Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jfoodeng

Spray drying of tomato pulp in dehumidified air: II. The effect on powder properties
Athanasia M. Goula, Konstantinos G. Adamopoulos
Received 14 October 2003; accepted 23 February 2004

*

Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Engineering, Laboratory of Food Process Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 541 24 University Campus, Thessaloniki, Greece

Abstract Tomato powders were produced by spray drying tomato pulp using a modified spray drying system. Modifications to the original dryer design consisted of connecting the spray dryer inlet air intake to an air dehumidifier. Samples of tomato pulp with a 14% constant total solids concentration were used. Sixty-four different experiments were conducted keeping constant the feed rate, the feed temperature and the atomizer pressure, and varying the compressed air flow rate, the flow rate of drying rate, and the air inlet temperature. In all experiments, the atomizer pressure, the feed rate and the feed temperature were kept at 5 ± 0.1 bar, 1.75 ± 0.05 g/ min, and 32.0 ± 0.5 °C respectively. The variable operating conditions were within the following ranges: inlet air temperatures 110– 140 (±1) °C; drying air flow rate 17.50–22.75 (±0.18) m3 /h, and compressed air flow rate 500–800 (±20) l/h. The tomato powders were analyzed for moisture content, bulk density and solubility. Analysis of experimental data yielded correlations between the powder properties and the variable operating conditions. Regression analysis was used to fit mathematical models to the data of each of the powder properties evaluated. Comparisons between the moisture content, the bulk density, and the solubility of powders produced by the two drying systems proved that the use of dehumidified air, promoting rapid particulate skin formation, decreased powder moisture content and increased powder bulk density and solubility. The modified spray drying system proved advantageous over the standard laboratory spray dryer. Preliminary air dehumidification improved not only product recovery, but, also product properties. Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Bulk density; Dehumidified air; Moisture; Powder properties; Solubility; Spray drying; Stickiness; Tomato pulp

1. Introduction Spray drying is the transformation of feed from a fluid state into a dried particulate form by spraying the feed into a hot drying medium. The production of dry particles from a liquid feed in a single processing step makes spray drying a unique and important unit operation. The design of a spray drying process includes establishment of the operating conditions that increase product recovery and produce an end product of a precise quality specification. Product recovery is mainly determined by powder collection efficiency. Material loss in a spray drying system is due mostly to the attachment of sprayed droplets and dry powder to the wall of the dryer.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +30-2310-996205/995903; fax: +302310-996259. E-mail address: costadam@eng.auth.gr (K.G. Adamopoulos). 0260-8774/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.02.031
*

Particle adhesion to the wall is affected by the nature of the spray-dried material and spray drying conditions, and is a commonly recognized effect in spray drying solutions containing sugars, such as fruit juices and tomato products (Bhandari, Datta, & Howes, 1997; Bhandari, Datta, Crooks, Howes, & Rigby, 1997). During the drying process they may either remain as syrup or stick on the dryer chamber wall. Various ways of coping with such products have been researched for many years (Goose & Binsted, 1964; Gransmith, 1971; Jayaraman & Das Gupta, 1995; Karatas, 1989; Ponting, Stanley, & Copley, 1973; Spicer, 1974). The most commonly quoted specifications of a powder involve moisture content, bulk density and solubility. The temperatures and drying conditions experienced by a droplet during drying have an important influence on the above powder properties (Masters, 1997; Oakley, 1997). However, the effect of process variables (e.g. the

Masters. & Maroulis. 1979a). and the feed temperature were kept at 5 ± 0. . The humidity of the air may also be a factor.e. submitted for publication). Spherical shaped particles can result in a low degree of interstitial air. Irregular shaped particles and agglomerates can lead to a lower bulk density (Walton & Mumford. The rapid particulate skin formation may also affect the powder properties. 2. the moisture content is controlled by the temperature of the exhaust air leaving the drying chamber (Cook. 1997). A modified laboratory spray dryer.6% from the triplicate mean. 1. an experimental spray dryer was modified for drying tomato concentrate. In addition. The most famous effect of the formation of a dry surface layer on product properties is the diminishment to 0 of the volatile components loss. the feed rate. and expressing the moisture loss in terms of percent wet basis (wb).2.75 (±0. and compressed air flow rates (Qc ) 500–800 (±20) l/h. The variable operating conditions were within the following ranges: inlet air temperatures (Tinlet ) 110–140 (±1) °C.0 ± 0. as the small particles in the size distribution fill the void spaces between the large particles.50–22. which are related to the feed properties.G.M. and with an increase in feed solids (Nath & Satpathy. 1998. thus increasing bulk density (Al-Kahtani & Hassan. the effect of the drying conditions on bulk density is highly product dependent (Krokida & Maroulis. In all experiments. However. required powder properties are a significant consideration. 0. 50–60 Hz. The modified drying system proved advantageous over the standard laboratory spray dryer. Inlet and outlet drying air temperatures were read and manually logged from the digital displays on the dryer’s control panel with an accuracy of ±1 °C. crushing and grinding.1. 2000). submitted for publication). highly dependent on drying rates. in spray drying there are some general trends.5 °C respectively. 1979a). The modification made to the original dryer design consisted of connecting the spray dryer inlet air intake to an absorption air dryer. Materials and methods 2. 1999a). and 32. drying air flow rates (Qa ) 17. Solubility: The solubility of the spray-dried powder was carried out by adding 2 g of the material to 50 ml of distilled water at 26 °C (El-Tinay & Ismail. Goula. 1985). The residual moisture in the powder influences many other powder properties such as bulk density and solubility. Masters. Density: 2 g of powder was transferred to a 50 ml graduated cylinder. Generally. This is due to the lack of information within the literature and to the specific drying nature of most materials. 1997. The objective of this work was to study the effect of spray drying conditions and preliminary air dehumidification on tomato powder moisture. Masters. occluded and interstitial air content.1 bar. In Part I of the study (Goula & Adamopoulos. 1999b). 1979b). the drying air temperature) upon powder properties are difficult to assess in general terms (Walton & Mumford. 1998.g. High ambient air humidity may require an increase in outlet air temperature in order to maintain the desired powder moisture content (Masters.75 ± 0. 2. bulk density and solubility. Higher atomizer wheel speeds and nozzle pressures decrease droplet and therefore particle size. in a spray drying system. the atomizer pressure. the speed of crust forma- tion.05 g/min. K. Production of tomato powders Tomato powders were prepared as described in Part I of this study (Goula & Adamopoulos. in accordance with the selective-diffusion theory (Hecht & King. The bulk density was calculated by dividing the mass of the powder by the volume occupied in the cylinder. Zogzas. 1964). according to Oakley (1997). 1990. Walton. again described in Part I.36 A. When designing a spray drying process. can affect the particle size and density. All analyses were done in triplicate and the averages of these triplicate measurements recorded. Analysis of powders Moisture: The moisture content was determined by drying the powders at 70 °C to a constant weight (Goose & Binsted. 2000). which decreased residue accumulation or dryer fouling. drying time and powder handling procedures e. Generally. was employed for the spray drying process. and minimized the number of thermoplastic particles sticking to the dryer wall. Additional determinations were carried out if the single values from the triplicates deviated by more than ±0. The mixture was agitated in a low form glass beaker 100 ml with a magnetic stirrer (Falc. the conditions of atomization. using a stirring bar with a size of 2 mm · 7 mm. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 residence time of particles within the drying chamber. 100 · kg water/kg wet material. Krokida. The time required for the material to dissolve completely was recorded. Bulk density tends to increase with a decrease in air outlet temperature.2 A) at 892 rpm. drying air temperature. i. Sixty-four different experiments were conducted in triplicate. Bulk density is also affected by particle size and density. since the much lower outlet temperatures and humidities of the drying air resulted in the formation of a solid particle surface. 1991.18) m3 /h. The performance of the modified dryer and the effect of preliminary air dehumidification on product recovery were studied.

43% wb. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 400 500 600 700 Q c (L/h) 800 900 Fig. 1. 12 11 powder moisture content (% wb) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 400 500 600 700 Q c (L/h) 800 900 Fig. However. the movement of air predetermines the rate and degree of droplet evaporation by influencing (a) the passage of spray through the drying zone.50 m3 /h. Powder moisture content as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. a low square root of mean square error (S). Drying air flow rate. 1–4 show the achieved values against inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate for different drying air flow rates. Statistical analysis The data were analyzed using the statistical software MINITAB (Release 13. drying rate flow rate and air inlet temperature (independent variables). This could give the impression that the drying air flow rate must be at a maximum in all cases. Increased residence times lead to a greater degree of . and (c) the extent to which semi-dried droplets re-enter the hot areas around the air disperser.00 m3 /h 600 700 Q c (L/h) 800 900 12 11 powder moisture content (% wb) Q a : 17.32). 1991).G. was 0. The repeatability for moisture content. Powder moisture content as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. 3.3. 21. 19. Symbols are the same as in Fig. expressed as the average standard deviation of the three determinations. The best fitting models were determined on the basis of a high R2 . 1979a) and enforces circulation effects (Goula & Adamopoulos. (b) the concentration of product in the region of the dryer walls. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 37 Q a : 19.1. As it can be drawn from Figs. 2. Results and discussion 3.M. Generally. A lower drying air flow rate. 1. Powder moisture content as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. the energy available for evaporation varies powder moisture content (% wb) 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 400 500 Q a : 21. Drying air flow rate. 1–4. 2004. Goula. Figs. Each data point in the figures represents the averaged values of three determinations. and linear models to the data of each of the variables evaluated (response variables). Regression analysis was used to fit full second order polynomials. Symbols are the same as in Fig. and a Mallows’ Cp statistic close to the number of predictors contained in the model.00 m3 /h. powder moisture content increases with an increase in drying air flow rate.50 m 3 /h Tinlet (° C) 110 120 modified 130 system 140 110 120 standard 130 system 140 fitted model Fig. The statistical analysis is described analytically in Part I of the study. causes an increase in product sojourn time in the drying chamber (Masters.A.25 m3 /h. Oakley & Bahu. according to the amount of drying air. Powder moisture content The moisture content of the tomato powders varied from 3. 1. Drying air flow rate. 17.70 were calculated to determine if the models could be used in place of full second order polynomials to predict the response of a variable to compressed air flow rate.25 m3 /h 2. reduced second order polynomials containing the three linear terms. K. 3.11% to 9. F values for all reduced and linear models with a coefficient of determination (R2 ) greater than 0.05%.

led to higher moisture contents. Flores-Luna. and King (1982). was higher (Goula & Adamopoulos. 1. Goula. Increase in air–liquid flow ratio in a two-fluid nozzle atomizer decreases the mean size of the spray droplets (Nath & Satpathy.365 g/ ml. 1–4. When the drying medium is air. an increase in air inlet temperature leads to a decrease in moisture content. Second. Powder bulk density Bulk density results. it must be carried away. The greater the temperature difference between the drying medium and the particles. However. decreasing the residence time of the product in the drying chamber. drying is facilitated by smaller particle sizes for two reasons. air inlet temperature. & Kazakis. and the formation of a solid particle surface (Roos. drying rate flow rate and compressed air flow rate was as follows: moisture ¼ 124 À 1:86 Á Tinlet þ 0:681 Á Qa þ 0:00115 Á Qc 2 þ 0:00692 Á Tinlet À 0:00735 Á Q2 a À 0:000003 Á Q2 À 0:00213 Á Tinlet Qa c ð1Þ Fig. respectively.16% to 11. With smaller particles. Powder moisture content as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. Drying air flow rate.2. stickiness results in agglomeration and so in a smaller surface area.75 m3 /h. the more moisture it will hold before becoming saturated. the modified system decreased residual moisture content due to the preliminary air dehumidification. If dehydration conditions do not permit surface solidification before particles collide with each other. during spray drying the main requirement is that a solid particle surface is formed rapidly. 1998).75 m 3 /h 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 400 500 600 Q c (L/h) 700 800 900 moisture being driven from the food to a greater extent than with cooler air. in a spray drying system. temperature plays a second important role. an increase in drying air flow rate. Diffusion of water vapor however. increasing surface viscosity and decreasing sticking of particles with each other or on dryer surfaces.27%. This does not allow formation of liquid bridges between contacting particles or particle adhesion to the dryer walls. 5–8. The best model predictions of moisture content to process variables such as. Symbols are the same as in Fig. Experimentally determined phase and state transition temperatures of food components and food solids suggest that. As water is driven from the particles in the form of water vapor. as in a standard spray drying system. 3. This reduced mixing of hot air should make the drying rates decrease. A lower moisture content can be reached by higher temperatures at the outlet.G. First. in dehydration of liquids during the evaporation of droplets with dissolved substances. 2003). 2003. the outlet air temperature was 19–24 °C lower than in the standard spray drying system.38 A. The hotter the air. This will slow down the rate of subsequent water removal.128. Goula. Comparison between the moisture content of powders produced by the two drying systems is shown in Figs. However. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 12 11 powder moisture content (% wb) Q a : 22. As shown in Figs. Data represent the average . 22. As a result. 4.199 to 0. the temperature of the exhaust air leaving the drying chamber controls the residual moisture in the powder. varying from 4. the greater will be the rate of heat transfer into the particles. According to Downton. ranging from 0. Moisture content shows a decrease with an increase in compressed air flow rate due to the effect of this flow rate on mean particle size. In experiments conducted under the same operating conditions using a standard laboratory spray drying system powder moisture content. 1991).M. narrow spray cones are formed and air may not penetrate the centre of the spray pattern until droplets have travelled quite some distance from the nozzle (Liang & King.2 and 0. larger surface area provides more surface in contact with the heating medium and more surface from which the moisture can escape. which provides less surface in contact with the heating medium and less surface from which the moisture can escape. In the modified system. high temperature air in the vicinity of the drying particles will take up the Eq. glassy surface allowing further dehydration of the particle core as the particle travels through the drying chamber. 2004). which provides the driving force for moisture removal. Cp and S equal to 0. smaller particles reduce the distance heat must travel to the centre of the particles and reduce the distance through which moisture in the centre of the particles must travel to reach the surface and escape. The drier the air. the rapid removal of water results in vitrification of the droplets within a short time. Adamopoulos. and F . K. moisture removal.117. 1–4. or the moisture will create a saturated atmosphere at the particle surface. Thus. the more rapid is the rate of drying. (1) has an R2 value of 0. are given in Figs. occurs rapidly within a porous. 6. Generally.997.

Powder bulk density as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. Drying air flow rate.35 powder bulk density (g/mL) 0. values of the three determinations.30 0.10 400 0. air flow rate increases lead to an increase in powder moisture content and a decrease in powder bulk density.25 powder bulk density (g/mL) 0. Masters (1979b) reported that increasing residual moisture content increases bulk density of a dry product.25 0.50 m 3 /h Tinlet (°C) 110 120 modified 130 system 140 110 120 standard 130 system 140 fitted model 39 0. 5.G. the more particles tend to stick together. and there is a greater tendency for the particles to be hollow.004 g/ml.30 0. Powder bulk density as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. 0. leaving more interspaces between them and consequently resulting in a larger bulk volume. 400 500 600 700 800 900 Qc (L/h) Fig.25 0.25 m 3 /h 0. increasing the drying air temperature generally produces a decrease in bulk and particle density. Higher compressed air flow rate causes an increase of powder bulk density due to its effect on mean particle size. as evaporation rates are faster and products dry to a more porous or fragmented structure.20 0.35 0.15 500 600 700 800 900 Qc (L/h) Fig. Drying air flow rate. this trend was not observed here. 22. However.00 m3 /h.15 0. According to Walton (2000). Drying air flow rate. expressed as the average standard deviation of the three determinations.35 powder bulk density (g/mL) 0. Powder bulk density as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. due to the thermoplastic nature of the product. Symbols are the same as in Fig. 17. Powder bulk density as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. 8. was 0. 5. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 0. The effect of drying air flow rate on powder bulk density depends on its effect on moisture content due to the sticky nature of the product.40 Q a : 21.M.A. The former can be caused by .10 400 500 600 700 800 900 Qc (L/h) Fig.40 Q a : 19.35 0. 5. 6.40 Q a : 22. As a result. The higher the powder moisture content. 7.15 0.00 m 3 /h powder bulk density (g/mL) 0.25 0. 19. 21.10 400 500 600 700 Q c (L/h) 800 900 0. K. 0. Smaller particles produced with higher compressed air rates are also more dense and so further increase bulk density. Goula.75 m3 /h.20 0.15 0.75 m 3 /h 0.20 0. Drying air flow rate. Symbols are the same as in Fig.10 Fig.30 0.25 m3 /h. Increased air inlet temperature causes a reduction in bulk density. Symbols are the same as in Fig.40 Q a : 17. The repeatability for bulk density.30 0.20 0.50 m3 /h. 5.

The time required for the powder to dissolve was found to increase with an increase in compressed air flow rate. 19. 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 400 500 600 Q a : 21. 9–12 show powder solubility in relation to inlet air temperature. Drying air flow rate. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 400 500 600 700 800 900 bulkdensity ¼ À0:405 þ 0:0132 Á Tinlet þ 0:00514 Á Qa 2 þ 0:000239 Á Qc À 0:000044 Á Tinlet À 0:000001 Á Q2 À 0:000188 Á Tinlet Qa c ð2Þ Eq.25 m3 /h. was as follows: Q a : 19. Powder solubility Figs. the preliminary air dehumidification increases powder bulk density due to its effect on powder moisture content. the particles tend to collide with each other formatting agglomerates with more interspaces between the particles and consequently resulting in lower bulk density. powder bulk density was lower.3. Large particles may sink.00 m 3 /h powder solubility (sec) 700 800 900 Q c (L/h) Tinlet (° C) 110 120 modified 130 system 140 110 120 standard 130 system 140 fitted model Fig. Powder solubility as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. Powder solubility as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. 9. .974. The best model predictions for bulk density in relation to the process variables.00 m3 /h. 10. Powder solubility as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. and F . In addition. & Tzia. compressed air flow rate and drying air flow rate. Symbols are the same as in Fig.M. Cp and S equal to 0. 3. This trend is similar to that reported by other researchers (Papadakis. varying from 0. The effect of drying air flow rate on powder solubility depends on its effect on powder moisture content. low moisture content seems to be associated with fast dissolution. Drying air flow rate. 2004). 9. in a standard spray drying system. Drying air flow rate.100 to 0. Gardeli..0 and 7. 5–8.40 A. drying air flow rate and compressed air flow rate. as a 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 400 Q a : 17.G. powder solubility (sec) 500 600 700 Q c (L/h) 800 900 Fig. Symbols are the same as in Fig. whereas small ones are more dusty and generally float on water making for uneven wetting and reconstitution (Potter. 1998).326. and is particularly common in skin-forming materials. 1968). In experiments conducted under the same operating conditions using a standard laboratory spray drying system. Comparisons between the bulk densities of the powders produced by the two drying systems are shown in Figs. 21.258 g/ml (Goula et al.25 m3/h Q c (L/h) Fig. Since a low moisture content of tomato powder is associated with a high bulk density. Solubility of the tomato powders varied from 121 to 245 s. 5. respectively.50 m 3 /h powder solubility (sec) particle inflation-ballooning or puffing. air inlet temperature.295 · 10À3 . 17. Air flow rate increases lead to an increase in powder moisture content and a decrease in powder solubility. (2) has an R2 value of 0. since particle size affects solubility rate.50 m3 /h. K. 9. The repeatability expressed as the average standard deviation of the three determinations was 5 s. 11. Goula.

15(10). 283–295. D. E. was as follows: solubility ¼ 352 À 2:22 Á Tinlet À 10:5 Á Qa þ 0:186 Á Qc þ 0:393 Á Q2 À 0:000083 Á Q2 a c þ 0:0301 Á Tinlet Qa ð3Þ References Al-Kahtani. N. & Rigby. powder solubility (sec) Q c (L/h) Fig. (1997). 4. M. S. Bhandari. Conclusions An experimental spray dryer was modified for drying tomato concentrate.. varying from 188 to 435 s (Goula et al. drying air flow rate. (3) has an R2 value of 0.75 m 3 /h 4.. The lower the moisture content and the higher the bulk density and the solubility. juice and powder (1st ed. . Acta Alimentaria Hungaricae.75 m3 /h. respectively. R. T. A.6 and 4. In experiments conducted under the same operating conditions using a standard laboratory spray drying system powder solubility was lower. 55(4). London: Food Trade Press. (1997). J. Howes. The best model predictions for powder solubility in relation to the process variables. Introduction. (1990). Solubility showed an increase with an increase in inlet air temperature. i.M. Comparisons between the solubilities of the powders produced with the two drying systems in relation to the air inlet temperature are shown in Figs. & Ismail.) extract. 9–12. Drying Technology. (1964). B. 14(3). 2004). 2509–2525. Goose. Crooks. (1985). In Process drying practice (pp. (1982). and so a decrease in time required for the powder to dissolve.e. P. bulk density and solubility. the more soluble is the powder. amorphous powders. 124–126).. Downton. & Hassan. • solubility increases with a decrease in drying and compressed air flow rate. and with an increase in compressed air flow rate.G. T. but. C. and compressed air flow rate..A. G. Symbols are the same as in Fig. Journal of Food Science. & Howes. Cp and S equal to 0. and with a decrease in drying air flow rate. Spray drying of Roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L. & Binsted. H. The modified system increased powder solubility due to its effect on powder moisture content. and with an increase in air inlet temperature. air inlet temperature. K.979. increasing the drying air temperature generally produces an increase in particle size. the better will be considered the product. It appears that the preliminary air dehumidification promoting rapid particulate skin formation improved not only product recovery. and compressed air flow rate on tomato powder moisture content. Datta. H. 15(2). air inlet temperature. Moisture content. 1073–1076. In experiments conducted under the same operating conditions using the standard laboratory spray drying system.. R. was studied. N. Datta.. Bhandari. Furthermore. A semi-empirical approach to optimize the quantity of drying aids required to spray dry sugar-rich foods.. I. (1991).122. In addition... the much higher air temperatures in the standard system may have resulted in denaturing more protein and hence affected solubility. This is due to the effect of inlet air temperature on residual moisture content. New York: McGraw-Hill.. Drying air flow rate. L. B. puree. 3– 12). powder moisture content was higher and powder bulk density and solubility were lower. R. In Tomato paste.. It was observed that: • powder moisture content decreases with an increase in air inlet temperature and compressed air flow rate. bulk density and solubility are the most commonly quoted specifications of a powder product. since a low moisture content seems to be associated with fast dissolution.. and F . Problems associated with spray drying of sugar-rich foods.205. 671–685. • bulk density increases with a decrease in drying air flow rate and air inlet temperature. H. 22. UK. A. Mechanism of stickiness in hygroscopic. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 400 500 600 700 800 900 41 Q a : 22. The lower the powder moisture content. Eq. also product properties. 12. pp. Flores-Luna. Powder solubility as a function of inlet air temperature and compressed air flow rate. J. Cook.. 9. El-Tinay. Drying Technology. A. drying air flow rate. 447–451. Allied tomato products. Effect of some additives and processes on the characteristics of agglomerated and granulated spray-dried Roselle powder. & King. P. R. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals. 21. B. The effect of spray drying conditions. The modification made on the original design consisted of connecting the spray dryer inlet air intake to an absorption air dryer. Goula.

K. Drying Technology. J. N. M. Spray dried products–– Characterization of particle morphology. Gransmith. Raisin extract powder: Production. & Copley. Krokida. In Advances in preconcentration and dehydration of foods (pp. D. The morphology of spraydried particles––The effect of process variables upon the morphology of spray-dried particles. J. & King. L. & Mumford. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers––London. C. Filkova (Eds.2004. 1756–1765. Industrial drying of foods (pp. In Practical dehydration (pp.. 445–458. 9(1).. 442–460. D. In Proceedings of the third international symposium of food rheology and structure. pp. Adamopoulos / Journal of Food Engineering 66 (2005) 35–42 Masters. 23(4). B.. 354–357. Connecticut: AVI Publishing Company. M. Food science (pp. K. Produce uniform particles by spray drying.). Connecticut: AVI Publishing Company. Liang. D. Greece. & Das Gupta.. Halkidiki. C. Adamopoulos. J. & Maroulis. physical and sensory properties. S.. & Kazakis. Spray drying fundamentals: Process stages and layouts. M.42 A. 90–114). Oakley. pp. Journal of Food Engineering. 32. Z. 1–25.. Influence of spray drying conditions on tomato powder moisture. Z. M.1016/j. K. In Proceedings of the symposium EUDrying ’03. P. Masters. A. & Adamopoulos. & Mumford. (1979a). (1973). Masters. 15(10). 48–54. E. International Journal of Food Science and Technology. London: Food Trade Press. 125–133). The morphology of spray-dried particles––A qualitative view. G. R. Van Arsdel. (1999b). A. 1943–1986. In Handbook of industrial drying (2nd ed. (2003). (2000). Krokida. Gardeli. 93(10). Single-drop experiments. (2000). C. In A. (1974). & Adamopoulos. In Spray drying handbook (pp. E. A. Goula. N. (1997). 1. P. Switzerland. M. In Spray drying handbook (pp. Oakley.. E.. Drying Technology. .. G. A systematic approach for investigation of spray drying processes. New York: Marcel Dekker. 337– 340). Spray drying: Influence of developing drop morphology on drying rates and retention of volatile substances. UK. Zurich. C. Baker (Ed. Goula. 39(6). In C. 227–257). Spray/gas mixing behaviour within spray dryers. K. Greece. (1998). Roos. (1995). M. S. (2004). Heraklion. E. D. S. Mujumdar & I. J. Potter..jfoodeng.. E. & Bahu. G.. & A.. G. Stanley. Goula. Y. S. N. (1971). J. New York: Halsted Press. Copley. (1989). N. (1979b). New York: John Wiley and Sons.). Dehydration of foods. K.. (1998). Jayaraman.). M. Drying Technology. C. (1999a). Drying Technology. temperature fields and consequent drying rates in spray drying. Goula. Influence of spray drying conditions on tomato powder properties.029. Drying Technology (5). K. K. The effect on the product recovery. & Maroulis. Morgan (Eds. D.. New York: Blackie Academic & Professional. E. D.M. I. M. 303–313). (1991). K. Walton. D. E. A laboratory scraped surface drying chamber for spray drying of tomato paste.. (1991). (2004). & King. Nath.. (1997). J. & Tzia. doi:10. Zogzas. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und Technologie. 77(A). 291–335). J. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers––London. K. 18(9). K. 77(A). B. Food dehydration (2nd ed. M. Westport. S. In B. (in press). (1998). G. Goula. A.. J. Modeling the effect of vacuum. Westport. A. In Proceedings of the 11th international drying symposium IDS ’98. W. Effect of drying method on shrinkage and porosity. & Satpathy. (2003).02. Walton. Drying of fruits and vegetables. I. Hecht. 661–662). Effects of latest developments of spray drying. & Adamopoulos. Ponting. S. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. 16(6). 21–53). New York: Halsted Press. Spray dryers. Drying of droplets/sprays. Drying (pp.. Karatas. Influence of spray drying conditions on residue accumulation––Simulation using CFD. Chemical Engineering Progress. A. Crete. 2441–2458.. Fruit and vegetables juices. 211–215). Spray drying of tomato pulp in dehumidified air. (1997). Factors influencing flow patterns. R. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 1173–1193. J. Phase and state transitions in food dehydration. Walton. C. Spicer. 21–38. (1968). G. K. B. K.. Shrinkage and porosity during drying.G. Drying Technology (5). Papadakis.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful