Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Food Engineering

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jfoodeng

Study on heat and mass transfer of sugarcane stem during vacuum

pre-cooling
Ning Wang , Ankang Kan *, Shang Mao , Zipei Huang , Fuliang Li
Merchant Marine College, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, 201306, China

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

Keywords: Heat and mass transfer of fruit and vegetables is significantly affected by vacuum pre-cooling end temperature
Vacuum pre-cooling (VPET). The simulations and experiments on the heat and mass transfer of sugarcane stem were performed to
Heat and mass transfer investigate the trends of total system pressure, temperature distribution, the water evaporation rate, weight loss,
Sugarcane stem
and thermal conductivity versus time during vacuum pre-cooling. A cylindrical model of heat and mass transfer
Cylindrical model
Finite volume method
of sugarcane stem was established, taking the transient heat transfer and mass conservation into consideration.
Based on mass and energy conservation, the governing equations for water involved were coupled. What is more,
the respiratory heat was regarded as the internal heat source. The finite volume method (FVM) was employed to
precisely derive differential equations. The results of the numerical simulation and experiments showed that the
maximum deviation of mean temperature between simulation and experiment was less than 2.6 ◦ C. The
maximum weight error between the simulation results and the experimental data was less than 2%, while the
error of weight loss was 16.35%. The thermal conductivity in the radial direction of the sugarcane stem was
lower than that of the axial direction. Compared with the simulation process, the two peaks of water evaporation
rate in the experiment were caused by the change in relative humidity. The maximum errors in simulation and
experiment operation for water evaporation rate and relative humidity were below 25% and 8.4%, respectively.
The results implied that simulation results were consonant with the data obtained in the experiment. The reliably
cylindrical model can be taken as an ideal reference for simulation research of other processes in the vacuum pre-
cooling.

1. Introduction
As is well-known, rich nutrients and biological activity ingredients in
fruit and vegetables are essential for human health. However, field heat
and respiration heat of fruit and vegetables after harvest still exist in
independent living bodies (Sakinah et al., 2019; Arah et al., 2015). Also,
the shelf life and the aging of fruit and vegetables is vitally influenced by
the changes of the internal environment (respiration, transpiration,
secondary metabolism, etc.) and external environment (temperature,
ethylene, oxygen, carbon dioxide, etc.) of harvest (Giannakourou and
Taoukis, 2019; Ma et al., 2017; Pinela and Ferreira, 2017). An advanced
cold-chain logistics system is urgently needed to support fresh goods
from production to cold storage and preservation, logistics distribution,
exhibition, sale, and other processes (Zhong et al., 2017).
How to cool fruit and vegetables after harvest is a critical step in the
cold-chain logistics system (Lu et al., 2019; Hsiao et al., 2018; Álvares
et al., 2007). In other words, the way to quickly remove the respiratory
heat of fruit and vegetables and inhibit respiration is vital. It is the most
effective and convenient way to keep the quality of fruit and vegetables
by eliminating the field heat and inhibiting respiration in cultivated fruit
and vegetables (Woolf and Ferguson, 2000; Ranjbaran and Datta, 2019).
For the first step in the cold-chain, pre-cooling can lower fruit and
vegetables’ temperature to meet the temperature requirement for cold
storage by a unique process (Kuo and Chen, 2010; Xu et al., 2018, 2019).
Furthermore, pre-cooling technology can effectively weaken the respi­
ratory intensity, control the activity of enzymes, and inhibit the repro­
duction of microorganisms (Vonasek and Nitin, 2016).
In general, pre-cooling methods include forced-air cooling, cold
water cooling, ice-cooling, and vacuum pre-cooling.
As an early cooling method, forced-air cooling has several advan­
tages, such as simple operation and low cost. However, it is suitable for
unpackaged and non-perishable products with a narrow scope of
application and a long cooling time (Becker and Fricke, 2004; Ferrua
and Singh, 2011). The cold water cooling does not lead to water loss and
can effectively retain fruit and vegetables’ moisture content.

* Corresponding author. 1550 Haigang Ave, Shanghai, 201306, China.

E-mail address: ankang0537@126.com (A. Kan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110288
Received 7 January 2020; Received in revised form 31 July 2020; Accepted 9 August 2020
Available online 14 August 2020
0260-8774/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N. Wang et al.
Nomenclature
A Surface area of product (m2)
c Specific heat (kJ kg− 1 K− 1)
da Diameter of pores (m)
Dav Diameter of sugarcane stem (m)
D Diffusion coefficient (m2 s− 1)
fbh Respiratory heat of product (kJ m− 3 s− 1)
fv Vapor generation rate of product (kg m− 3 s− 1)
h Convective heat transfer coefficient (kW m− 2 K− 1)
hfg Latent heat of evaporation of water (kJ kg− 1)
Ha Height of sugarcane stem (m)
M Molecular weight (kg kmol− 1)
n Normal direction of surface
Nu Nusselt number
p Pressure (Pa)
Pr Prandtl number
psat Saturation pressure (Pa)
pv Pressure of vacuum chamber (Pa)
qc Convective heat (kW m− 2)
Re Reynolds number
R0 Universal gas constant (=8.314 kJ kmol− 1K− 1)
Nevertheless, recycling cold water may be easily contaminated by
pathogenic bacteria. Thus, fruit and vegetables would be rotten and
cause much loss of economic value (Chepngeno et al., 2016; Liang et al.,
2013). Ice-cooling is mainly applied to short-distance transportation for
particular products, such as freshly harvested seafood products, which
need to be stored under low temperatures (Pamitran et al., 2013).
Currently, vacuum pre-cooling is an effective method for food pre-
cooling (Kongwong et al., 2019; Ozturk and Hepbasli, 2017; Cheng
and Hsueh, 2007). The vacuum pump is used to reduce the ambient
pressure associated with the water boiling point. According to the
physical property of water, heat in fruit and vegetables can be quickly
taken away by the evaporation of moisture from the surface and the
inside (Augusto et al., 2013, 2014; Wang et al., 2017). Vacuum
pre-cooling is superior to the conventional pre-cooling methods in
cooling rate and temperature distribution (Zhang et al., 2013; Sun and
zheng, 2006).
Theoretical studies of vacuum pre-cooling technology are well-
developed. Many scholars simulated the heat and mass transfer pro­
cess of fruit and vegetables under vacuum pre-cooling from different
research perspectives and tested their quality after pre-cooling (Zhu
et al., 2019a). However, most scholars concentrated on the effect and
quality of fruit and vegetables after pre-cooling (Tao et al., 2007; Feng
et al., 2019). Moreover, the latent heat of evaporation of water was
considered the only internal heat source of heat and mass transfer in the
vacuum pre-cooling process. He et al. (2013) investigated the effect of
vacuum cooling on the antioxidant system of enzymes in cherries and
the inhibition of surface bacteria in the course of storage. The experi­
ment illustrated that the activities of catalase and peroxidase in cherries
under vacuum pre-cooling were higher than that of the untreated
cherries (p < 0.05), while the content of malondialdehyde of the former
was lower than that of the latter (p < 0.05). Ozturk and Ozturk (2009)
studied the cooling effect of iceberg lettuce with different pressure. They
found from the comparison of 0.7 kPa and 1.0 kPa that the former’s
cooling time was faster than the latter, but the mass loss was higher of
0.28%. Sun and Hu (2003) established a mathematical model to study
the heat and mass transfer of water evaporation and transmission in
porous food during vacuum cooling. The results showed that it coincided
with the experimental results very well in terms of core temperature and
weight loss. He and Li (2008) proposed a mathematical model to test the
vacuum cooler’s performance and described the evaporation boiling
2
Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288
r Cylindrical coordinate system
S Volumetric flow rate (m3 s− 1)
sv Internal heat source (kJ m− 3 s− 1)
T Temperature (K)
V Volume of vacuum chamber (m3)
τ Tortuosity factor
λf Thermal conductivity of fluid (kW m− 1 K− 1)
x Cylindrical coordinate system
ρ Density (kg m-3)
μ Dynamic viscosity of water vapor (kPa s)
ξ Migration resistance of water vapor
ωv Water content in the vacuum chamber (%)
θ Cylindrical coordinate system
ε Porosity
λp Thermal conductivity (kW m-1 K-1)
Subscripts
av Average
sur Outer surface of sugarcane stem
v Vacuum chamber
0 Initial
phenomena in the process of vacuum cooling based on the conservation
of energy and mass. It was found that the temperature difference be­
tween simulation results and experimental data was lower than 1 ◦ C, and
the maximum weight deviation was less than 0.59%. Hence, the simu­
lation results agreed with the experimental facts well.
VPET affects not only the storage quality of fruit and vegetables after
pre-cooling but also on their thermophysical parameters (Bahrani et al.,
2014). Hence, the numerical model’s analysis and the establishment of
the geometric model are of great significance for further study. The
cylindrical sugarcane stem was selected as a research object in this
paper. Given that the coupled heat and mass transfer effects of multi­
phase and multicomponent, the finite volume method was utilized in the
simulation. Meanwhile, respiratory heat was considered in the internal
heat source, which was involved in the governing equations. The heat
and mass transfer process and thermal conductivity of sugarcane stem
with different VPETs were studied through modeling analysis and
experimental verification. It is intended to provide relevant parameters
for developing vacuum pre-cooling devices and the quality requirement
of products.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Thermodynamic principles
The process of vacuum pre-cooling is mainly divided into three
stages (Fig. 1). The first one is the decompression stage. Due to the slight
intensity of heat transfer, the temperature of food does not drop
dramatically in this stage. The water begins to evaporate at the second
stage, where the ambient pressure drops to the saturation pressure
corresponding to the initial temperature of the product (flash point). The
third is the fully boiling stage. With the continuous evaporation of water
and the discharge of vapor, the temperature of food drops sharply to the
required value. Fig. 2 displays the corresponding saturated vapor pres­
sure of pure water at different temperatures. When the temperature
drops rapidly to the required level, the vent valve is opened and air flows
into the vacuum chamber to restore the surrounding pressure (Zhu et al.,
2019a; Jin and Xu, 2006).
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Fig. 1. Schematic of moisture migration during vacuum pre-cooling: (a) Initial stage; (b) Boiling diffusion stage; (c) Fully boiling stage.

7. The temperature decreased in the vacuum pre-cooling process was

mainly caused by the evaporation of water.

2.2.1. Meshing
To improve the accuracy of the simulation, the FVM was utilized to
solve the heat transfer process. In the three-dimensional cylindrical
coordinate system, P was a spatial node of the cylindrical model, E and
W were located at both sides of P along the θ direction, U and B were
located at both sides of P along the x-direction, and N and S were located
at both sides of P along the r-direction (Fig. 3). Within the time interval
[t, t+1], the selected control volume node P was discretized by the
integration at three directions of the coordinate axis. The fully implicit
scheme of the 3D unsteady heat conduction equation after dispersion is
shown as follows:

aP TP = aE TE + aW TW + aS TS + aN TN + aU TU + aB TB + SC rp ΔxΔrΔθ + a0p Tp0

(1)
Fig. 2. The saturated vapor pressure of pure water at different temperatures.
ρf crp ΔxΔrΔθ
aP = aE + aW + aS + aN + aU + aB + a0p − SP rp ΔxΔrΔθ, a0p =
Δt
2.2. Geometric model (2)

According to the biological morphology of the sugarcane stem, the λΔrΔx λΔrΔx λrs ΔθΔx
aE = , aW = , aS = (3)
cylindrical model with a diameter of 4 cm and a length of 7 cm was (δθ)e re (δθ)w rw (δr)s
established. During vacuum pre-cooling, the heat and mass transfer of
cylindrical sugarcane stem was perceived as a coupling process of the λrn ΔθΔx λrP ΔrΔθ λrP ΔrΔθ
aN = , aU = , aB = (4)
mass diffusion and heat transfer in a porous material. Not only the (δr)n (δx)u (δx)b
coupled heat and mass transfer effect of multicomponent were involved,
but also the phase transition of water did. The vacuum pre-cooling Where a is the coefficient in the discrete equation, Sc is the constant term
process of cylindrical sugarcane stem was simulated and verified to of a linear equation transformed by the source term, the superscript 0 is
investigate the heat and mass transfer process and thermal properties of the value of the previous time layer in the unsteady problem, the capital
sugarcane stem with different VPETs. letters P, E, W, S, N, U, and B are the studied node and the six adjacent
In order to simplify the heat and mass transfer process, the cylin­ nodes, respectively, and the lowercase letters e, w, s, n, u, and b are the
drical model was created based on the following assumptions: corresponding interfaces.

1. There was no heat input from the outside air in the vacuum chamber. 2.3. Numerical model
2. The radiant heat was ignored in the model.
3. The experimental object was a porous material composed of a solid The value of diffusion coefficient related to the density, temperature,
frame, liquid phases, and gas phases. and pressure of the mixture is determined by the experiment. According
4. Water vapor passed freely through the frame by flowing and to the theory of molecular motion, it is concluded that the ideal gas
diffusing. correlates D～P− 1T1.5. When the temperature T0 and pressure P0 are
5. The total volume of the experimental subject did not change in the known in terms of gas-phase substances, the corresponding diffusion
whole pre-cooling. coefficient D0 can be described as (Yang and Tao, 2006):
6. The water vapor produced by evaporation was completely absorbed
( )1.5
by the condenser. T P0
D = D0 (5)
T0 P

3
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Fig. 3. Model meshing.

Where T0 = 273K and P0 = 1atm. Where ε is the porosity of fruit and vegetables, τ is the tortuosity factor,
During vacuum pre-cooling, the vapor from food and vacuum M is the molecular weight, R0 is the universal gas constant, ξx , ξr and ξθ
chamber is deemed as two mixed gases. According to the Max­ are the direction factors at x, y and z directions of the vegetable fiber.
well–Gilliland formula, the diffusion coefficient between two gas mol­ It is hypothesized that there are two paths through the cylindrical
ecules is expressed as follows (Yang and Tao, 2006): model element in the vertical direction, and the straight path of vapor
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ diffusion isξ0 . The short path through the cylindrical model element is
4.357 × 10− 2 T 3/2 1 1 1.15ξ0 while the long path is 1.33ξ0 . The direction factors of x, y, and z
D= ( )2 + (6)
1/3
P Va + Vb 1/3 Ma Mb on fruit and vegetables’ fiber can be written as follows (Sun and Hu,
2002):
Where Ma and Mb are the mole masses of two mixed gases, and Va and Vb ζ x = ξ0 (12)
are the volumes of gases.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
2.3.1. Governing equations ζ r = ξ0 (1.3333 sin θ)2 + (1.1547 cos θ)2 (13)
Based on the above assumptions, a numerical model of cylindrical √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
fruit and vegetables in vacuum pre-cooling was established. According ζθ = ξ0 (1.1574 sin θ)2 + (1.3333 cos θ)2 (14)
to the conservation of energy, the transient heat transfer equation can be
expressed as follows (Yang and Tao, 2006): The respiratory heat is relevant to temperature, density and breeds,
( ) ( ) ( ) which can be obtained by (Gaffney, 1985):
∂T ∂ ∂T 1 ∂ ∂T 1 ∂ ∂T
ρc = λp + rλp + 2 λp + sv (7) fbh = ρm1 (T + 17.8)m2 (15)
∂t ∂x ∂x r ∂r ∂r r ∂θ ∂θ

sv = hfg fv + fbh (8) Where m1 and m2 are constant parameters for specific types of fruit and
vegetables, respectively.
Where ρ is the density of fruit and vegetables, cis the specific heat ca­ The relationship between the temperature of fruit and vegetables and
pacity of fruit and vegetables, λp is the thermal conductivity of fruit and their corresponding saturation pressure can be described as (Cogné
vegetables, T is temperature, t is time, x, r, θ is the cylindrical co­ et al., 2013):
ordinates, fv is the inner vapor generation rate of fruit and vegetables, (
3816.44
)
and sv is the internal heat source, including latent heat of evaporation hfg psat = exp 23.209 − (16)
T − 46.44
and respiratory heat fbh .
The thermal conductivity of the sugarcane stem is obtained accord­ According to the operating parameters of the vacuum pump provided
ing to Eq. (9) (Rao et al., 2014): by the manufacturer, the relationship of the pressure between the vac­
uum chamber and time is expressed as:
λp = 0.58ωw + 0.155ωp + 0.25ωc + 0.16ωf + 0.135ωa (9)
dpv S × pv
=− (17)
Where ωw , ωp , ωc , ωf and ωa represent the weight percentage of mois­ dt V
ture, protein, carbohydrate, fat, and ash inside sugarcane stem,
respectively. Where S is the volumetric flow rate of the vacuum pump, V is the volume
The latent heat of water evaporation from fruit and vegetables in the of the vacuum chamber.
vacuum pre-cooling process is related to the temperature. The rela­
tionship between the latent heat of evaporation and temperature can be 2.3.2. Initial and boundary conditions
expressed as follows (Rogers and Mayhew, 1995): For Eq. (7) and Eq. (11), the initial conditions are as follows:

hfg = 2500.8 − (T − 273.15) × 2.422449 (10) t = 0, T = T0 , p = p0 , λp = λ0 , ωw = ω0 (18)

According to Fick’s second law of diffusion, the mass transfer The boundary conditions on the symmetries are as follows:
equation for porous media is shown as follows (Sun and Hu, 2003): ∂T ∂p ∂ωw ∂ωw
[ ( ) ( ) ( )] − λp = 0, = 0, = 0, =0 (19)
εMD 1 ∂ ∂p 1 ∂ ∂p 1 ∂ ∂p ∂n ∂n ∂n ∂n
fv = − + r + (11)
τ R0 T ξ x ∂ x ∂ x ξr r∂r ∂r ξθ r ∂θ ∂θ Where n is normal of the surface.
2

4
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

On the surfaces are:

p = pv , ωw = ωv (20)

∂T
− λp = sv + q c (21)
∂n

qc = Ah(Tsur − Tv ) (22)
The convective heat transfer coefficient between sugarcane stem and
gases in the vacuum chamber is expressed as (Yang and Tao, 2006):
λf
h= Nu (23)
Dav
The Nusselt number for the fluid crossing the surface of the cylin­
drical sugarcane stem is described as (Churchill and Bernstein, 1997):

0.62Re1/2 Pr1/3 [ ]4/5

Nu = 0.3 + [ ]1/4 1 + (Re/28200)
5/8
(24)
1 + (0.4/Pr)2/3

Fig. 4. Grid independence analyses of temperature variation of sugarcane stem

2.4. Model parameters during vacuum pre-cooling.

The thermophysical parameters were closely related to water content in Fig. 5. The simulation results implied that the temperature distribu­
and internal nutrients, and the thermal conductivity of sugarcane stem tion of sugarcane stem showed an arc centered on its core, and the
in the paper was determined by experiment facts. The related model temperature decreased sequentially from the inside to the outside. The
parameters are shown in Table 1. temperature distribution was caused by the continuous evaporation of
moisture and the discharge of vapor. Due to the convective heat transfer
2.5. Grid independence and simulation of temperature between the surface of the sugarcane stem and gas in the vacuum
chamber, this moisture on the surface of the sugarcane stem arrived at
2.5.1. Grid independence the flash point before the core (Zhu et al., 2019b). But the temperature of
The temperature variation of sugarcane stem was taken as the the sugarcane stem did not drop sharply because of the slight thermal
research indicator to verify grid independence. Five different grid exchange. At the initial stage, water migration in the inner layer of the
growth (normal mesh, fine mesh, finer mesh, extra finer mesh and sugarcane stem was hindered by the evaporation of water on the surface.
extremely fine mesh) were employed in the simulation. As shown in Meanwhile, the sugarcane stem’s internal moisture did not reach the
Fig. 4, there was about 1.4% average temperature change when the flash point, and the cooling was dependent on heat conduction. Hence,
mesh changed from normal mesh to finer mesh, and it was about 0.53% the cooling rate on the surface of the sugarcane stem was the fastest,
from fine mesh to finer mesh. However, it was a less than 0.05% while the central cooling rate was the slowest (Fig. 6). In addition, the
maximum difference in temperature, which was obtained at different axial temperature difference of sugarcane stems from x = 0.025 m to x =
times with an increase in grid number from finer mesh to extremely fine 0.035 m (NO.4) in Fig. 6a was below 0.6 ◦ C, while the radial tempera­
mesh. As mentioned above, the temperature variation at different times ture difference from z = 0 m to z = 0.01 m in Fig. 6b was about 1.5 ◦ C.
was insensitive to grid resolution. Therefore, taking careful consider­ Therefore, it was evident that the axial cooling rate of cylindrical sug­
ation of the calculation time and the accuracy, the extremely fine mesh arcane stem was less than the radial cooling rate.
(50.4 K elements) was utilized, and the relative tolerance was set to
10− 4. The maximum element size was 1.4 × 10− 3 m, while the minimum 3. Experimental validation
element size was 1.4 × 10− 5 m.
Experiments were undertaken to verify the correctness of the cylin­
2.5.2. Temperature distributions of numerical simulation drical model established in the paper. Primary experimental devices are
The simulated temperature distributions of surface（No.1，No.2， ZLG0.1A vacuum pre-cooling tester (Shanghai Kind-water Preservation
No.3，No.7，No.8 and No.9）and core（No.4，No.5, No.6，No.10， Fresh Tech Co., Ltd.), HZY-B1000 electronic balance (Fuzhou Huazhi
No.11 and No.12）of sugarcane stem at 12 ◦ C，10 ◦ C，8 ◦ C，6 ◦ C，4 Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd.), and Hot Disk TPS 500 Thermal Con­
◦
C and 2 ◦ C, respectively in the process of vacuum pre-cooling are shown stants Analyser (Sweden). The vacuum pre-cooling system is mainly
composed of a vacuum pump and a compressor (Fig. 7a). Data on
temperature, humidity, and pressure of fruit and vegetables in the vac­
Table 1
Parameters of moisture movement model during vacuum pre-cooling.
uum chamber can be continuously measured and collected by the data
acquisition system, consisting of T-type thermocouples and pressure
Symbol Value Properties
sensors. The size of the vacuum chamber is 500 × 410 × 490 mm (L × W
W 0.097 Initial weight of sugarcane stem (kg) × H) with a minimum vacuum of 400 Pa and an accuracy of 1.0 Pa. The
Dav 0.04 Diameter of sugarcane stem (m) minimum temperature of vacuum pre-cooling system is − 5 ◦ C with an
Hav 0.07 Height of sugarcane stem (m) accuracy of 0.1 ◦ C, which can be arbitrarily set from − 5 ◦ C to 40 ◦ C.
ε 0.658 Porosity of sugarcane stem (Rao et al., 2008) Moreover, the accuracy of the humidity sensor is 0.5%.
τ 1.63 tortuosity factor (Geankoplis, 1983) Fresh sugarcane stems purchased on the market were chosen as the
ρ 1102.716 Density (kg m− 3) research objects. Those sugarcane stems were peeled to a diameter of 4
λ0 0.7517 Thermal conductivity (W m− 1
K− 1) cm and a length of 7 cm to ensure that the geometry was the same size as
c 3.1765 Specific heat (kJ kg− 1
K− 1) the model. The temperature sensor probes were inserted into the core
T0 298.15 Initial temperature (K) and surface positions of the sugarcane stem. The initial temperature of
p0 101325 Initial pressure (Pa) the sugarcane stem was 25 ◦ C, and the VPET was set to 2 ◦ C, 4 ◦ C, 6 ◦ C, 8

5
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Fig. 5. Internal temperature distributions of sugarcane stem throughout vacuum pre-cooling process.

6
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Fig. 6. Temperature variation curve of sugarcane stem under different VPETs: (a) Axial temperature variation (y = 0 m and z = 0 m); Radial temperature variation
(y = 0 m and x = 0.035 m).

Fig. 7. Experimental setup and procedure: (a) Sche­

matic diagram of vacuum pre-cooling system; (b) and
(c) Vacuum pre-cooling tester; (d) Thermal Constants
Analyser; (e) and (f) The sugarcane stem before and
after vacuum pre-cooling. (1) vacuum chamber; (2)
mass sensor; (3) sample; (4) thermocouples; (5)
electromagnetic bleeding valve; (6) programmable
logic controller; (7) computer; (8) pressure sensor; (9)
vacuum pump; (10) condenser; (11) compressor; (12)
cold trap; (13) thermal expansion valve; (14) dry fil­
ter; (15) liquid reservoir.

◦
C, 10 ◦ C, and 12 ◦ C, respectively (Table 2). The compressor and the The error between simulation and experiment can be expressed as
vacuum pump operated simultaneously after the equipment started, and follows:
stopped when the VPET at the center of sugarcane stem reached the ⃒ ⃒
⃒ex − si⃒
requested value. In the vacuum pre-cooling system, data such as pres­ Er = ⃒⃒ ⃒ (25)
ex ⃒
sure, temperature, and humidity were automatically collected and
recorded every 10 s.
Where ex is the experimental value, si is the simulated value.
The mean temperature between core and surface can be written as
Table 2 the following formula:
Experimental parameters and results of vacuum pre-cooling. ⃒co − su⃒
⃒ ⃒
Temperature/ Weight Weight Thermal Thermal Mt = ⃒ ⃒ (26)
2
◦
C (surface)/ (core)/ conductivity in conductivity in
kg kg the axial radial direction/ Where co is the core temperature, su is the surface temperature.
1
direction/W m− W m− 1 K− 1
K− 1
The mean temperature deviation between simulation and experi­
ment can be defined as follows:
2 0.09299 0.09170 0.5363 0.5081
4 0.09337 0.09241 0.5681 0.5542 De = |Mtex − Mtsi | (27)
6 0.09465 0.09373 0.6132 0.5871
8 0.09508 0.09394 0.6523 0.6321
10 0.09531 0.09411 0.6742 0.6592
12 0.09560 0.09436 0.6878 0.6753

7
N. Wang et al.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Pressure variation in the vacuum chamber
The pressure variation versus time in the vacuum chamber is illus­
trated in Fig. 8. It was observed that the experimental date coincided
with simulated results. The difference between simulation and experi­
ment in terms of temperature began to broaden sharply after 82 s, and
narrow down after 310 s. Nevertheless, the experimental value was al­
ways higher than the simulated value. The reason was that the operating
power of the vacuum pump was assumed to be constant in the simula­
tion. However, since the vacuum pump was just started at the early stage
of vacuum pre-cooling, the vacuum pump’s actual power was lower than
the set power in the simulation. Besides, the penetration of outside air
into the vacuum chamber was not considered in the simulation.
Therefore, the measured pressure’s drop rate at the beginning of the
experiment was less than the simulated pressure’ drop rate. Afterward,
the operating power tended to be stable, resulting in a downward trend
in the pressure difference between simulation and experiment. The re­
sults indicated that the error in pressure between simulated value (667
Pa) and experimental value (753 Pa) in the vacuum chamber was 11.4%
(He and Li, 2008).
4.2. Temperature variation
Fig. 9a shows the temperature variation of sugarcane stem in vacuum
pre-cooling. Results indicated that the maximum average temperature
deviation between simulated and experimental values was less than 2.6
◦
C. When the core temperature was cooled to 2 ◦ C, the simulation and
experiment time in vacuum pre-cooling were 883 s and 713 s, respec­
tively. Furthermore, the simulation time was 717 s, and the experiment
time was 633 s when the surface temperature was reduced to 2 ◦ C.
Trends based on the data suggested that the surface temperature of
sugarcane stem decreased faster than the central temperature. Also, it
was seen from Fig. 9b that compared with the experimentally measured
value, the temperature decreasing rate of sugarcane stem in the simu­
lation increased first and then decreased. Moreover, the maximum
temperature drop rate of sugarcane stem in the experiment was greater
than that of the simulation. The reason for the above change of tem­
perature drop was that the simulated pressure in the vacuum chamber
dropped faster than the experiment, depending on section 3.1. Mean­
while, the moisture of sugarcane stems in the simulation group reached
the flash point quicker than the experiment (Sun and Hu, 2003).
Nevertheless, fresh sugarcane stem involved in the experiment were
mechanically cut. The mechanical treatment not only damaged the
Fig. 8. Simulated and experimental pressure values vary with time during
vacuum pre-cooling.
8
Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288
tissue structure but also changed the performance of its internal water
migration (He et al., 2019). In the later stage of vacuum pre-cooling, it
improved water’s ability to migrate from the inner layer to the outer
layer, thus accelerating the evaporation of water inside the experiment’s
sugarcane stem.
4.3. Weight changes of sugarcane stem
The weight changes of the sugarcane stem during vacuum pre-
cooling are depicted in Fig. 10a. When the sugarcane stem’s interior
temperature was cooled to 2 ◦ C, the simulated weight loss was 3.84%,
while the experimental weight loss was 4.13% (Fig. 10b). Meanwhile,
the maximum weight error between the simulated and experimental
values was below 2%, and the weight loss error was 16.35%. The
conclusion from the experiment’s weight curves and simulation was
made that the former had a faster falling speed and shorter time. Two
main reasons for the above changes were got. One was that the sugar­
cane stem began to evaporate and absorb heat when the water reached
flash point at the boiling diffusion stage (Zhu et al., 2019b). The entire
sugarcane stem was surrounded by vapor, which hindered further
evaporation of water. The other was that the gas in the vacuum chamber
was continuously sucked by the vacuum pump and quickly discharged to
the outside. Driven by the pressure difference, the evaporation of water
in the outer layer made the pores increase in the sugarcane stem. As a
result, the ability of water migration from the inner layer to the outer
layer was improved (Alibas and Koksal, 2014). However, based on the
assumption, the initial moisture distribution was uniform in the simu­
lation. Consequently, the simulation’s weight loss was lower than that of
the experiment at the end of the vacuum pre-cooling. Besides, weight
loss increased with the reduction of VPET is illustrated in Fig. 11b. The
maximum rate of weight loss in the sugarcane stem occurred at the stage
where the VPET changed from 6 ◦ C to 4 ◦ C. The main reason was that the
internal temperature of moisture was up to the flash point in the
experiment, resulting in absorption and evaporation of water in the
sugarcane stem.
4.4. Effect of VPET on thermal conductivity of sugarcane stem
The VPET impacted on the thermal conductivity, as well as the
weight loss. The thermal conductivity of sugarcane stems varied with
VPET. In the vacuum pre-cooling process, the thermal conductivity of
the sugarcane stem was positively correlated with VPET. In other words,
the lower the VPET was, the lower the thermal conductivity was. The
axial thermal conductivity in the experiment was higher than the radial
one under the same VPET (Fig. 11a). The reason was that the sugarcane
stem’s thermal conductivity was correlated with its moisture content
and fiber structure (Bahrani et al., 2014). When the heat was transmitted
in the radial direction, it must pass through the tube wall of conductive
tissue with considerable heat resistance. Compared with radial fiber
structure, axial fiber structure has sieve tubes and vessels for trans­
porting organic matter, water, and inorganic salts. Hence it was weaker
in heat resistance.
4.5. Effect of relative humidity on water evaporation rate
The relative humidity of the initial environment, where the sugar­
cane stem located, was 63% (Fig. 12). Since the gas was sucked by the
vacuum pump, the relative humidity in the vacuum chamber dropped to
24% at 273 s, but a peak of relative humidity (26%) appeared from 273 s
to 384 s. Subsequently, the relative humidity in the experiment gradu­
ally decreased and remained constant at 20% after 883 s, while the
simulated value remained unchanged at 18.3% after 795 s. By
comparing the simulation results with the experimental data, it was
found that the maximum error of the water evaporation rate was below
25%, and the relative humidity error was within 8.4%. Meanwhile, two
peaks of water evaporation rate inside the experiment’s sugarcane stem
N. Wang et al. Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288

Fig. 9. Comparison of simulated and experimental temperature values: (a) The temperature on the surface and center of sugarcane stem; (b) Mean temperature
drop rate.

Fig. 10. Comparision of weight and weight loss of sugarcane stem with time between simulation and experiment during vacuum pre-cooling: (a) Weight; (b)
Weight loss.

Fig. 11. Effects of different VPETs on weight, weight loss and thermal conductivity of sugarcane stem: (a) The axial and radial thermal conductivity; (b) Weight and
weight loss.

were 0.021 g s− 1 and 0.003 g s− 1, respectively. But the peak value was
0.015 g s− 1 in the simulation. The reason was that certain convection
and slight radiation occurred between the sugarcane stem and the inner
wall (air) in the vacuum chamber, leading to the evaporation of water in
the experiment before the flash point. The space around the sugarcane
stem was filled with a large amount of vapor after the flash point,
resulting in an increase of relative humidity in the vacuum chamber. The
decrease of water evaporation rate in the sugarcane stem was attributed
to the increase of the evaporation resistance generated by relative hu­
midity in the vacuum chamber (Augusto et al., 2013, 2014). Therefore,
the relative humidity had inhibitory effects on the water evaporation
rate in the sugarcane stem. Nevertheless, the coupling relationship was

9
N. Wang et al.
Fig. 12. Effects of the change of the relative humidity in the vacuum chamber
on the water evaporation rate of sugarcane stem during vacuum pre-cooling.
not considered in the simulation.
5. Conclusions
Sugarcane stem, as a typical cylindrical fruit, was selected as the
research object. A cylindrical model of sugarcane stem in vacuum pre-
cooling was established based on the theory of heat and mass transfer.
Furthermore, respiratory heat was taken as an internal heat source in the
governing equations. The cylindrical model was theoretically and
numerically analyzed to study the water migration and heat transfer
characteristics in vacuum pre-cooling. The comparison between exper­
imental studies and simulation results was also made. Moreover, the
effects of VPET on thermal conductivity of sugarcane stem were
experimentally investigated. The conclusions can be summarized as
follows:
1) At the end of the vacuum pre-cooling, the pressure error between
simulated value (667 Pa) and the experimental value (753 Pa) was
11.4%. The maximum deviation of the mean temperature between
simulated and experimental results was within 2.6 ◦ C. The variation
curves of simulated pressure and temperature agreed well with that
of the experimental results.
2) Compared with the simulation results, the sugarcane stem in the
experiment was prone to water loss. The maximum weight error
between experimental and simulated results was less than 2%, and
the weight loss error was 16.35%.
3) The thermal conductivity of the sugarcane stem was affected by
moisture content associated with VPET. In the experiment, the
thermal conductivity decreased with the reduction of VPET.
Compared with the radial direction, the thermal conductivity was
higher in the axial direction.
4) The water evaporation rate in the sugarcane stem was inhibited by
the relative humidity. The difference from the simulation results was
that two peaks of the water evaporation rate appeared in the
experiment. The maximum error of water evaporation rate between
experimental and simulated values was within 25%, and the error of
relative humidity was no more than 8.4%.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ning Wang: Methodology, Writing - original draft, Data curation,
Investigation, Writing - review & editing. Ankang Kan: Conceptuali­
zation, Supervision, Writing - review & editing. Shang Mao: Visuali­
zation, Investigation. Zipei Huang: Software, Validation. Fuliang Li:
Writing - review & editing.
10
Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declared that there is no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
The work is financially supported by National Natural Science
Foundation of China (51679107). The authors would also like to render
thankfulness to Dr. Stanley P. Burg (University of Florida, IFAS, Tropical
Research and Education Center), Mr. Xianzhang Zheng (Shanghai Kind-
water Preservation Fresh Tech Co., Ltd.), Ms. Wei Wang (Experimenter
at Merchant Marine College, Shanghai Maritime University), and Prof.
Dan Cao (Merchant Marine College, Shanghai Maritime University) for
their valuable comments and suggestions.
References
Alibas, I., Koksal, N., 2014. Forced-air, vacuum, and hydro precooling of cauliflower
(Brassica oleracea L. var. botrytis cv. Freemont): part I. determination of precooling
parameters. Food Sci. Technol. 34 (4), 730–737.
Álvares, V.S., Finger, F.L., de ASantos, R.C., da Silva Negreiros, J.R., Casali, V.W., 2007.
Effect of pre-cooling on the postharvest of parsley leaves. J. Food Agric. Environ. 5
(2), 31–34.
Arah, I.K., Amaglo, H., Kumah, E.K., Ofori, H., 2015. Preharvest and postharvest factors
affecting the quality and shelf life of harvested tomatoes: a mini review.
International Journal of Agronomy 1–6.
Augusto, C.M., Ribeiro, J.B., Gaspar, A.R., Costa, J.J., 2013. Experimental study of the
low-pressure-vaporization of water in different porous media. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran.
65, 561–571.
Augusto, C.M., Ribeiro, J.B., Gaspar, A.R., Costa, J.J., 2014. Physical and experimental
calibration of a mathematical model of the low-pressure-vaporization of free water.
J. Food Eng. 138, 23–34.
Bahrani, S.A., Monteau, J.Y., Rezzoug, S.A., Loisel, C., Maache-Rezzoug, Z., 2014.
Physics-based modeling of simultaneous heat and mass transfer intensification
during vacuum steaming processes of starchy material. Chem. Eng. Process: Process
Intensification 85, 216–226.
Becker, B.R., Fricke, B.A., 2004. Heat transfer coefficients for forced-air cooling and
freezing of selected foods. Int. J. Refrig. 27 (5), 540–551.
Cheng, H.-P., Hsueh, C.-F., 2007. Multi-stage vacuum cooling process of cabbage. J. Food
Eng. 79 (1), 37–46.
Chepngeno, J., Owino, W.O., Kinyuru, J., Nenguwo, N., 2016. Effect of calcium chloride
and hydrocooling on postharvest quality of selected vegetables. J. Food Res. 5 (2),
23–40.
Churchill, S.W., Bernstein, M., 1997. A correlating equation for forced convection from
gases and liquids to a circular cylinder in cross flow. ASME J Heat Transfer 99 (1),
300–306.
Cogné, C., Nguyen, P.U., Lanoisellé, J.L., Van Hecke, E., Clausse, D., 2013. Modeling heat
and mass transfer during vacuum freezing of puree droplet. Int. J. Refrig. 36 (4),
1319–1326.
Feng, C.-H., Wang, W., Makino, Y., García-Martín, J.F., Alvarez-Mateos, P., Song, X.-Y.,
2019. Evaluation of storage time and temperature on physicochemical properties of
immersion vacuum cooled sausages stuffed in the innovative casings modified by
surfactants and lactic acid. J. Food Eng. 257, 34–43.
Ferrua, M.J., Singh, R.P., 2011. Improved airflow method and packaging system for
forced-air cooling of strawberries. Int. J. Refrig. 34 (4), 1162–1173.
Gaffney, J.J., 1985. Influence of airflow rate, respiration, evaporative cooling, and other
factors affecting weight loss calculations for fruit and vegetables. Build. Eng. 91 (1),
690–707.
Geankoplis, C.J., 1983. Transport Process: Momentum, Heat and Mass. Allyn and Bacon,
USA.
Giannakourou, M.C., Taoukis, P.S., 2019. Meta-analysis of kinetic parameter uncertainty
on shelf life prediction in the frozen fruit and vegetable chain. Food Engineering
Reviews 11 (1), 14–28.
He, S.-Y., Li, Y.-F., 2008. Experimental study and process parameters analysis on the
vacuum cooling of iceberg lettuce. Energy Convers. Manag. 49 (10), 2720–2726.
He, S.Y., Zhang, G.C., Yu, Y.Q., Li, R.G., Yang, Q.R., 2013. Effects of vacuum cooling on
the enzymatic antioxidant system of cherry and inhibition of surface-borne
pathogens. Int. J. Refrig. 36 (8), 2387–2394.
He, Z., Qian, J., Qu, L., Wang, Z., Yi, S., 2019. Simulation of moisture transfer during
wood vacuum drying. Results in Physics 12, 1299–1303.
Hsiao, Y.-H., Chen, M.-C., Lu, K.-Y., Chin, C.-L., 2018. Last-mile distribution planning for
fruit-and-vegetable cold chains. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 29 (3), 862–886.
Jin, T.X., Xu, L., 2006. Development and validation of moisture movement model for
vacuum cooling of cooked meat. J. Food Eng. 75 (3), 333–339.
Kongwong, P., Boonyakiat, D., Poonlarp, P., 2019. Extending the shelf life and qualities
of baby cos lettuce using commercial precooling systems. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
150, 60–70.
Kuo, J.-C., Chen, M.-C., 2010. Developing an advanced multi-temperature joint
distribution system for the food cold chain. Food Contr. 21 (4), 559–566.
N. Wang et al.
Liang, Y.S., Wongmetha, O., Wu, P.S., Ke, L.S., 2013. Influence of hydrocooling on
browning and quality of litchi cultivar Feizixiao during storage. Int. J. Refrig. 36 (3),
1173–1179.
Lu, M.X., Xie, R.H., Chen, P.R., Zou, Y.F., Tang, J., 2019. Green transportation and
logistics performance: an improved composite index. Sustainability 11 (10), 1–18.
Ma, L., Zhang, M., Bhandari, B., Gao, Z., 2017. Recent developments in novel shelf life
extension technologies of fresh-cut fruit and vegetables. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
64, 23–38.
Ozturk, H.M., Hepbasli, A., 2017. Experimental performance assessment of a vacuum
cooling system through exergy analysis method. J. Clean. Prod. 161, 781–791.
Ozturk, H.M., Ozturk, H.K., 2009. Effect of pressure on the vacuum cooling of iceberg
lettuce. Int. J. Refrig. 32 (3), 402–410.
Pamitran, A.S., Ardiansyah, H.D., Novviali, M., 2013. Characteristics of sea-water ice
slurry for cooling of fish. International Meeting Advances Thermofluids 388,
123–127.
Pinela, J., Ferreira, I.C., 2017. Nonthermal physical technologies to decontaminate and
extend the shelf-life of fruit and vegetables: trends aiming at quality and safety. Crit.
Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 57 (10), 2095–2111.
Ranjbaran, M., Datta, A.K., 2019. Pressure-driven infiltration of water and bacteria into
plant leaves during vacuum cooling: a mechanistic model. J. Food Eng. 246,
209–223.
Rao, M.A., Rizvi, S.S., Datta, A.K., Ahmed, J., 2014. Engineering Properties of Foods.
CRC Press, New York.
Rao, P.J., Das, M., Das, S.K., 2008. Thermophysical properties of sugarcane, palmyra
palm, and date-palm granular jaggery. Int. J. Food Prop. 11 (4), 876–886.
Rogers, G.F.C., Mayhew, Y.R., 1995. Thermodynamic and Transport Properties of Fluids
(No. BOOK). Blackwell.
Sakinah, M.J., Misran, A., Mahmud, T.M.M., Abdullah, S., 2019. A review: production
and postharvest management of Volvariella volvacea. International Food Research
Journal 26 (2), 367–376.
Sun, D.-W., Hu, Z., 2003. CFD simulation of coupled heat and mass transfer through
porous foods during vacuum cooling process. Int. J. Refrig. 26 (1), 19–27.
11
Journal of Food Engineering 292 (2021) 110288
Sun, D.-W., Hu, Z., 2002. CFD predicting the effects of various parameters on core
temperature and weight loss profiles of cooked meat during vacuum cooling.
Comput. Electron. Agric. 34 (1), 111–127.
Sun, D.-W., Zheng, L., 2006. Vacuum cooling technology for the agri-food industry: past,
present and future. J. Food Eng. 77 (2), 203–214.
Tao, F., Zhang, M., Yu, H.-Q., 2007. Effect of vacuum cooling on physiological changes in
the antioxidant system of mushroom under different storage conditions. J. Food Eng.
79 (4), 1302–1309.
Vonasek, E., Nitin, N., 2016. Influence of vacuum cooling on Escherichia coli O157: H7
infiltration in fresh leafy greens via a multiphoton-imaging approach. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 82 (1), 106–115.
Wang, C., Xu, R., Song, Y., Jiang, P., 2017. Study on water droplet flash evaporation in
vacuum spray cooling. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran. 112, 279–288.
Woolf, A.B., Ferguson, I.B., 2000. Postharvest responses to high fruit temperatures in the
field. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 21 (1), 7–20.
Xu, X.F., Zhang, X.L., Liu, S., 2018. Experimental study on cold storage box with
nanocomposite phase change material and vacuum insulation panel. Int. J. Energy
Res. 42 (14), 4429–4438.
Xu, X.F., Zhang, X.L., Zhou, S.X., Wang, Y.H., Lu, L., 2019. Experimental and application
study of Na2 SO4⋅10H2O with additives for cold storage. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim.
136 (2), 505–512.
Yang, S.M., Tao, W.Q., 2006. Heat Transfer. Greater Education Press, Beijing.
Zhang, Z., Drummond, L., Sun, D.-W., 2013. Vacuum cooling in bulk of beef pieces of
different sizes and shape–Evaluation and comparison to conventional cooling
methods. J. Food Eng. 116 (2), 581–587.
Zhong, D.R.Y., Tan, P.K., Bhaskaran, P.G., 2017. Data-driven food supply chain
management and systems. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 117 (9), 1779–1781.
Zhu, Z., Geng, Y., Sun, D.-W., 2019a. Effects of operation processes and conditions on
enhancing performances of vacuum cooling of foods: a review. Trends Food Sci.
Technol. 85, 67–77.
Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Sun, D.-W., Wang, H.-W., 2019b. Developments of mathematical models
for simulating vacuum cooling processes for food products–a review. Crit. Rev. Food
Sci. Nutr. 59 (5), 715–727.