Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

Solar drying of Stevia (Rebaudiana Bertoni) leaves using direct and indirect T
technologies
⁎
Margarita Castillo Télleza, , Isaac Pilatowsky Figueroab, Beatríz Castillo Téllezc,
Erick C. López Vidañab, Anabel López Ortizb
a
Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Autónoma de Campeche, Campus V, predio s/n por Av. Humberto Lanz Cárdenas y Unidad Habitacional Ecológica ambiental, Col. Ex
Hacienda Kalá, C.P. 24085, San Francisco de Campeche, Campeche, Mexico
b
Instituto de Energías Renovables, Cerrada Xochicalco s/n Colonia Centro, 62580 Temixco, Morelos, México
c
Centro Universitario De Tonalá, UdeG, Av. Nuevo Periférico #555 ejido San Jose Tatepozco, Cp. 45425 Tonalá, Jalisco, Mexico

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Stevia plant has acquired great importance and has increased its consumption in the world, because it is a
Natural sweetener great natural sweetener, up to 300 times than sugar. Its higher sweetening content occurs mainly in dry leaves,
Stevia dehydration being important to analyze the drying process. In a previous study they were not found works related to solar
Dried stevia leaves drying of the Stevia. In this work, experimental dehydration of the Stevia leaves using direct (cabinet type)
Stevia solar drying
operating at natural and forced convection and indirect (air heated by a solar water heating system) as solar
Direct and indirect solar dryers
drying technologies is presented. The experimental results demonstrated the technical feasibility for the solar
drying of Stevia leaves. Indirect solar drying was observed to have superior conditions, moderate drying times,
better control of the operating conditions and greater protection against the effects of temperature compared
with direct exposure to solar radiation, drying kinetics were highly similar between samples, and equilibrium
was reached between 240 min and 270 min. Colorimetric analyses indicate that the effect of temperature is the
most significant parameter on tone degradation. Integrating the shadow-mesh cover in the direct solar dryer
improved the final quality of the leaves, reduced the discoloration effect, with the mesh-shadow cover, natural
convection yielded a drying time of 360 min and forced convection had a drying time between 550 min and
600 min. Without mesh, these values were 250 min and 300 min, respectively. The Weibull and Two-term ex-
ponential models for direct solar drying and Weibull model for indirect solar drying were the best fit to the
experimental results. The analyzed solar drying technologies will allow to obtain important savings of con-
ventional energy with a smaller environmental impact and a better quality of the final product in relation to the
traditional methods of drying.

1. Introduction such as Aspartame, Acesulfame k (SunNet), Cyclamate and Saccharin.

Sweet foods have been part of mankind’s diet from the beginning of
the time; unrefined and refined sugar, is the major consumed product
and contains natural vitamins and minerals and when it is refined and
processed, these elements are eliminated, and the human body has to
compensate and mobilizes its own reserves, causing vitamin and mi-
neral deficits. Sugar’s use in this refined form is associated with many
health problems, which include tooth decay, heart attacks, stress,
obesity, and diabetes, among others (SAGARPA, 2011).
Biotechnology has introduced synthetic, non-caloric sweeteners,
The problems caused by the side effects of these synthetic, non-caloric
sweeteners have led to an increased demand for natural sweeteners,
such as Thaumatin, Neohesperidin, Monellin, Hernandulcin, Brazzein,
and Stevioside. These natural sweeteners have benefits similar to those
of the artificial sweeteners but with the added value of not causing
harmful health effects (Ladygin et al., 2008).
Of the natural sweeteners, Stevia (Rebaudiana Bertoni), shrub na-
tive of Paraguay, is considered the best sugar substitute because it is up
to 300 times sweeter than sugar and contains no calories (González-
Moralejo, 2011). One notable variety is the Morita II, which has a

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mcastill@uacam.mx (M. Castillo Téllez), ipf@ier.unam.mx (I. Pilatowsky Figueroa), beatriz.castillo@academicos.udg.mx (B. Castillo Téllez),
eclov@ier.unam.mx (E.C. López Vidaña), alo@ier.unam.mx (A. López Ortiz).
URLS: http://www.uacam.mx (M. Castillo Téllez), http://www.ier.unam.mx (I. Pilatowsky Figueroa), http://www.ier.unam.mx (B. Castillo Téllez),
http://www.ier.unam.mx (E.C. López Vidaña), http://www.ier.unam.mx (A. López Ortiz).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.11.031
Received 20 June 2017; Received in revised form 8 November 2017; Accepted 12 November 2017
Available online 29 November 2017
0038-092X/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Castillo Téllez et al.
higher yield of dry leaves and better chemical content (Mitsuhashi
et al., 1975).
1.1. Solar drying
The most common technologies used in solar drying are the direct
cabinet type dryers, the indirect ones that mostly operate assisted with
solar air heaters and the mixed ones that work at the same time as
direct and indirect. There is a great diversity of designs and modes of
operation: forced convection (Ahmad et al., 2014), Indirect forced
convection (Bahlou et al., 2009), Direct cabinet and indirect cabinet
solar dryers (Banoult et al., 2010), Solar-biomass hybrid dryer en-
hanced by the Co-Gen technique (Tadahmun and Hussai, 2016; Leon
and Kumar, 2008), Greenhouse solar dryers (Abdullah, 1997; Bechoff
et al., 2009), Direct solar dryer, (Hii et al., 2006) Heat pumps (Fadhel
et al., 2010; Li et al., 2011), Indirect natural convection solar dryer with
chimney, solar dryer with greenhouse as collector, solar tunnel dryer
(air collector), hybrid solar dryer assisted by evacuated tube collectors
(Jairaj et al., 2009), dehumidification solar dryer (Yahya et al., 2004),
Mixed mode passive solar dryer, (Mehdizadeh and Zomorodian, 2009)
Unglazed transpired solar dryers (Hassanain, 2010) Hot box chamber,
Greenhouse dryer analysis, semi-cylindrical plastic, (Belessiotis and
Delyannis, 2011) forced convection solar dryer integrated with paraffin
wax-based latent heat storage system (Rabha and Muthukumar, 2017),
hybrid solar/thermal dryer combined with supplementary recovery
dryer, (Tadahmun and Hussian, 2016) solar dryer associated with the
PV module, (Chen et al., 2005). There is not much information on in-
direct solar dryers assisted with solar water heaters that exchange heat
with the drying air.
Among the main barriers to its development is the drying of leaves
which, if not performed properly, can result in a large decrease in the
quality of the dried material. Better understanding of the dehydration
process of Stevia leaves will allow higher yields of the active sweeteners
and better industrial operating conditions.
Given this possibility, the primary objective of this study was to
determine the characteristics of the drying process of Stevia leaf drying
using both a direct cabinet-type and indirect tunnel-type solar dryers.
The experimental results were adjusted using different mathematical
models in order to predict the behaviour of the dehydration process.
Additionally, a colorimetric analysis was conducted.
1.2. Drying of Stevia leaves
Stevia leaves can be consumed fresh or dried and crushed, or they
can have the active sweeteners extracted as either crystalline solids or
in a solution. Commercial sweetener is made from the dried leaves
(10–13% moisture). The dried leaf has a higher content of steviol gly-
cosides: 9–13% stevioside and 6–8% of rebaudioside A (reb-A) (Rojas
and Waldemar, 2009).
The drying of the plant and leaves of Stevia is typically achieved by
direct sunlight exposure or by ovens. The traditional method of open-
sun drying is mostly used by rural farmers due to its economic and
simple nature, but it has several limitations: inadequate drying, attacks
from such organisms as insects, birds, and rodents, structural damages,
exposure to rains, and loss of volatiles and component nutrients, all of
which can degrade the quality of the final sun-dried product. Branches
should be exposed to the sun for 4–6 h. It is suggested that the best time
to collect and store the leaves is when they become brittle with 10–12%
humidity (Rojas and Waldemar, 2009).
In the open-sun drying process, branches and leaves of Stevia are
placed over an appropriate piece of cloth or plastic without overlaying
them and are left until sunset, and if they are not fully dried, they are
collected and stored indoor. This process is continued day after day,
until complete, and the leaves are later separated from the stems. At
low humidity and thin layering conditions, the humidity in the leaves
can be reduced from 80% to 10% within 9 h to 10 h. (Oddore, 1999). If
899
Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907
not dried quickly after cutting, the quality deteriorates due to oxida-
tion, and up to a third of the content of stevioside is lost after three days
of exposure (Oddore, 1999).
It is highly convenient to use solar air collectors to improve the
efficiency of various solar drying modalities (Ekechukwu and Norton,
1999). Generally, the performance of a dryer depends largely on the
variations its insulation, ambient temperature and relative humidity
(Ekechukwu and Norton, 1998).
The kinetics of drying between 30 °C and 80 °C, the effective diffu-
sivity and the activation energies were obtained (Kaya and Aydin,
2009). Specific drying conditions are known to effect the quality of the
finals leaves (García-Navarrete, 2016), the convective drying leaves
(Jeria and Pozo, 2011), and the end industrial output (Soejarto et al.,
1983) and (Midmore and Rank, 2002). There are notably few works
published on the solar drying of leaves of Stevia, including the kinetics
in a convective solar drying tunnel and proposed mathematical models
for drying leaves (Lemus-Mondaca et al., 2014).
Based on the previous analysis, no evidence of solar drying of stevia
leaves was found. The aim of this study was to determine the char-
acteristics of the drying process of Stevia leaves drying using both a
direct cabinet-type and indirect tunnel-type dryer solar dryers. The
direct dryer was operated at natural and forced convection, with and
without a shadow–mesh cover, with the objective of knowing the in-
fluence of direct solar irradiance on the final product quality. Indirect
tunnel-type dryer was assisted by a flat plate collector array and a
water/air heat exchanger. The experimental results were adjusted using
different mathematical models in order to predict the behaviour of the
dehydration process. Additionally, a colorimetric analysis was con-
ducted. It should be mentioned that none of the nutritional and func-
tional properties of the dried Stevia leaves were determined.
In this work, an experimental study of the solar drying of stevia
leaves is presented. It was first worked with cabinet type solar dryers
with natural and forced convection, obtaining drying times of 210 min
and 300 min, respectively. Subsequently, it was experimented by
adding a shadow-mesh to the cabinet dryers, with drying times of
360 min for the natural convection case and between 550 min and
600 min with forced convection. Finally, it worked on a tunnel type
solar dryer, three samples of 20 g of leaves were selected approximately
each, and in the three cases the drying times were similar, between
240 min and 270 min.
Given this possibility, the primary objective of this study was to
determine the characteristics of the drying process of Stevia leaf drying
using both a direct cabinet-type and indirect tunnel-type solar dryers.
The experimental results were adjusted using different mathematical
models in order to predict the behaviour of the dehydration process.
Additionally, a colorimetric analysis was conducted.
2. Experimental design
In this study, experiments were performed to analyse the behaviour
of the drying process of Stevia leaves utilizing both direct and indirect
solar drying technologies. Additionally, was created and optimized a
mathematical model that could be used to help adjust the different
kinetic parameters and determine the best operating conditions for the
convective drying process.
The experiments were conducted in the Laboratorio de Secado Solar
(Solar Drying Laboratory, SDL), located at the Plataforma Solar at the
Instituto de Energías Renovables (IER) of the Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México (UNAM) in Temixco, Morelos, located at 18 ° 51
'LN and 99°14′LO. This locale has a warm dry climate, with 50%
average annual relative humidity, a maximum average temperature of
27 °C, and average solar irradiance value of 950 W/m2. The testing
period was from 1 April to 3 August 2015.
M. Castillo Téllez et al.
2.1. Materials and methods
2.1.1. Raw material
Mature Stevia plants of the Morita II variety, cultivated in the mu-
nicipality of Temixco, Morelos, were selected for use in this study. The
branches were cut, and the leaves were separated to obtain a homo-
geneous group based on their maturity, colour and freshness. The leaves
were washed and weighed, and the width, length and thickness di-
mensions were measured. There were no significant differences con-
cerning the dimensions and weight of the different selected plants. For
each of the tests, three samples were selected with different weights,
denoted W1, W2 and W3 (W1, 21.2 g; W2, 20.78 g; W3, 20.6 g).
2.1.2. Methods
2.1.2.1. Solar drying technologies. Among the different solar drying
technologies the (1) direct drying (cabinet-type dryer) and (2)
indirect drying (tunnel-type) assisted by flat plate solar collectors,
were selected.
2.1.2.1.1. Direct solar drying (DSD). The solar drying process was
carried out in a direct solar dryer cabinet built with transparent plastic
material and with a treatment surface of 0.5 m2. The drying chamber
contains a surface that absorbs the solar radiation, into which the
product to be dried is placed. The side, bottom and rear parts are
perforated to allow circulation and extraction of the hot and humid air.
The DSD can be operated with natural air circulation or forced
convection using a fan placed at the back with a maximum air velocity
of 2 m/s. In this work, two direct solar dryers, one operating with
natural air flow and the other with forced convection, were tested
under the same environmental conditions. In each case, the indoor
temperature, weight and size of the samples, solar irradiance, relative
humidity and air temperature were measured. Fig. 1 shows the direct
solar dryers that were used.
To determine the effect of solar irradiance on Stevia leaves, the tests
were carried out simultaneously on two DSD, one where the surface was
completely covered by a shadow-mesh, with a 60% solar irradiance
filtration rate, while the a second DSD did not have the mesh cover. In
both cases, the solar dryers were operated with both natural and forced
convection. The purpose of this experiment was to determine the effect
of direct sunlight on the leaves during the drying process, particularly
chlorophyll colour loss, which was assessed with a colorimetric study.
2.1.2.1.2. Indirect solar dryer (ISD). The indirect solar dryer (ISD)
consists of (a) a drying chamber and (b) a water heating system
operated by a flat plate collectors.
Drying chamber: The drying chamber is a horizontal rectangular
tunnel with a length of 6 m and a cross section of 0.28 m2. The structure
is metallic and thermally insulated. It is divided into seven sections of
which six contain three trays at different levels that hold the product to
be dried. A diffuser and air filter are located in the entrance. The air
filter and the water/air heat exchanger were located in the first section
Solar Dryier Direct
Fan
Stevia leaves
(a)
Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907
Solar heaters Chimney
Food container
Input of hot air
Fig. 2. Image of the indirect solar dryer.
and the other six sections had the trays where the Stevia leaves were
treated and at the exit there is a chimney. The tunnel can treat up to
4000 m3/h of air and has a maximum velocity of 4 m/s; in most food
drying processes, the recommended velocity is less than 3 m/s. Fig. 2
shows the ISD.
Solar heating water system: In the solar heating circuit, water flows
by forced circulation through, the flat plate collector array and a sto-
rage tank. The heat is transferred to the air by means of a water/air heat
exchanger; next, the air heated is introduced to the drying chamber by a
centrifuge-fan.
Flat plate collector array: The solar heating system consists of five,
10 m2 flat plate collectors from HIPER-TINOX, with a spectral selective
treatment, the purpose of which is to increase its absorption of heat; a
tempered glass cover content insulation comprised of polyurethane
foam. Fig. 3 presents a view of the flat plate solar collector array.
2.1.2.2. Drying modelling. To analyse the behaviour of the drying
process of different agriculture products, mathematical modelling of
the convective drying kinetics has been previously studied. In most of
these models, the drying process is considered isothermal and a
diffusional mass transfer mechanism was considered. Table 3 presents
the most widely used models, and it can be observed that the moisture
ratio (MR) is a function of the drying time and can be calculated as:
M −Me
MR =
M0−Me (1)
where M is the moisture content (is the ratio between the weight of
water contained in the fresh sample and the weight of the sample after
drying), Me is the equilibrium moisture (under specific controlled
conditions of temperature and humidity of air for an extended period of
time) and M0 is the initial moisture.
Fig. 1. Image of the direct solar dryers operating with
forced (a) at natural convection (b).
Dark tray
(b)
900
M. Castillo Téllez et al.
Fig. 3. Image of the solar flat plate collector array.
2.1.2.3. Statistical analysis. This work used the coefficient of
determination (R2), as one of the primary criteria to select the best
model for comparison with the experimental data, (Midilli and Yapar,
2002), and for the evaluation of R2 was applied, which was solved for
the calculation of the different parameters involved in the selected fit
models using the DataFix software version 9.1. Additionally, reduced
chi-square (χ2) and root-mean-square error (RMSE) were used as fit
criteria for the data. The RMSE provided the deviation between
experimental and predicted values, with less deviation indicated by
values closer to zero. The model with the highest coefficient of
determination and the lowest RMSE was selected as the best model to
describe the drying kinetics of Stevia leaves. A better fit is achieved if
the value of (χ2) is reduced according to the literature Henderson and
Pabis (1961).
The statistical analysis was conducted using the following equa-
tions:
n n
∑i = 1 (MR1−MRpre,i ) ∑i = 1 (MR1−MR exp,i )
R2 = n n
[∑i = 1 (MR1−MRpre,i )2][∑i = 1 (MR1−MR exp,i )2 ]
1 N
RMSE =
N
∑i =1 (MRpre,i−MRexp,i)2
and
N
∑i = 1 (MR exp,i−MRpre,i )2
χ2 =
N −n
where MR exp,i represents the experimental moisture ratio, MRpre,i is the
humidity ratio predicted by the mathematical model, N is the number
of observations and n is the number of constants.
2.1.2.4. Colorimetric analysis. The colour of food is an indicator of
product quality that consumers expect. The drying method and
temperature affect the colour of pigments that are heat-labile, such as
chlorophyll. In Stevia, the concentration dependence of chlorophylls in
the chloroplast membranes during growth has been shown (Ladygin
et al., 2008). However, this dependence after harvest has not been
determined.
Colour was measured with the L∗ a∗ b∗ scale (CIELAB), which was
designed to quantify the colours perceived by the human eye. The
CIELAB scales allows for the definition of specific colour styles in three-
dimensional space. The axis L∗ is the brightness (lightness) and goes
from 0 (black) to 100 (white).
The other two coordinate axes are a∗ and b∗, which represent the
variation between reddish-green, and yellow-blue, respectively. Those
cases where a∗ = b∗ = 0 are achromatic, so the L∗ axis represents the
achromatic grey scale ranging from black to white. Fig. 4 is a graphical
representation of the CIELAB scale.
Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907
Fig. 4. Graphical representation of the CIELAB scale. Manufacturer's Manual colorimeter
miniscan model AY100 (a* and b* represent the variation between reddish-green, and
yellow-blue, respectively). (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
The colour change was also expressed by Chroma (Eq. (5)), Hue (Eq.
6) and ΔE (Eq. 7)
Chroma = (a∗2 + b∗2)1/2 (5)
Hue = arctan (b∗/ a∗) (6)
ΔE = (a0∗−a∗f )2 + (b0∗−b∗f )2 + (L0∗−L∗f )2 (7)
2.2. Instrumentation
2.2.1. Operating parameters
2.2.1.1. Humidity. To determine the humidity of the leaves, two
(2) moisture analysers, the Sartorius MA 45 and the Ohaus MB45 with an
accuracy of ± 0.01% mg were used. The sample of leaf was
approximately 1.0 g and was cut and placed in the analyser. This
(3) procedure was performed before and after each drying condition.
2.2.1.2. Water activity (aW). Water activity is a parameter that
determines the stability of the food with respect to ambient humidity
and was measured for both fresh and dried leaves, before and after the
(4)
drying process, utilizing the portable Rotronic HygroPalm, with an
accuracy of ± 0.01% mg. A mean of three measurements were
reported at a room temperature of 24.5 ± 1 °C.
2.2.1.3. Temperature. The temperature was measured with K-type
thermocouple, previously calibrated using an Ameter Jofra
Instruments Temperature calibrator, model D55SE, in a range from
10 °C to −200 °C and with an accuracy of ± 0.05 °C.
2.2.1.4. Weight. The weight measurements were determined with an
Ohaus balance, model Adventure, with an accuracy of ± 0.001 g.
2.2.1.5. Colour. The colorimetric study was performed with a
colorimeter (model SR108 Colour Difference Meter Tester) with a
standard illuminant (D65). Repeatability as defined by the standard
deviation of 30 white calibration plates measurements, was within △E∗
ab:0.1.
2.2.2. Climatic parameters
During the test period, the weather parameters, including tem-
perature and humidity and velocity of air, as well as the global solar
irradiance, were obtained from the meteorological station of the
901
M. Castillo Téllez et al. Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907

60 1000
Table 1
Characteristics and description of measuring instruments from the IER weather station.
950
50
Variable Global solar Ambient temperature Velocity and wind
irradiance and relative humidity direction
900

Solar irradiance (W/m )

2
Temperature (°C)
40
Description Piranometer Campbell Sensor, CS500 Wind Sentry R.M.
Eppley Young Company 850
Model PSP 1000 ΩPRT, DIN 03002-5 30
43760B
800
Accuracy ± 0.5 W/m2 ± 0.4 °C ± 0.3 m/s
± 3% ± 3° 20
750
Forced convection
Natural convection
Instituto de Energías Renovables (IER, UNAM). Table 1 shows the va- 10 Solar irradiance 700
lues of these variables, the equipment and its accuracy (manufacturer
provided). 0 650
The measured variables were recorded and processed with an HP

0
0

0
00

0
0

0
00

00

0
0

0
:0
:0

:0

:0
:0
:0

:0
:0
:0

:0
9:
7:

8:

15
10

14

19
12
11

17
16
13

18
data acquisition system with a maximal capacity of three multiplexing
Drying time (h)
cards. Data processing was performed by the HP- VEE commercial
programme. Fig. 6. Change in solar irradiance and temperature inside of the drying chamber oper-
ating with either forced or natural convection on April 9, 2015.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Solar drying kinetics
During the test period, approximately 45 assays were performed,
and in most cases, a certain level of reproducibility was observed,
especially regarding the average values of solar irradiance on test days.
Based on the above, several representative test days were selected,
corresponding to the 9th, 10th, 16th and 17th of April.
3.1.1. Direct solar drying, DSD
3.1.1.1. Weather conditions. Fig. 5 show the change in climatological
parameters during the test day of April 9th. As can be seen, a maximum
of solar global irradiance of 1000 W/m2 was achieved, with the average
maximum values ranging between 950 and 990 W/m2. The minimum
values of the ambient temperature were between 22.0 °C and 27.7 °C,
while the maximum measured average values were between 29.0 °C
and 33.3 °C. Concerning the relative humidity, the minimum values
were between 18.11% and 29.2%, and the maximum values were
between 32.65% and 50.0%.
Fig. 6 shows the change in the received solar irradiance in a range
between 689 W/m2 and 710 W/m2 with a maximum value of 990 W/
m2. The temperature variation inside of drying chambers was also
measured. With natural convection drying, the internal temperature
was generally between 42 °C and 44 °C with a maximum value of 53 °C.
With forced convective drying, the temperatures was generally between
60
36 °C and 40 °C with a maximum value of 45 °C, which occurred on a
particular test day. Additionally, higher temperatures were consistently
found with natural convection, due to the lower air velocity in the
drying chamber, producing a thermal stratification, which is broken
due to the increased air velocity with the forced convection, yielding a
lower and more homogenous temperature, making the mass heat
transfer more efficient.
Fig. 7 shows the change in moisture content in the direct solar
dryers operating with either natural or forced convection. As can be
seen, the drying kinetics under natural convection is faster due to poor
heat exchange between the Stevia leaves and the air at low velocity.
With forced convection a lower temperature is reached due to a greater
airflow, causing thermal homogenization and resulting in a lower
temperature. This effect can be observed in Fig. 5 and the corre-
sponding drying times of the two modalities: 210 min for natural con-
vection and 300 min for forced convection.
Fig. 8 shows the change in the drying rates for each convection
mode of the direct solar dryers as function of the moisture content. In
both cases, no constant-rate period was observed. The highest drying-
rate occurs with natural convection, with a value of 0.0554 kg water/kg
dry mater min for an initial moisture content of 3.237 and final content
of 0.1405 kg water/kg dry mater.
With natural convection, the drying rate decreased steadily to a
3.0
Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)

1000
2.5
50 Forced Convection
800 Natural convection
Solar irradiance (W/m )
2

2.0
40
Temperature (°C)

600
1.5
RH (%)

30
400
1.0
20
200
0.5
10 Ambient temperature
Relative humidity 0
Solar irradiance 0.0
0
2:00 4:30 7:00 9:30 12:00 14:30 17:00 19:30 22:00 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300
Time (h) Drying time (min)

Fig. 5. Change in global solar irradiance, ambient temperature and relative humidity on Fig. 7. Change in moisture content in solar dryers operating with natural or forced
April 9, 2015. convection.

902
M. Castillo Téllez et al. Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907

3.5

0.08

Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)

Drying rate (kg water/kg dry matter min)

3.0
Forced convection and shadow-mesh
Forced convection
2.5 Forced convection
Natural convection Natural convection and shadow-mesh
0.06
Natural convection
2.0

0.04 1.5

1.0
0.02
0.5

0.0
0.00
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Drying time (min)
Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)
Fig. 9. Change in moisture content in solar dryers in DSD operating in forced or natural
Fig. 8. Drying rate as function of moisture content for a solar direct dryer operating with
convection, both with and without a shadow-mesh cover.
either forced or natural convection.

Table 2 0.072
Initial and final humidity and water activity for natural and forced convection. Forced convection and shadow-mesh

Drying rate (kg water/kg dry matter min)

0.063 Forced convection
Drying operationing mode Humidity (%) Water activity (aw) Natural convection and shadow-mesh
0.054 Natural convection
Initial Final Initial Final
0.045
Natural convection 82.36 7.85 0.989 0.149
Forced convection 83.40 8.71 0.993 0.128
0.036

0.027
moisture content of 1.75 and more rapidly to 0.002 kg water/kg dry
matter thereafter. For values of moisture content lower that 0.6, both 0.018
operating modes had the same drying rates. In forced convection, the
velocity values of the drying rates were lower. The first drying rate 0.009
phase had slowly decreasing moisture to a content level of 2.75, fol-
lowed by another slow phase to a moisture level of 1.0, followed by a 0.000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
final slow phase to 0.1 kg water/kg dry matter.
Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)
The initial and final humidity and water activity values obtained are
presented in Table 2 for each convection mode. Fig. 10. Change in drying rate as function of moisture content in the DSD operating at
natural or forced convection with and without a shadow-mesh.

3.1.2. Direct solar dryer covered by a shadow–mesh

To analyse the impact of solar radiation on the Stevia leaves, direct 300 min, respectively.
drying tests were performed in devices with and without a sha- Fig. 10 shows the change in drying rate as function of the moisture
dow–mesh cover. For these tests, dryers were operated simultaneously content in the direct solar dryer, operating with natural or forced
with either forced or natural convection, allowing for observation of convection and with or without a shadow-mesh cover. As can be seen,
interactions between the shadow-mesh and convection mode. in all cases, the drying rate decreases over time; continuously with
Fig. 9 shows the change in moisture content during drying in the natural convection and discontinuously with forced convection. Max-
DSD operating with natural or forced convection. In both cases, the DSD imum values for drying rates were obtained in the case of natural
were covered with a mesh-shadow. convection, decreasing slightly when the mesh-shade was used. A no-
With the mesh-shadow cover, natural convection yielded a drying table decrease in drying rate was observed when operating at forced
time of 360 min and forced convection had a drying time between convection at range of moisture content between 2.25 and 1.25 kg
550 min and 600 min. Without mesh, these values were 250 min and water/kg dry matter.

Table 3
Mathematical models applied to the solar drying process.

Model Name Model name Reference

Newton MR = exp(−kt) Tunde-Akintunde (2011)

Page MR = exp(−ktn) Page (1949)
Modified Page MR = exp(−(kt)n) Diamante and Munro (1993)
Henderson and Pabis MR = a exp(−kt) Henderson and Pabis (1961)
Logarithmic MR = a exp(−kt) + c Togrul and Pehlivan (2002)
Two-term MR = a exp(−k0t) + b exp(−k1t) Kouaa et al. (2009)
Two-term exponential MR = a exp(−kt) + (1−a) Sharaf-Elden et al. (1980)
Wang and Singh MR = 1 + at + bt2 Wang and Singh (1978)
Weibull MR = exp[−(t/b)α] Midilli and Yapar (2002)

903
M. Castillo Téllez et al. Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907

60
0.055
55 800

Drying rate (kg water/kg dry matter min)

0.050
50 W1
0.045
45 W2

Solar irradiance (W/m )

2
600 0.040 W3
Relative humidity (%)

40
Temperature (°C)

0.035
35
30 400 0.030

25 0.025

20 0.020
200
15 0.015
10 0.010
Ambient temperature
5 Relative humidity 0
Solar irradiance
0.005
0
0.000
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time (h) -0.005
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Fig. 11. Change in global solar irradiance, ambient temperature and relative humidity on
Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)
April 10, 2015.
Fig. 14. Drying rate vs moisture content for W1: 21.2 g, W2: 20.78 g, W3: 20.6 g.
60 1000
58
56 Table 4
900
54 Coefficients and fit parameters for direct solar drying.
52
800 Model Coefficients and fit parameter Value
Solar irradiance (W/m )

50
2

48
Temperature (°C)

46
700 Wang and Singh a −0.0077
44 b 0.000013
42 600 R2 0.7725
40 RMSE 0.1358
38 500 Χ2 0.0101
36 Henderson and Pabis a 0.9718
34 Water temperature at the entrance 400 K 0.0165
32 to the drying chamber R2 0.9941
30 Drying chamber temperature
300 RMSE 0.0218
28 Solar irradiance
Χ2 0.0024
26
200
Newton k 0.0170
R2 0.9932
0

0
00

0
00
00

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0
:0

:0

:0
8:

9:
7:

13

14

15

16

17

18
10

11

12

RMSE 0.0224
Drying time (min) Χ2 0.0038

Fig. 12. Solar irradiance, water temperature from collectors entering the air/water heat Two-term exponential a 0.2321
exchanger and drying chamber temperature. k 0.0585
R2 0.9995
RMSE 0.0058
Χ2 0.0001
3.0 Weibull a 0.8168
Moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter)

b 55.073
R2 0.9997
2.5 RMSE 0.00443
W1
Χ2 0.0001
W2
2.0 W3 Logarithmic a 0.9619
c 0.0177
k 0.0177
1.5 R2 0.9961
RMSE 0.0183
Χ2 0.0010
1.0

0.5 average maximum value range of 750 W/m2 to 800 W/m2. The
minimum values of the ambient temperature were between 25.0 °C
0.0 and 27.0 °C, while the maximum measured average values were
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 between 30.0 °C and 32.5 °C. Regarding the relative humidity, the
Drying time (min) minimum values were between 20% and 35.2%, and the maximum
value was 50.0%.
Fig. 13. Change in the moisture content of the different samples. W1: 21.2 g, W2: 20.78 g,
W3: 20.6 g.
Fig. 12 shows the variation in the temperature of the water from the
solar collectors entering the air/water heat exchanger and of the air
into the drying chamber, with maximum values of 57 °C and 48 °C,
3.1.3. Indirect solar dryer type tunnel, ISD respectively, yielding a solar irradiance average maximum of 930 W/
3.1.3.1. Weather conditions. Fig. 11 shows the change in climatological m2.
parameters during the test day of April 10 th. As can be seen, a In the indirect solar dryer tunnel, the Stevia leaves were located in
maximum solar global irradiance of 830 W/m2 was achieved with an

904
M. Castillo Téllez et al. Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907

Table 5
Coefficients and fit parameters for indirect solar drying. 1.0

Model Coefficients and fit parameter Valor

0.8
Wang and Singh a −0.0106
b 0.000025 Experimental
R2 0.8985 Weilbull model

Moisture ratio
RMSE 0.1074 0.6
Χ2 0.0034

Henderson and Pabis a 1.0117

k 0.02124 0.4
R2 0.9980
RMSE 0.01504
Χ2 0.0022
0.2
Newton k 0.0210
R2 0.9978
RMSE 0.0147
Χ2 0.0010 0.0
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
Two-Term Exponential a 0.9999
Drying time (min)
k 0.0208
R2 0.9978 Fig. 16. Experimental data of moisture ratio versus drying time for the indirect solar
RMSE 0.0157 dryer fitted using the Weibull model.
0.0012

Weibull α 1.14318
Table 6
β 49.0798
Values of L*, a*, and b* of raw and dried stevia leaves in cabinets without (no) mesh
R2 0.9999
(CNM) and cabinets with mesh (CWM).
RMSE 0.0029
Χ2 0.0009
L* a* b*
Logarithmic a 1.0020
c −0.0108 Raw 43.6 −8.4 21.5
k 0.0205 45 43.6 −3.4 19.6
R2 0.9985 55 40.6 −2.7 18.6
RMSE 0.01363 CSM 45.7 1.1 18.1
Χ2 0.0011 CWM 40.2 −2.1 18.2

1.0

20
0.8
Experimental
Weilbull model 15
Moisture ratio (%)

0.6 Two-term exponential

Chroma

0.4 10

0.2
5

0.0
0 100 200 300 400
Drying time (min)
Fig. 15. Experimental data of moisture ratio versus drying time using direct solar drying
fitted with the Weibull and two-term exponential models.
the trays throughout the dryer, and the weight loss was recorded. Initial
weights of the samples were as follows: W1: 21.2 g; W2: 20.78 g; W3:
20.6 g. All samples were exposed to the conditions described in Fig. 9.
Fig. 13 shows the change in moisture content on a dry basis, where a
slight difference was observed due to the variation in the initial weight
of the samples. Drying kinetics were highly similar between samples,
and equilibrium was reached between 240 min and 270 min.
Fig. 14 shows the variation in the drying rate in dry basis depending
on the moisture content. Decreasing drying rates were observed in
samples with higher initial weights. For the W2 and W3 samples, an
0
1 2 3
500
Raw Cabinet without mesh Cabinet with mesh
Fig. 17. Chroma values of raw and dried Stevia leaf samples.
inflection point was observed at a moisture content of 1.75, whereas
this point was at a moisture content of 1.25 for sample W1. The same
drying rate was observed in all the samples when the moisture content
was less than 1.0.
4. Drying process mathematical model fits
In this work, nine predictive models were analysed, as shown in
table 3. The corresponding constants and the fit parameters R2 and χ2
values were obtained for each model considered.
Tables 4 and 5 present the coefficients and fit parameters of the
experimental results with the mathematical models analysed for the

905
M. Castillo Téllez et al.
240
220
200
180
160
140
o
Hue
120
100
80
60
40
20
0 reduce the environmental impact compared to the use of conventional
1 2 3 fuel-based dryers.
Raw Cabinet with out mesh Cabinet with mesh
Fig. 18. Hue values of raw and dried Stevia leaves using the direct solar dryer with and
without mesh.
direct and indirect solar drying kinetics, respectively.
The Weibull and two-term exponential models gave the best results
for direct solar drying, with a R2 of 0.9997 and 0.9995, respectively,
and a χ2 of 0.0001 for both models. For indirect solar drying, the
Weibull model gave the best results; it had an R2 of 0.9999 and a χ2 of
0.00012. Thus, the moisture content at any time during the drying
process could be reliably estimated. These data fits are shown in
Figs. 15 and 16.
Fig. 15 shows the experimental data for direct solar drying of the
moisture ratio versus drying time fitted with the Weibull and Two-term
exponential models. Fig. 16 presents the experimental drying kinetics of
the solar indirect drying fitted with the Weibull model.
5. Colorimetric analysis
Table 6 shows the values: L∗, a∗, and b∗ of raw and dried Stevia
leaves. The a∗ values indicate the greenness of the leaves, which is af-
fected by the temperature and drying method. There is an increase in a∗
as it approaches neutral colours, which indicates that the green leaves
are becoming brown and are going from the green to red scale. The
yellowness (b∗) of the leaves is also affected, although no significant
effect due to the method or drying temperature was found.
Fig. 17 shows the Chroma values or colour saturation of the samples
of the raw and dried stevia leaves. A decrease in the colour saturation of
the leaves was noted with drying at 45 °C (in a mesh-cover cabinet), as
indicated by the decreased Chroma value at 55 °C. In the absence of
mesh, a greater decrease in colour saturation of the leaves was ob-
served, indicating that the colour intensity was lost due to the heat
treatment.
Fig. 18 shows the tone or ° Hue values of the raw leaves and those
dried using the direct solar dryer with (CWM) and without (CNM)
mesh. No significant difference between the values of the °Hue of the
dehydrated samples at 45 °C and raw samples was seen, indicating that
there was no difference in the green hue of the samples. However, for
Stevia leaves dried at 55 °C, the value of Hue decreased, moving to-
wards the yellow hue, indicating that temperature is the most sig-
nificant parameter influencing tone degradation.
6. Conclusions
In this study, the dehydration kinetics of Stevia leaves using direct
and indirect solar drying technologies were analysed. Indirect drying
was demonstrated to be superior with moderate drying time, better
control of the operating conditions and greater protection against the
906
Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907
effects of temperature and direct exposure to solar radiation. However,
this approach requires more equipment and more electric power con-
sumption. Direct drying is the simplest and most economical method.
Operating with natural convection provides the shortest drying time
with higher operating temperatures than operating with forced con-
vection, integrating the shadow-mesh cover improved the final quality
of the leaves, reduced the discoloration effect, and shortened the drying
time when operating with forced convection. The Weibull and Two-
Term Exponential models for direct drying and Weibull for indirect
drying were the best fit to the experimental results, where the moisture
content at any time during the drying process could be reliably esti-
mated. The colorimetric analyses demonstrate that temperature was the
most significant parameter effecting tone degradation. The technical
feasibility of solar drying Stevia leaves was demonstrated, and these
solar drying technologies can save energy, improve product quality and
References
Abdullah, K., 1997. Drying of vanilla pods using a greenhouse effect solar dryer. Dry
Technol. 15, 685–698.
Ahmad, F., Kamaruzzaman, S., Mohammad, H.Y., Mohd, H.R., Mohamed, G., Hussein,
A.K., 2014. Performance analysis of solar drying system for red chili. Sol. Energy 99,
47–54.
Banout, J., Havlik, J., Kulik, M., Kloucek, P., Lojka, B., 2010. Effect of solar drying on the
composition of essential oil of sacha culantro (Eryngium foetidum L) grown in the
peruvian amazon. J. Food Process. Eng. 33, 83–103.
Bahloul, N., Boudhrioua, N., Kouhila, M., Kechaou, B., 2009. Effect of convective solar
drying on colour, total phenols and radical scavenging activity of olive leaves (Olea
europaea L). Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 44, 2561–2567.
Bechoff, A., Dufour, D., Dhuique-Mayer, C., Marouzé, C., Reynes, M., et al., 2009. Effect of
hot air, solar and sun drying treatments on provitamin a retention in orange- fleshed
sweet potato. J. Food Eng. 92, 164–171.
Belessiotis, V., Delyannis, E., 2011. Solar drying. Sol. Energy 85, 1665–1691.
Chen, H.H., Hernandez, C.E., Huang, T.C., 2005. A study of the drying effect on lemon
slices using a closed-type solar dryer. Sol. Energy 78, 97–103.
Diamante, L.M., Munro, P.A., 1993. Mathematical modelling of the thin layer solar drying
of sweet potato slices. Sol. Energy 51 (4), 271–276.
Ekechukwu, O.V., Norton, B., 1998. Effects of seasonal weather variations on the mea-
sured performance of a natural-circulation solar-energy tropical crop dryer. Energy
Convers. Manage. 39 (12), 1265–1276.
Ekechukwu, O.V., Norton, B., 1999. Review of solar energy drying III: low temperature
air-heating solar collectors for crop drying applications. Energy Convers. Manage. 40
(6), 657–667.
Fadhel, M.I., Sopian, K., Daud, W.R.W., Alghoul, M.A., 2010. Performance analysis of
solar-assisted chemical heat-pump dryer. Sol. Energy 84, 1920–1928.
García-Navarrete, F.J., 2016. Evaluación de los efectos del proceso de secado sobre la
calidad de la Stevia. Tesis Magister, Ing. Agrícola, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
González-Moralejo, Silvia Andrés, 2011. Aproximación a la comprensión de un en-
dulzante natural alternativo, la Stevia rebaudiana bertoni: producción, consumo y
demanda potencial. Agroalimentaria 17 (32), 57–69.
Hassanain, A.A., 2010. Unglazed transpired solar dryers for medicinal plants. Dry
Technol. 28, 240–248.
Henderson, S., Pabis, S., 1961. Grain drying theory: temperature effects on drying coef-
ficient. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 6, 169–174.
Hii, C.L., Abdul Rahman, R., Jinap, S., Che Man, Y.B., 2006. Quality of cocoa beans dried
using a direct solar dryer at different loadings. J. Sci. Food Agri. 86, 1237–1243.
Jairaj, K.S., Singh, S.P., Srikant, K., 2009. A review of solar dryers developed for grape
drying. Sol. Energy 83, 1698–1712.
Jeria Heitmann, D.M., Pozo-Cofré, A., A., 2011. Estudio del secado convectivo de hojas de
stevia rebaudiana y factibilidad técnico-económica de una planta elaboradora de
edulcorante a base de Stevia, Tesis, Lic. Ing. en Alimentos, Universidad de Chile.
Kaya, A., Aydin, O., 2009. An experimental study on drying kinetics of some herbal
leaves. Energy. Conver. Manage. 50 (1), 118–124.
Kouaa, Kamenan Blaise, Fassinou, Wanignon Ferdinand, Gbahab, Prosper, Toure, Siaka,
2009. Mathematical modelling of the thin layer solar drying of banana, mango and
cassava. Energy 34, 1594–1602.
Ladygin, V.G., Bondarev, N.I., Semenova, G.A., Smolov, A.A., Reshetnyav, O.V., Nosov,
A.M., 2008. Chloroplast ultrastructure, photosynthetic apparatus activities and pro-
duction of steviol glycosides in Stevia rebaudiana in vivo and in vitro. Biol. Plant.
52 9–1.
Lemus-Mondaca, R., Vega-Galez, A., Moraga, N.O., Astudillo, S., 2014. Dehydration of
Stevia rebaudiana Berton leaves: kinetics, modelling and Energy Features. J. Food
Process. Preserv. 50 (5), 508–520.
Leon, M.A., Kumar, S., 2008. Design and performance evaluation of a solar assisted
biomass drying system with thermal storage. Dry Technol. 26, 936–947.
Li, Y., Li, H.F., Dai, Y.Y., Gao, S.F., Wei, L., et al., 2011. Experimental investigation on a
solar assisted heat pump in-store drying system. Appl. Thermal Eng. 31, 1718–1724.
Mehdizadeh, Z., Zomorodian, A., 2009. A study of the effect of solar drying system on rice
M. Castillo Téllez et al.
quality. J. Agri. Sci. Technol. 11, 527–534.
Midilli, A. Kucuk, Yapar, Z., 2002. A new model for single layer drying. Dry Technol. 20,
1503–1525.
Midmore David, Rank Andrew, 2002. A new rural INDUSTRY (Stevia) to replace imported
chemical sweeteners. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation,
RIRDC.
Mitsuhashi, H., Ueno, J., Sumita, T., 1975. Studies on the cultivation of Stevia
Rebaudiana Bertoni determination of stevioside II. J. Pharma. Soc. Japan 12,
1501–1503.
Oddore, B., 1999. How grow Stevia, Guarani Botanicals, INC. Pawcatuck, Connecticut.
1-30.
Page, G., 1949. Factor Influencing the Maximum Rates of Air-drying Shelled Corn in Thin
Layer. Master Thesis. Perdue University, USA.
Rabha, D.K., Muthukumar, P., 2017. Performance studies on a forced convection solar
dryer integrated with paraffin wax-based latent heat storage system. Sol. Energy 149,
214–226.
Montoya Rojas, Sergio Waldemar, 2009. STEVIA, edulcorante orgánico del siglo XXI.
Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina; Lima, Perú.
907
Solar Energy 159 (2018) 898–907
Sharaf-Elden, Y.I., Blaisdell, J.L., Hamdy, M.Y., 1980. A model for ear corn drying. Trans.
ASAE 5, 1261–1265.
Soejarto, D.D., Compadre, C.M., Medon, P.J., Kamath, S.K., Kinghorn, A.D., 1983.
Potential sweetening agents of plant origin. II. Field search for sweet-tasting Stevia
Species. Econ. Bot. 37, 71–79.
Tadahmun, A.Y., Hussian, H.A., 2016. Experimental investigation and evaluation of hy-
brid solar/termal dryer combined with supplementary recovery dryer. Sol. Energy
134, 284–293.
Togrul, I., Pehlivan, D., 2002. Mathematical modelling of solar drying of apricots in thin
layers. J. Food Eng. 55, 209–225.
Tunde-Akintunde, T.Y., 2011. Mathematical modelling of sun and solar drying of chili.
Renewable Energy 36 (8), 2139–2145.
Wang, C., Singh, R.A., 1978. A single layer drying equation for rough rice. ASAE Paper.
St. Joseph. MI: American Society. Agri. Eng. 78, 3001.
Yahya, M., Othman, M.Y., Sopian, K., Daud, W.R.W., Yatim, B., et al., 2004. Quality of
pegaga leaf dried in a solar assisted dehumidification drying system. In: Proceedings
of the 14th International Drying Symposium. São Paulo, Brazil, 22–25 August 2004,
vol. B. pp. 1049–1054.