later period. This might be due to the reason that with

progression of time, as the moisture moved from the sample to solution and solute from solution to sample, the

osmotic driving potentials for moisture and solute transfer

decreased. Also the rapid loss of water and uptake of solids

near the surface in the beginning might have been resulted

in structural changes leading to compaction of these surface layers and increased mass transfer resistance for water

and solids. Similar results were also reported by Lenart and

Flink (1984) for osmotic dehydration of potatoes. Further,

progressive solid uptake might have been resulted in the

formation of high solids subsurface layer, which interfered

with the concentration gradient across the product

of water and uptake of solids, which was in close agreement

with the results of Hawkes and Flink (1978).

476

10

0

0

100

200

0

300

Time (minutes)

Fig. 4. Eect of solution to fruit to solution ratio (STFR) on water loss

and solute gain at 50 B + 10% NaCl concentration and solution

temperature 45 C.

477

Table 1

Regression summary for water loss and solute gain for osmotic dehydration in solution of sucrosesalt mixture

Water loss

Solute gain

B

b

Intercept

Time

Concentration

Temperature

Ratio

**

0.8899

0.1842

0.1697

0.1201

p-Level

p-Level

0.9316

0.1089

0.1535

0.1410

4.7764

0.03627

0.1213

0.0855

0.7853

0.0007**

3.88E37**

0.0023**

3.23E05**

0.0001**

**

18.9584

0.1613

0.9556

0.4404

3.1169

0.0246

2.77E29**

0.0001**

0.0003**

0.0093**

Signicant at 5% level.

Table 1 indicates that that during osmotic dehydration

of carrot cubes in solution of sucrosesalt mixture; the

eects of all the process parameters were signicant at

5% level of signicance on both water loss and solute gain.

concentration, temperature, time and fruit to solution ratio

has positive eect on water loss during osmotic dehydration. The solution concentration and solution temperature

had more contribution towards water loss as compared to

fruit to solution ratio.

Table 2

Various regression coecients and statistical parameters of Penetration model

Exp. No.

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

Concentration

(50 B + NaCl%)

Temperature (C)

10

10

10

10

10

15

5

45

45

35

55

45

45

45

Ratio

4

5

5

5

6

5

5

Water loss

Solute gain

R2

v2

E%

RMSE

R2

v2

E%

RMSE

4.372

4.494

4.096

5.113

4.834

5.143

3.122

0.81

0.81

0.86

0.66

0.83

0.70

0.82

36.32

35.98

24.23

69.64

37.97

64.72

28.86

9.42

11.41

10.83

14.09

10.79

13.55

11.68

5.71

5.69

4.67

7.96

5.84

7.63

5.09

0.764

0.853

0.759

0.902

0.913

0.894

0.781

0.97

0.98

0.86

0.90

0.96

0.97

0.97

0.23

0.18

0.93

0.85

0.34

0.33

0.25

6.02

4.87

10.49

9.68

6.97

5.65

5.31

0.45

0.41

0.91

0.87

0.55

0.54

0.47

Table 3

Various regression coecients and statistical parameters of Magee model

Exp. No.

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

Concentration

(50 B + NaCl%)

Temperature (C)

10

10

10

10

10

15

5

45

45

35

55

45

45

45

Ratio

4

5

5

5

6

5

5

Water loss

Solute gain

R2

RMSE

E%

R2

RMSE

E%

3.578

3.217

3.071

3.325

3.572

3.449

2.999

5.226

11.615

9.869

16.184

11.952

15.277

10.143

0.95

0.96

0.96

0.94

0.96

0.94

0.96

3.24

2.38

2.26

3.17

2.87

3.30

2.28

6.62

6.23

6.67

6.52

6.89

6.61

6.37

0.701

0.770

0.600

0.714

0.789

0.798

0.690

0.589

0.861

1.477

2.064

1.335

1.000

0.849

0.99

0.99

0.93

0.98

0.99

0.98

0.98

0.27

0.23

0.65

0.40

0.19

0.39

0.30

3.38

2.64

9.08

5.19

2.17

4.57

3.78

Table 4

Various regression coecients and statistical parameters of Azuara model

Exp. No.

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

Concentration

(50 B + NaCl%)

Temperature

(C)

Ratio

10

10

10

10

10

15

5

45

45

35

55

45

45

45

4

5

5

5

6

5

5

Water loss

Solute gain

WL/

b1

R2 of

line

E%

RMSE

R2 of

model

SG/

b2

R2 of

line

E%

RMSE

R2 of

model

63.10

66.22

62.50

70.92

72.99

72.46

61.35

0.024

0.026

0.025

0.032

0.025

0.031

0.025

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

0.99

3.47

4.31

3.71

3.82

4.07

3.25

4.37

1.18

1.67

1.38

1.86

1.68

1.54

1.62

0.99

0.98

0.99

0.98

0.99

0.99

0.98

13.21

15.13

11.76

14.58

15.85

15.62

13.51

0.017

0.016

0.023

0.022

0.017

0.017

0.017

0.98

0.98

0.99

0.88

0.97

0.98

0.98

8.2

7.80

6.55

6.25

7.85

7.10

6.72

0.54

0.54

0.42

0.51

0.69

0.54

0.44

0.96

0.97

0.97

0.97

0.96

0.97

0.98

478

Table 5

Eective diusivity of water and solute for osmotic dehydration of carrot cubes in solution of sucrosesalt mixture

No.

Concentration

Temperature

Ratio

MC/

SG/

(Dw)avg (m2/S)

(Ds)avg (m2/S)

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

10

10

10

10

10

15

5

45

45

35

55

45

45

45

4

5

5

5

6

5

5

5.7678

5.5464

9.0431

8.1116

3.3114

7.9929

7.4831

23.0713

33.2786

45.2153

40.5579

37.8682

39.9646

37.4153

26.6678

24.3318

30.000

20.5804

19.2023

19.3462

29.5913

13.2101

15.1282

11.7641

14.5772

15.8473

15.6252

13.5133

1.5941E09

1.7685E09

1.6798E09

2.0782E09

1.6689E09

1.9772E09

1.7215E09

1.2160E09

1.1747E09

1.6450E09

1.5762E09

1.3077E09

1.2610E09

1.2172E09

2.5

Solute diffusity (x10-9m2/S)

Wa

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5

35C

45C

55C

1

0.5

35C

45C

55C

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

0

20

40

60

80

100

Solute diffusivity (x10-9 m2/s)

3

2.5

2

1.5

50B+5% NaCl

50B+10% NaCl

0.5

50B+15% NaCl

0

20

40

60

10

15

2

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

50B+5% NaCl

50B+10% NaCl

50B+15% NaCl

0

80

5

10

15

Solute gain (g)/100g fresh fruit

2.5

Solute diffusivity (x10-9 m2/s)

Wa

2.5

2

1.5

FTSR=1:4

1

FTSR=1:5

FTSR=1:6

0.5

FTSR=1:4

2

FTSR=1:5

FTSR=1:6

1.5

1

0.5

0

0

20

40

60

Moisture content % (wb)

80

10

15

Fig. 5. Eect of various process parameters on eective diusivity of water and solute during osmotic dehydration of carrot cubes.

In all the experiments of osmotic dehydration, the values

of R2 were low in case of Penetration model. Tables 24

indicate that, the Magee and Azuara model represented

the experimental data of osmotic dehydration with more

accuracy. Further, for water loss, Azuara model had an

excellent t as compared to Magee model due to lower values of E (%). The solute gain is more well represented by

the Magee model as compared to the Azuara model.

Similar results were reported by Kar and Gupta (2001),

Rahman and Lamb (1990). However, Lazarides and

Mavroudis (1996), Pokharkar and Prasad (1998) reported

that Penetration model was a universal model for osmotic

dehydration, but this model did not t to the experimental

data in the present study.

3.4. Eective diusivity of water and solute

Table 5 indicates that the average eective diusivity of

water loss and solute gain varied from 1.594 109 to

1.977 109 m2/s and 1.216 109 to 1.645 109 m2/s,

respectively, during osmotic dehydration in sucrosesalt

mixture solution over the temperature range of 3555C,

concentration from 45 to 55 B and fruit to solution ratio

from 1:4 to 1:6. The calculated eective diusion coecients for solute were analogous to those reported by various researchers. Azoubel and Murr (2004) reported the

eective diusion coecients ranged from 4.3 1010 to

1.77 109 m2/s for water loss and from 4 1011 to

5.4 1010 m2/s for solute gain during osmotic dehydration of Cherry tomato in solution sucrosesalt mixture at

25 C. Telis et al. (2004) reported apparent diusion coecients for water loss and solute gain between 3.35 1010

and 8.58 1010 m2/s during osmotic dehydration of tomatoes in solution of sucrosesalt mixture.

It is clear from Fig. 5 that the eective diusivity for

water as well as solute decreased with decrease of moisture

and increase of solute gain. The eective diusivity

increased for water loss with the increase in temperature,

concentration and fruit to fruit ratio. Highest diusivity

of water during osmotic dehydration of carrot cubes was

observed for solution of 50 B sucrose + 15% salt as compared to 50 B sucrose + 5% salt and 50 B sucrose + 10%

salt concentration. The values were high for fruit to solution

ratio of 1:5 as compared to ratio of 1:4 and 1:6. The values

of eective diusivity were high at 55 C as compared to 35

and 45 C. Similar, to the water diusivity, the solute diusivity was highest at high temperature, concentration and

solution to fruit ratio, i.e., for 55 C, 50 B sucrose + 15%

salt concentrations and solution to fruit ratio of 6.

4. Conclusions

Osmotic dehydration rate increases with the concentration of osmosis solution, process temperature and fruit to

solution ratio. When the predicted values were compared

479

adequately describes the experimental values of process

time for specic for water loss, and Magee model for solute

gain. The obtained water and solute diusion coecients

calculated from Crank (1975) equation were 1.594

1092.078 109 m2/s and 1.175 1091.645 109 m2/s,

respectively.

References

Ade-Omowaye, B. I. O., Rastogi, N. K., Angersbach, A., & Knorr, D.

(2002). Osmotic dehydration behavior of red paprika (Capsicum

annuum L.). Journal of Food Science, 67, 17901796.

Azoubel, P. M., & Murr, F. E. X. (2004). Mass transfer kinetics of osmotic

dehydration of cherry tomato. Journal of Food Engineering, 61,

291295.

Azuara, E., Beristain, C. I., & Garcia, H. S. (1992). Development of a

mathematical model to predict kinetics of osmotic dehydration.

Journal of Food Science and Technology, 29, 239242.

Azuara, E., Cortes, R., Garcia, H. S., & Beristain, C. I. (1992). Kinetic

model for osmotic dehydration and its relationship with Ficks second

law. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 27,

239242.

Bao, B., & Chang, K. C. (1994). Carrot pulp chemical composition, color

and water-holding capacity as aected by blanching. Journal of Food

Science, 59, 11591167.

Bongirwar, D. R., & Sreenivasan, A. (1977). Studies on osmotic

dehydration of banana. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 14,

104113.

Crank, J. (1975). Mathematics of diusion (2nd ed., Vol. 329, pp. 5253).

London: Oxford University Press.

Hawkes, J., & Flink, J. M. (1978). Osmotic concentration of fruit slices

prior to freeze dehydration. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation(2), 265284.

Islam, M. N., & Flink, J. M. (1982). Dehydration of potato. II. Osmotic

concentration and its eect on air drying behaviour. Journal of Food

Technology, 17, 387403.

Kaleemulah, S., Kailappan, R., Varadharaju, N., & Devdas, C. T. (2002).

Mathematical modeling of osmotic dehydration kinetics of papaya.

Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 33,

3034.

Kalra, C. L. (1990). Role of blanching in vegetable processing. Indian Food

Packer(SeptemberOctober), 315.

Kar, A., & Gupta, D. K. (2001). Osmotic dehydration characteristics of

button mushrooms. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 38,

352357.

Karathanos, V. T., Villalobos, G., & Saravacos, G. D. (1990). Comparison of two methods of estimation of eective moisture diusivity from

drying data. Journal of Food Science, 55, 218223, 231.

Kaymak-Ertekin, F., & Sultanoglu, M. (2000). Modeling of mass transfer

during osmotic dehydration of apples. Journal of Food Engineering, 46,

243250.

Lazarides, H. N., & Mavroudis, N. E. (1996). Kinetics of osmotic

dehydration of a highly shrinking vegetable tissue in a salt-free

medium. Journal of Food Engineering, 30, 6174.

Lazarides, H. N., Katsanidis, E., & Nickolaidis, A. (1995). Mass transfer

kinetics during osmotic preconcentration aiming at minimal solid

uptake. Journal of Food Engineering, 25, 151166.

Lenart, A., & Flink, J. M. (1984). Osmotic concentration of potato. I.

Criteria for the end point of the osmosis process. Journal of Food

Technology(19), 4563, II. Criteria for the end point of the osmosis

process. Journal of Food Technology, 19, 6589.

Magee, T. R. A., Murphy, W. R., & Hassaballah, A. A. (1983). Internal

mass transfer during osmotic dehydration of apple slices in sugar

solution. Irish Journal of Food Science and Technology, 7, 147155.

480

Osmotic dehydration of tilapia llets in limited volume of ternary

solutions. Chemical Engineering Journal, 3966, 17.

Mudahar, G. S., Toledo, R. T., Floros, J. D., & Jen, J. J. (1989).

Optimization of carrot dehydration process using response surface

methodology. Journal of Food Science, 54, 714719.

Nieto, A., Salvatori, D., Castro, M. A., & Alzamora, S. M. (1998). Air

drying behaviour of apples as aected by blanching and glucose

impregnation. Journal of Food Engineering, 36, 6379.

Ozen, B. F., Dock, L. L., Ozdemir, M., & Floros, J. D. (2002). Processing

factors aecting the osmotic dehydration of diced green peppers.

International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 37, 497502.

Park, K. J., Bin, A., & Brod, F. P. R. (2002). Drying of pear dAnjou with

and without osmotic dehydration. Journal of Food Engineering, 56,

97103.

Pokharkar, S. M., & Prasad, S. (1998). Mass transfer during osmotic

dehydration of banana slices. Journal of Food Science and Technology,

35, 336338.

Ponting, J. D. (1973). Osmotic dehydration of fruits: Recent modications

and applications. Process Biochemistry, 8, 1822.

Rahman, M. S., & Lamb, J. (1990). Osmotic dehydration of pineapple.

Journal of Food Science and Technology, 27, 150152.

Rastogi, N. K., & Raghavarao, K. S. M. S. (1994). Eect of temperature

and concentration on osmotic dehydration of coconut. Lebensmittel

Wissenschaft und Technologie, 27, 564567.

Rastogi, N. K., & Raghavarao, K. S. M. S. (1995). Kinetics of osmotic

dehydration of coconut. Journal of Food Processing and Engineering,

18, 187197.

Rastogi, N. K., & Niranjan, K. (1998). Enhanced mass transfer during

osmotic dehydration of high pressure treated pineapple. Journal of

Food Science, 63, 508511.

mass transfer during osmotic dehydration of high intensity electrical eld pulse pretreated carrots. Journal of Food Science, 64,

10201023.

Sacchetti, G., Gianotti, A., & Dalla Rosa, M. (2001). Sucrosesalt

combined eect on mass transfer kinetics and product acceptability.

Study on apple osmotic treatment. Journal of Food Engineering, 49,

163173.

Sharma, G. P., Prasad, S., & Datta, A. K. (2003). Drying kinetics of garlic

cloves under convective drying conditions. Journal of Food Science

Technology, 40, 4551.

Shi, J., & Maguer, M. L. (2002). Osmotic dehydration of foods: Mass

transfer and modeling aspects. Food Reviews International, 18,

305335.

Simal, S., Bauza de Mirabo, F., Deya, E., & Rossello, C. (1997). A simple

model to predict mass transfers in dehydration by osmosis. Zeitschrift

fur Lebensmittel-Untersuchung und-Forschung AFood Research and

Technology, 204, 210214.

Spiazzi, E., & Mascheroni, R. (1997). Mass transfer model for osmotic

dehydration of fruits and vegetablesI. Development of simulation

model. Journal of Food Engineering, 34, 387410.

Statistica for Windows 5.0 (1995). Computer program manual. Tulsa:

StatSoft, Inc.

Telis, V. R. N., Murari, R. C. B. D. L., & Yamashita, F. (2004). Diusion

coecients during osmotic dehydration of tomatoes in ternary

solutions. Journal of Food Engineering, 61, 253259.

Telis, V. R. N., Romanelli, P. F., Gabas, A. L., & Romero, J. T. (2003).

Salting kinetics and salt diusivities in farmed Pantanal caiman

muscle. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira, Brasillia, 38, 529535.

Toledo, R. T. (2000). Fundamental of food engineering (2nd ed., pp. 471

472). New Delhi: CBS Publishers and Distributors.

- LAb 1 (2)Uploaded byKhan
- OsmosisUploaded byKomalesh Theeran
- Full Text 01Uploaded bydescob
- CHM12-3 homeworkUploaded byMikhail Hans Collo
- PEX-01-03Uploaded byJamie Rose Pacete
- A Simple Method for the Isolation of Lipids From Animals Tissues J. Biol. Chem.-1957-Folch-497-509Uploaded byMustafaMgharib
- Water PotentialUploaded byMelissa Gaelle Jean
- 24 Appendix ViiiUploaded byGabriela Arenas
- Chloride Migration CoefficientUploaded bySreenath Menon K
- Activity No.30AUploaded byNep Cabangon
- Operating Instructions and Maintain EdiUploaded byPhạm Quang Huy
- Enriquez Physio Ex1-Act3Uploaded byVergel Jigs Enriquez
- Ultrasonic Investigation and Molecular Interaction Studies in Substitutedoxoimidazoline Drugs Solution at Different ConcUploaded bysunaina agarwal
- The Control of Conditioning Atmospheres by Saturated Salt SolutionsUploaded byKamal Thummar
- G 44 sal 3.5 %Uploaded byPaola Roncagliolo Barrera
- The Rate of Solution of Solid Substances in Their Own SolutionUploaded byElias Campuzano
- tar 1 - water lesson planUploaded byapi-270448768
- 9701_s02_ir_5Uploaded byHubbak Khan
- PETSOC-67-02-01Uploaded bysanty222
- Modelado de La Transferencia de Masa Durante La Deshidratación Osmótica de ManzanasUploaded byOliver Ch C
- Optimized Room Temperature Human Cadaveric Tissue Preservation for DNA ExtractionUploaded bySamuel Price
- transport across the cell membraneUploaded byapi-292439032
- Salt reduction guide for the food industry.pdfUploaded byperunikica
- Determinación Creatinina CODEX ALIMENTARIUSUploaded bymarylusita17
- Bacillus Bio InsecticidaUploaded byLucio Rodriguez Sifuentes
- copy of dissolution diffusionUploaded byapi-315570635
- Kayce Cook HCOP English Annotated BibliographyUploaded bykscook
- 215728Uploaded byAlexandra Galan
- 6-PatelUploaded bydaniel
- the structure of membranes1Uploaded byapi-237593339

- Rasel 16.pptUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- 2.2.pptxUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Rasel Sir.pptUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Thermal Processing- CanningUploaded bythink_exergy
- microwave vacuum dryer setup.pdfUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Department of Agricultural and Industrial EngineeringUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- 0c9605286468ca3d04000000.pdfUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Cold Storage Publication08.docUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Blanching of BananaUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Webinar_How_to_handle_revisions (1).pdfUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Essay ExamsUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- RM EvaporatorHandbookUploaded bynjuguna63
- Handbook of Food and Bioprocess Modeling Techniques.pdfUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- MBA Evening Application FormUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Ekc471 NotesUploaded byArka Guha
- University College CorkUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Thermal Processing of FoodUploaded byRaihanul Haque
- Attonirman Book WebUploaded byfrosebond
- Presentation1.pptUploaded byRaihanul Haque

- UPB Sci Bull ShortVUploaded bybogdan176
- PAPQC - Pharmacopia Tests-2013 (1)Uploaded byLeyla Majunda
- Aufbau PrincipleUploaded bycrbruma
- 2012 AMC McPherson Quarter Car Suspension Model Kinematics DynamicsUploaded byEmin Garaca
- Percent Ppm PpbUploaded byJerico Santos
- o Riordan 2015Uploaded byjacs127
- Turbine Protections.pptUploaded byHamid Ariz
- b4 astronomy projectUploaded byapi-343640414
- Calibration Philosophy 1Uploaded byAtul Duggal
- Derivation_for_Spherical_Co-ordinates.pdfUploaded bySuhail Bilal
- Sound Unit TestUploaded byKomalesh Theeran
- TnxTower 6.1 Release NotesUploaded byruayo
- gee7-2011Uploaded byJaved Raoof
- Leonardo Da Vinci's Solution to the Problem of the Pinhole CameraUploaded byGorka Etxague
- PDAUploaded byLasantha Dadallage
- Hans Christian ØrstedUploaded byMichelle Van Amenamen
- m4l26 Lesson 26 The Direct Stiffness Method: Temperature Changes and Fabrication Errors in Truss AnalysisUploaded byVitor Vale
- Linearization Assignment W-Solution saUploaded byFikri Al Ayubi
- Jordan Canonical FormUploaded bymichel_faleiros
- The Effect of Shear and Oil WaUploaded byBruno Handem
- Sirloin Bowl Cutter TCM65A 020314Uploaded byGlazierx Kun
- Reinforced Concrete Design Lecture 03 Strength of BeamsUploaded byglen cristian rivera
- u3LECT- 1 (2)Uploaded bypmahesh268
- James ChadwickUploaded bydthabatah
- Paper ChromatographyUploaded byManohar Pattar
- Syllabus for BoostUploaded bypatilvishal284
- 121205Uploaded bywdavid81
- Boundary Value Problems in Linear ElasticityUploaded byNamsu Park
- Sa20Uploaded byPrIsmatIIcO
- azo 3.PDFUploaded byFernanda Stuani Pereira Furini