Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Fuel Processing Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuproc

Drying kinetics of coarse lignite particles in a fixed bed

Saban Pusat ⁎, Mustafa Tahir Akkoyunlu, Hasan Hüseyin Erdem, Ahmet Dağdaş
Yildiz Technical University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, 34349 Besiktas, Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, experimental works for a Turkish lignite in a fixed bed dryer were carried out. Drying experiments
Received 1 September 2014 were carried out at 70, 100 and 130 °C drying air temperatures, 0.4, 1.7 and 1.1 m/s drying air velocities, 80, 130
Received in revised form 14 October 2014 and 150 mm sample heights and 20, 35 and 50 mm sample sizes. Suitability of twelve thin-layer drying models in
Accepted 19 October 2014
describing the drying kinetics of lignite was evaluated by using statistical analyses. The results show that
Available online 4 November 2014
Wang&Singh model is the best model describing the drying behavior of coarse lignite particles in a fixed bed
Keywords:
dryer, which is different from the literature. Additionally, the effects of drying parameters on model coefficients
Lignite were studied by multiple regression analysis. Finally, apparent diffusion coefficient range was presented.
Drying kinetics © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Fixed bed
Modeling
Turkey

1. Introduction
Today, lignite is one of the cheapest energy sources [1,2]. Lignite
constitutes about 45% of the total coal reserves and are distributed
throughout the world [3]. Low Rank Coals (LRCs) including brown and
subbituminous coals, which are known as having high moisture content
(up to 65%, wet basis), are very important for LRC fired power plants,
gasification and liquefaction [4]. However, high moisture content of
LRC limits its availability in spite of its low cost [5].
Moisture in the coal causes problems in handling, storage, transpor-
tation, milling and burning [4,6]. In coal burning, an important part of
energy is consumed to evaporate moisture inside the coal [5–8]. The
burning of coal with high moisture content creates some problems
such as insufficient combustion and additional exhaust discharge [8].
LRC should be dried to required moisture level to decrease energy losses
and transportation costs, and to increase the quality of the products [9,
10].
Both heat and mass transfer mechanisms are valid in a drying
process. In evaporative drying of the coal, heat is provided to remove
water from the coal particle. In references [5,11] and [12], it is stated
that effective parameters on drying of lignite are temperature, drying
media flow rate, sample thickness, and particle size. Many studies
have been done about lignite drying. In the literature, there are some
attempts to review studies about coal drying such as references [13–19].
The design of a suitable dryer mostly depends on drying kinetics
which is generally determined by the experimental studies. However,
all the different drying conditions can't be investigated experimentally
due to high cost and long time. Therefore, drying models have been
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 212 383 2915.
E-mail address: spusat@yildiz.edu.tr (S. Pusat).
developed for numerous organic and inorganic materials and many
different drying methods. Thin-layer drying models have been used in
various drying operations. They are easy to use, and their results are
sufficiently well [20].
Thin-layer drying models have been adopted to coal drying in a few
studies [21–24]. Pickles et al. investigated microwave drying of a low-
rank sub-bituminous coal [21]. They examined the effects of microwave
power, sample mass and initial moisture content on a 2.45 GHz micro-
wave system. They used ten different thin-layer drying models to
describe drying kinetics of Highvale coal, and Midilli model fitted well
to their experimental results. Tahmasebi et al. studied on drying kinetics
of Chinese lignite in nitrogen fluidized bed, superheated steam fluidized
bed and microwave dryers [22]. They examined the effects of drying
temperature, gas flow rate, particle size and microwave power level.
They used ten different thin-layer drying models to describe drying
kinetics. In nitrogen and superheated steam fluidized bed drying, Midilli
model fitted well, while in microwave drying, Page model fitted well to
the experimental results. Zhao et al. investigated the effects of operating
conditions (air temperature and velocity, frequency, amplitude, particle
size and bed height) on drying of Chinese lignite in a vibration fluidized
bed [23]. They used three different thin-layer drying models to describe
drying kinetics, and Midilli model fitted well to their experimental
results. Stokie et al. compared drying characteristics of Victorian
Brown Coals in superheated steam and air fluidized-bed dryers [24].
They investigated the effects of gas temperature and velocity and
particle size. They used ten thin-layer drying models to describe drying
characteristics of Victorian Brown Coals, and Midilli model fitted well to
their experimental results.
Many different drying methods have been used for coal drying
processes. Some of them are fluidized bed, fixed bed, moving fixed
bed, rotary dryer, flash dryer, microwave dryer, etc. Fixed bed dryers

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.10.023
0378-3820/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 S. Pusat et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213
Table 1
Proximate analysis and heating values of Konya-Ilgın lignite, as received basis.
Total moisture % 52.42
Ash % 8.79
Volatile matter % 21.20
Fixed carbon % 17.59
Lower heating value kcal/kg 2144
Higher heating value kcal/kg 2561
are widely used for different organic and inorganic products [25,26].
Results of a fixed bed dryer can be used to design a dryer such as band
and chamber dryers. Cost of a fixed bed dryers is low, and they have
an easy construction [27]. However, they have some disadvantages
such as inhomogeneous output and long drying time [28].
In the literature, there isn't much study on drying of Turkish coals.
Most of the coal reserves of Turkey are LRC. Therefore, there is a high
need for studies on drying. Modeling the drying of coarse lignite parti-
cles is a necessity to design a suitable dryer. Fluidizing of coarse particles
isn't applicable. Hence, fixed bed dryer is an important solution for
coarse particle drying. In the experimental studies, a fixed bed dryer
was used to analyze and evaluate the results for a possible dryer
(band, chamber, etc.) design.
In this study, experiments were carried out at 70, 100 and 130 °C
drying air temperatures, 0.4, 1.7 and 1.1 m/s drying air velocities, 80,
130 and 150 mm sample heights and 20, 35 and 50 mm sample sizes.
The aim of this study is to adopt twelve thin-layer drying models to
the experimental results of Konya-Ilgın lignite dried in a fixed bed
dryer. Therefore, a model would be developed for the range of the
experimental conditions taken into consideration in this study.
2. Materials and methods
A Turkish lignite, Konya-Ilgın lignite, was used in the experimental
works. The proximate analysis and heating values of the lignite are
shown in Table 1. As can be seen, Konya-Ilgın lignite is a LRC with a
very low heating value.
2.1. Experimental set-up and procedure
Fig. 1 shows a schematic diagram of the fixed bed dryer used in the
experimental studies. The airflow rate is adjusted by the fan speed
control and airflow rate is measured by an orifice type flowmeter with
an accuracy of 1%. The air is heated using six 1.5 kW electrical heaters
Fig. 1. A schematic view of the experimental setup.
209
Table 2
Experimental procedure.
1 Turn on the system with no lignite in the bed and allow it to reach steady-state
at desired experimental conditions.
2 Once air temperature and velocity at steady-state, turn off the system and load
the lignite samples in to the bed.
3 Turn on the system again and start the experiment. In every 10 min, take a
lignite sample from the upper side of the bed and load them into crucibles.
4 At the end of the experiment, turn off the system, and place all the crucibles
into oven and measure the moisture of the removed lignite samples.
5 Analyze the results.
placed inside the heater box with equal distances. The fixed bed drying
chamber temperature is adjusted by the heater power control. The air
flow is regulated by a flow straightener just below the drying chamber,
and the lignite samples are placed on the perforated plate. Locations of
the temperature (Ts), humidity (Hs) and pressure (Ps) measurements
are shown in the figure. A digital balance (Sartorius — CPA1003S-0CE)
is used in weight measurements. Its measurement range is 0–1000 g
and accuracy is 1 mg.
The aim of the experiments is to understand the effects of different
parameters on fixed bed drying and to model the drying process. In
this study, the effects of air temperature (T) and velocity (V), sample
size (S) and height (H) on drying were investigated. Drying experi-
ments were carried out at 70, 100 and 130 °C drying air temperatures,
0.4, 1.7 and 1.1 m/s drying air velocities, 80, 130 and 150 mm sample
heights and 20, 35 and 50 mm sample sizes.
Experimental procedure used in the experiments is presented in
Table 2. The drying experiments were performed with inlet air temper-
ature ranging from 70 to 130 °C. One sample of the lignite was removed
and collected from the fixed bed periodically during the experiments
and the lignite moisture content was measured.
2.2. Kinetics modeling
In all experiments moisture content values were calculated using
Eq. (1).
W0 −Wt
M¼ ð1Þ
W0
where M is the moisture content (g moisture/g wet coal), W0 is the
initial sample weight, and Wt is the dry coal weight at time intervals.
210 S. Pusat et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213

In general, moisture ratio (MR) was calculated using Eq. (2). Table 4
Results of statistical analysis for mathematical models fitted to fixed bed lignite drying
Mt −Me experiments.
MR ¼ ð2Þ
M0 −Me # Drying parameters Drying models

S H V T Page Modified Page Wang&Singh

where Mt is the moisture at time t, Me is the equilibrium moisture
2 2
mm mm m/s °C SEE RSS R SEE RSS R SEE RSS R2
content at the end of the drying process, and M0 is the initial moisture
content. In this study, the equilibrium moisture content was near zero 1 20 80 0.4 70 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.02 0.98
at the end of the drying process. Therefore, for simplicity, the moisture 2 20 80 0.4 100 0.08 0.06 0.96 0.08 0.06 0.96 0.07 0.05 0.97
3 20 80 0.4 100 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.08 0.05 0.95
ratio (MR) was calculated using Eq. (3) as in references [22,29].
4 20 80 0.4 130 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.08 0.04 0.97
5 20 80 0.7 130 0.02 0.00 1.00 0.02 0.00 1.00 0.04 0.01 0.99
Mt 6 20 80 0.7 100 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.00 0.99
MR ¼ ð3Þ
M0 7 20 80 1.1 100 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.05 0.01 0.99
8 20 80 1.1 130 0.05 0.01 0.98 0.05 0.01 0.98 0.03 0.00 0.99
9 20 150 0.4 130 0.05 0.02 0.98 0.05 0.02 0.98 0.08 0.06 0.96
For the best drying model selection, drying curves were fitted to
10 35 80 0.4 100 0.06 0.03 0.97 0.06 0.03 0.97 0.06 0.03 0.97
the well-known mathematical thin-layer drying models by using 11 35 80 0.4 130 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99
non-linear regression analyses. Drying models used in this study are 12 35 130 0.4 130 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.01 0.99 0.06 0.04 0.97
presented in Table 3. 13 35 80 0.4 100 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.04 0.01 0.99 0.03 0.01 0.99
14 35 80 0.4 70 0.04 0.02 0.97 0.04 0.02 0.97 0.06 0.04 0.95
The coefficient of determination (R2) is one of the primary criterions
15 35 130 0.4 100 0.07 0.05 0.96 0.07 0.05 0.96 0.05 0.02 0.98
for selecting the best model to define the fixed bed drying curves. Other 16 35 130 0.4 70 0.03 0.02 0.99 0.03 0.02 0.99 0.03 0.01 0.99
statistical parameters used in the analyses are the residual sum of 17 35 150 0.4 130 0.06 0.04 0.97 0.06 0.04 0.97 0.04 0.02 0.99
square (RSS) and the standard error of the estimate (SEE). These param- 18 35 80 0.7 130 0.05 0.01 0.97 0.05 0.01 0.97 0.05 0.01 0.97
eters can be calculated using Eqs. (4)–(5). The statistical analyses are 19 50 150 0.4 100 0.04 0.01 0.98 0.04 0.01 0.98 0.03 0.01 0.99
20 50 150 0.7 100 0.03 0.01 0.96 0.03 0.01 0.96 0.03 0.00 0.98
carried out using DataFit software.
21 50 150 0.7 130 0.03 0.01 0.98 0.03 0.01 0.98 0.03 0.01 0.98
22 50 150 0.4 130 0.06 0.03 0.98 0.06 0.03 0.98 0.02 0.00 1.00
23 50 150 0.4 130 0.06 0.03 0.96 0.06 0.03 0.96 0.04 0.01 0.98
Xn  2
RSS ¼ i¼1
MR exp;i −MRpre;i ð4Þ

the R2, RSS and SEE values were between 0.95 and 1.00, 0.00 and 0.06
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
uX 2 and 0.02 and 0.08, respectively. When the R2 values were compared,
u MR exp;i −MRpre;i
t Page, Modified Page and Wang&Singh models were ranked first for 8,
SEE ¼ ð5Þ
n 3 and 12 times, respectively. Therefore, the Wang&Singh model was
selected as the best model to represent the drying behavior of Konya-
where MRexp,i is the ith measured moisture ratio, MRpre,i is the ith Ilgın lignite in fixed bed.
predicted moisture ratio and n is the number of observations. Drying coefficients of Wang&Singh model are presented in Table 5.
The value of a was in the range of (− 2.74E− 02) –(− 1.73E− 03),
3. Results and discussion while the value of b was in the range of (−2.04E− 05)–(1.78E− 04).
Dependency between drying parameters and coefficients of Wang&Singh
Fixed bed lignite drying experiments were done at different condi-
tions and moisture content data were used to calculate moisture ratio.
Some experiments are at the same conditions due to checking the
Table 5
repeatability of the experimental set-up. Then, results were fitted to
Drying coefficients of Wang&Singh model.
twelve different thin-layer drying models. Three of the drying models
were fitted well to the results of all the experiments, Page, Modified # Drying parameters Wang&Singh model coefficients
Page and Wang&Singh drying models. However, other models didn't S H V T a b
fit to the results of the experiments. Therefore, the selection of the mm mm m/s °C – –
best model was done among the three drying models.
1 20 80 0.4 70 −8.27E−03 1.95E−05
The comparison criteria used to evaluate goodness of fit for fixed bed 2 20 80 0.4 100 −1.32E−02 3.98E−05
drying of lignite at different experiments are shown in Table 4. Generally 3 20 80 0.4 100 −1.19E−02 2.75E−05
4 20 80 0.4 130 −1.17E−02 −2.04E−05
5 20 80 0.7 130 −2.52E−02 1.35E−04
Table 3 6 20 80 0.7 100 −1.53E−02 4.13E−05
Mathematical thin-layer drying models used in this study. 7 20 80 1.1 100 −2.63E−02 1.78E−04
8 20 80 1.1 130 −2.74E−02 8.13E−05
# Model name Model equation References
9 20 150 0.4 130 −1.17E−02 2.23E−05
1 Newton MR = exp(−kt) [30] 10 35 80 0.4 100 −8.21E−03 2.39E−06
2 Page MR = exp(−ktn) [31] 11 35 80 0.4 130 −1.05E−02 2.84E−06
3 Modified Page MR = exp(−(kt)n) [32] 12 35 130 0.4 130 −1.28E−02 3.81E−05
4 Henderson&Pabis MR = aexp(−kt) [33] 13 35 80 0.4 100 −6.91E−03 2.96E−07
5 Geometric MR = at-n [34] 14 35 80 0.4 70 −3.96E−03 −2.18E−06
6 Wang&Singh MR = 1 + at + bt2 [35] 15 35 130 0.4 100 −4.92E−03 −6.23E−07
7 Two term exponential MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−kat) [36] 16 35 130 0.4 70 −3.30E−03 1.32E−06
8 Logarithmic MR = a0 + aexp(−kt) [34] 17 35 150 0.4 130 −4.63E−03 −5.49E−06
9 Diffusion approach MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−kbt) [37] 18 35 80 0.7 130 −1.52E−02 7.83E−05
10 Verma MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−gt) [38] 19 50 150 0.4 100 −4.92E−03 5.65E−06
11 Two term MR = a1exp(−k1t) + a2exp(−k2t) [39] 20 50 150 0.7 100 −6.14E−03 2.26E−05
12 Midilli MR = aexp(−ktn) + bt [40] 21 50 150 0.7 130 −6.17E−03 1.44E−05
t is the time. 22 50 150 0.4 130 −4.80E−03 −8.59E−06
k, k1, k2, n, a, a0, a1, a2, b and g are model constants. 23 50 150 0.4 130 −1.73E−03 −1.95E−05
 S. Pusat et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213
Fig. 2. Variations of the experimental and the predicted moisture ratios by the Wang&Singh
drying model at different drying temperatures.
model was not observed explicitly. However, the following results can
be deduced simply:
• Coefficient a increases with increasing bed height and particle size,
while coefficient b increases with increasing air temperature and
velocity.
• Coefficient a decreases with increasing air temperature and velocity,
while coefficient b decreases with increasing bed height and particle
size.
Comparisons of the experimental and the predicted moisture ratios
at different air temperatures and velocities, sample sizes and heights are
presented in Figs. 2 and 5, respectively. As can be seen in Figs. 2 and 3,
decreasing drying air temperature and velocity resulted in lower drying
rate and longer drying time. Internal heat and mass transfer are better
for the smaller particles, and the smaller particles have larger heat and
mass transfer surface area. Therefore, decreasing particle size resulted
in higher drying rate and shorter drying time (Fig. 4). As can be seen
in Fig. 5, decreasing sample height resulted in higher drying rate and
shorter drying time.
In Fig. 6, the change of moisture ratio with drying rate is presented.
As expected, drying rate is higher at higher temperatures, and drying
rate is lower at low temperatures. For the case in Fig. 6, drying rates
are 0.27, 0.47 and 0.70 g/g·min at 70, 100 and 130 °C, respectively.
Drying rate at 130 °C is higher than drying rate at 100 °C by 50%, and
drying rate at 100 °C is higher than drying rate at 70 °C by 75%. As can
be seen from the figure, constant rate drying stage did not occur.
Konya-Ilgın lignite just has a long falling rate stage which means that
internal diffusion is the most dominant mechanism.
Fig. 3. Variations of the experimental and the predicted moisture ratios by the Wang&Singh
drying model at different drying air velocities.
211
Fig. 4. Variations of the experimental and the predicted moisture ratios by the
Wang&Singh drying model at different particle sizes.
Further regressions have been done to account for the effect of
drying air temperature and velocity, sample size and height on
Wang&Singh model coefficients. The model coefficients obtained after
these regressions are as follows (Eqs. (6) and (7), and Table 6):
2 2 2 2 2
a ¼ c1 þ c2S þ c3S þ c4H þ c5H þ c6V þ c7V þ c8T þ c9T ; R ¼ 0:93
ð6Þ
2 2 2 2 2
b ¼ d1 þ d2S þ d3S þ d4H þ d5H þ d6V þ d7V þ d8T þ d9T ; R ¼ 0:73:
ð7Þ
R2 value for a is satisfactory but it is low for b. This is due to that
dependency of coefficient b to drying conditions is very low. In general,
increasing of number of independent variables makes worse the regres-
sion. These equations can be used to predict the moisture ratio of
Konya-Ilgın lignite within the range of drying conditions taken into con-
sideration in this study.
Apparent diffusion coefficient can be calculated by using the proce-
dure in reference [41]. Apparent diffusion coefficient includes both
internal and external mass transfer effects. For this study, the values
of apparent diffusion coefficient vary between 4.99E− 08 and
1.80E−06 m2/s. The change of apparent diffusion constant for different
drying conditions is the same as drying rate. Apparent diffusion coeffi-
cient increases with increasing air temperature and velocity. In
addition, apparent diffusion coefficient decreases with increasing bed
height and particle size. These results are as expected. Tahmasebi et al.
[22] found apparent diffusion coefficient in the range of 10− 10 m2/s
Fig. 5. Variations of the experimental and the predicted moisture ratios by the
Wang&Singh drying model at different sample heights.
212 S. Pusat et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213

Acknowledgment

This work is supported in part by the Yildiz Technical University

Research Projects Fund under grants 2012-06-01-DOP01 and 2014-
06-01-DOP02, and the Scientific and Technological Research Council of
Turkey, under the project number 1120278.

References

[1] K. Kavouridis, Lignite industry in Greece within a world context: mining, energy
supply and environment, Energy Policy 36 (2008) 1257–1272.
[2] Z. Kozłowski, Present situation and prospects for lignite in the Polish power gener-
ation industry, Appl. Energy 74 (2003) 323–329.
[3] D. Jeon, T. Kang, H. Kim, S. Lee, S. Kim, Investigation of drying characteristics of low
rank coal of bubbling fluidization through experiment using lab scale, Sci. China
Technol. Sci. 54 (7) (2011) 1680–1683.
[4] L. Xianchun, S. Hui, W. Qi, M. Chatphol, W. Terry, Y. Jianglong, Experimental study
Fig. 6. Drying rate — moisture ratio change. on drying and moisture re-adsorption kinetics of an Indonesian low rank coal, J.
Environ. Sci. Suppl. 21 (1) (2009) 127–130.
[5] A. Tahmasebi, J. Yu, X. Li, C. Meesri, Experimental study on microwave drying of
which is higher than this study. This is mainly due to the superiority of
Chinese and Indonesian low-rank coals, Fuel Process. Technol. 92 (2011)
fluidized bed to fixed bed in terms of heat and mass transfer. 1821–1829.
Fixed bed drying is similar to fluidized bed drying. Therefore, model- [6] Z. Pakowski, R. Adamski, M. Kokocinska, S. Kwapisz, Generalized desorption equilib-
ing studies in the literature similar to this study can be compared. rium equation of lignite in a wide temperature and moisture content range, Fuel 90
(2011) 3330–3335.
Tahmasebi et al., Zhao et al. and Stokie et al. modeled their results of [7] D. Ross, S. Doguparthy, D. Huynh, M. Mcintosh, Pressurised flash drying of Yallourn
the experimental studies in nitrogen/steam, air and steam/air fluidized lignite, Fuel 84 (2005) 47–52.
bed dryers, respectively [22–24]. Midilli model fitted well to their [8] Y. Shi, J. Li, X. Li, J. Wu, M. Wu, S. Li, H. Wang, G. Zhao, F. Yin, Experimental study on
super-heated steam drying of lignite, Adv. Mater. Res. 347–353 (2012) 3077–3082.
results. However, in this study, Wang&Singh model fitted well to the [9] Z. Chen, P. Agarwal, J. Agnew, Steam drying of coal. Part 2. Modeling the operation of
results. This difference may be explained by the following reasons: a fluidized bed drying unit, Fuel 80 (2001) 209–223.
[10] E. Kakaras, P. Ahladas, S. Syrmopoulos, Computer simulation studies for the integra-
tion of an external dryer into a Greek lignite-fired power plant, Fuel 81 (2002)
• The used coals in the experimental studies are different. Hence, they 583–593.
have different drying characteristics. [11] C.S. Kannan, P.P. Thomas, Y.B.G. Varma, Drying of solids in fluidized beds, Ind. Eng.
• Top particle sizes are very small compared to this study. Chem. Res. 34 (1995) 3068–3077.
[12] N.C. Diamond, T.R.A. Magee, G. McKay, The effect of temperature and particle size on
• They performed most of the experiments at higher temperatures than the fluid bed drying of Northern Ireland lignite, Fuel 69 (1990) 189–193.
this study. [13] W.G. Willson, D. Walsh, W. (Bill)irwinc, Overview of Low-Rank Coal (LRC) drying,
• In fixed bed, heat and mass transfer rates are different than fluidized Coal Prep. 18 (1997) 1–15.
[14] H. Katalambula, R. Gupta, Low-grade coals: a review of some prospective upgrading
bed.
technologies, Energy Fuel 23 (2009) 3392–3405.
• Moisture distribution in fixed bed is very poor. [15] M. Karthikeyan, W. Zhonghu, A.S. Mujumdar, Low-rank coal drying technologies—
• In this case, constant rate drying stage was not seen for Konya-Ilgın current status and new developments, Dry. Technol. 27 (2009) 403–415.
lignite. [16] X. Yang, Y. Zhao, Z. Luo, Z. Chen, C. Duan, S. Song, Brown coal drying processes—
a review, International Conference on Materials for Renewable Energy &
Environment (ICMREE) (2011) Shanghai, 2011.
[17] H. Osman, S.V. Jangam, J.D. Lease, A.S. Mujumdar, Drying of low-rank coal (LRC), A
Review of Recent Patents and Innovations, Minerals, Metals and Materials Technology
4. Conclusion Centre (M3TC) (2011) Singapore, 2011.
[18] S.V. Jangam, M. Karthikeyan, A.S. Mujumdar, A critical assessment of industrial coal
drying technologies: role of energy, emissions, risk and sustainability, Dry. Technol.
In this study, drying kinetics of a Turkish lignite was investigated by 29 (4) (2011) 395–407.
the experimental works and using a non-linear regression and multiple [19] J. Yu, A. Tahmasebi, Y. Han, F. Yin, X. Li, A review on water in low rank coals: the
regression analyses. Twelve thin-layer drying models were adopted to existence, interaction with coal structure and effects on coal utilization, Fuel Process.
Technol. 106 (2013) 9–20.
the experimental results, and the results of the models were evaluated
[20] Z. Erbay, F. Icier, A review of thin layer drying of foods: theory, modeling, and
by statistical analyses. Wang&Singh model best described the drying experimental results, Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 50 (5) (2010) 441–464.
kinetics of Konya-Ilgın lignite at different drying conditions (air temper- [21] C.A. Pickles, F. Gao, S. Kelebek, Microwave drying of a low-rank sub-bituminous coal,
ature and velocity, sample size and height) in a fixed bed dryer. This Miner. Eng. 62 (2014) 31–42.
[22] A. Tahmasebi, J. Yu, Y. Han, H. Zhao, S. Bhattacharya, A kinetic study of microwave
result is different from the studies in the literature on fluidized bed and fluidized-bed drying of a Chinese lignite, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 92 (1) (2014)
drying, which is mainly due to the drying method applied, drying condi- 54–65.
tions and the coals used. As expected, the calculated apparent diffusion [23] P. Zhao, Y. Zhao, Z. Luo, Z. Chen, C. Duan, S. Song, Effect of operating conditions on
drying of Chinese lignite in a vibration fluidized bed, Fuel Process. Technol. 128
coefficient is lower than the values for fluidized bed. (2014) 257–264.
[24] D. Stokie, M.W. Woo, S. Bhattacharya, Comparison of superheated steam and air
fluidized-bed drying characteristics of Victorian brown coals, Energy Fuel 27 (11)
Table 6 (2013) 6598–6606.
Coefficients for Wang&Singh drying model coefficients ‘a’ and ‘b’ at Eqs. (6) and (7). [25] F. Roma'n, V. Strahl-Schafer, O. Hensel, Improvement of air distribution in a fixed-
bed dryer using computational fluid dynamics, Biosyst. Eng. 112 (2012) 359–369.
Coefficients for Wang&Singh Coefficients for Wang&Singh [26] K. Hassan, G. Rajender, Low-grade coals: a review of some prospective upgrading
model coefficients ‘a’ model coefficients ‘b’ technologies, Energy Fuel 23 (2009) 3392–3405.
[27] A.M. Noetzel, Untersuchung zum Stand der Technik in der Kräutertrocknung kleiner
c1 3.26E−02 d1 −2.97E−04 bis mittelgroßer Anbaubetriebe in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland(Master thesis)
c2 7.29E−04 d2 −9.67E−07 University of Kassel, Witzenhausen, Germany, 2006.
c3 −7.14E−06 d3 −4.20E−09 [28] J. Adamiec, W. Kamin'ski, A.S. Markowski, C. Strumiłło, Drying of biotechnological
c4 −6.68E−04 d4 3.05E−06 products, in: A.S. Mujumdar (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial Drying, third ed.Taylor
c5 3.18E−06 d5 −1.36E−08 & Francis Group, New York, 2006.
c6 −1.20E−02 d6 2.77E−04 [29] H.J. Zheng, S.Y. Zhang, X. Guo, J.F. Lu, A.X. Dong, W.X. Deng, W.J. Tang, M.H. Zhao,
c7 −4.37E−03 d7 −8.41E−05 T. Jin, An experimental study on the drying kinetics of lignite in high tempera-
c8 −2.54E−04 d8 1.66E−06 ture nitrogen atmosphere, Fuel Process. Technol. 126 (2014) 259–265.
[30] J.R. O'Callaghan, D.J. Menzies, P.H. Bailey, Digital simulation of agricultural dryer
c9 7.19E−07 d9 −7.68E−09
performance, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 16 (3) (1971) 223–244.
 S. Pusat et al. / Fuel Processing Technology 130 (2015) 208–213
[31] Y.C. Agarwal, R.P. Singh, Thin-layer Drying Studies on Short-grain Rice, ASAE Paper,
771977. 3531 (St. Joseph, MI, USA).
[32] L.M. Diamante, P.A. Munro, Mathematical modelling of the thin layer solar drying of
sweet potato slices, Sol. Energy 51 (1993) 271–276.
[33] M.S. Chhinman, Evaluation of selected mathematical models for describing thin
layer drying of in-shell pecans, Trans. ASAE 27 (1984) 610–615.
[34] P.K. Chandra, R.P. Singh, Applied Numerical Methods for Food and Agricultural
Engineers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995. 163–167.
[35] C.Y. Wang, R.P. Singh, A Single Layer Drying Equation for Rough Rice, ASAE Paper,
781978. 3001 (St. Joseph, MI, USA).
[36] Y.I. Sharaf-Elden, J.L. Blaisdell, M.Y. Hamdy, A model of ear corn drying, Trans. ASAE
5 (1980) 1261–1265.
213
[37] A.S. Kassem, Comparative studies on thin layer drying models for wheat, Proceedings
of the 13th International Congress on Agricultural Engineering 6, 1998 (Morocco).
[38] L.R. Verma, R.A. Bucklin, J.B. Endan, F.T. Wratten, Effects of drying air parameters on
rice drying models, Trans. ASAE (1985) 296–301.
[39] S.M. Henderson, Progress in developing the thin-layer drying equation, Trans. ASAE
17 (1974) 1167–1168.
[40] A. Midilli, H. Küçük, Z. Yapar, A new model for single layer drying, Dry. Technol. 20
(7) (2002) 1503–1513.
[41] O. Hacıhafızoglu, A. Cihan, K. Kahvenci, Mathematical modeling of drying of thin
layer rough rice, Food Bioprod. Process. 86 (2008) 268–275.