See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257051858

Evaluation of drying models of apple (var. Ligol) dried in a fluidized bed dryer

Article  in  Energy Conversion and Management · March 2013

DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2012.11.011

CITATIONS READS

87 522

4 authors, including:

Krzysztof Górnicki Radosław Winiczenko

Warsaw University of Life Sciences - SGGW Warsaw University of Life Sciences - SGGW
48 PUBLICATIONS   547 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   368 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

EVALUATION OF MODELS FOR THE DEW POINT TEMPERATURE DETERMINATION View project

Friction welding of aluminium alloy with magnesium alloy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Radosław Winiczenko on 28 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management

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

Evaluation of drying models of apple (var. Ligol) dried in a fluidized bed dryer
Agnieszka Kaleta, Krzysztof Górnicki ⇑, Radosław Winiczenko, Aneta Chojnacka
Faculty of Production Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, ul. Nowoursynowska 164, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland

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

Article history: Three new drying models were formulated. The developed models are various modifications of the Page
Received 18 September 2012 model. The models were used to describe the drying behaviour of apple (var. Ligol) dried in a fluidized
Received in revised form 9 November 2012 bed dryer. The suitability of new models to describe the drying characteristics were compared to the
Accepted 16 November 2012
accuracy of sixteen models available from the literature. The accuracies of the models were measured
Available online 23 December 2012
using the correlation coefficient (R), root mean square error (RMSE), and reduced chi-square (v2). Three
new developed models described the drying characteristics of apple cubes satisfactorily (R > 0.997). The
Keywords:
Page model and one of the empirical models formulated by the authors of this study can be considered as
Apple
Drying
the most appropriate (R > 0.9977, RMSE = 0.0094–0.0167, v2 = 0.0001–0.0002). The effect of drying air
Dehydration temperature on the drying models parameters were also determined. The shrinkage of apple cubes dur-
Fluidized bed dryer ing drying was measured to assess the changes in quality of dried apples.
Modelling Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The drying of food remains a very widespread operation in the
food industry both for the preservation of foods in their form and
as an intermediate operation. Fresh fruits and vegetables are re-
garded as highly perishable food due to their high water content.
Drying is one of the best ways to minimise loses and its makes eas-
ier and cheaper the packing, handling, and transporting of the
dried products because of less weight and volume [1–3].
An important aspects of drying technology is the mathematical
modelling of the drying process and equipment. The principle of
modelling is based on having a set of mathematical equations that
can adequately describe the operation [4]. Mathematical modelling
provides a tool to enable drying rate and efficiency to be predicted
under a range of conditions. Accurate prediction can determine the
best quality of end product as well as reduction in process time [5].
Mathematical models proposed to describe the drying behaviour of
agricultural products generally fall into three categories: theoreti-
cal, semi-theoretical and empirical models [1].
Theoretical models are based on the general theory of mass and
heat transfer laws. They take into account fundamentals of the dry-
ing process and their parameters have physical meaning. There-
fore, theoretical models can give an explanation of the
phenomena occurring during drying. On the other hand however
these models are more difficult in application compared to semi-
theoretical and empirical models. Theoretical models are time con-
suming and need assumption of, among others, moisture diffusion
coefficient, critical moisture content, particle geometry, and
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 22 59 346 18; fax: +48 22 59 346 27.
E-mail address: krzysztof_gornicki@sggw.pl (K. Górnicki).
shrinkage [6]. Theoretical models have been used to describe the
drying behaviour of agricultural products such as carrots [7,8], cel-
ery [8], corn [9], poppy seeds [10], red beets [6], and wheat [9].
In simulations drying, semi-theoretical and empirical models
present the advantage to be easy to use but their applications are
restricted and valid only in range of drying conditions led during
the experiment [1]. The semi-theoretical models are generally de-
rived directly to the general solution of Fick’s second law by simpli-
fication. The empirical models derive a direct relationship between
average moisture content and drying time. They neglect the funda-
mentals of the drying process and their parameters have no phys-
ical meaning [6,11]. Among these models, the Lewis (Newton)
model, the Page model, the Modified Page model, the Henderson
and Pabis model, the Logarithmic model, the Two-term model,
and the Two-term exponential model are the most frequently used
to model the drying of different agricultural products [1,4,6,12–
15].
Various methods of drying have been developed for solids, and
each method has its own characteristics. Considering the thermal
efficiencies of the equipment, fluidized bed dryers are among the
most efficient and are suitable for a variety of drying applications
[16]. The advantages of fluidized bed drying can be summarised
as follows: (i) high heat and mass transfer rates, because of good
contact between the particles and the drying gas, (ii) uniform tem-
perature and bulk moisture content of particles, because of inten-
sive particle mixing in the bed, (iii) high drying capacity due to
high ratio of mass of air to mass of product [17]. The better heat
and mass transfer greatly reduce drying time without considerably
damaging heat-sensitive materials [18]. Uniform drying results in
bed product quality. Carrots dried by fluidized bed drying showed
better colour, rehydration properties, greater b-carotene retention

0196-8904/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2012.11.011
180 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185
and better overall sensory acceptability than those dried by micro-
wave oven and solar methods [19]. However comparison of
chopped coconuts pieces dried in a fluidized bed dryer to that
available commercially revealed that the quality (colour, and sur-
face oil content) of two products was almost similar [20]. Taking
into account the quality of waxy rice, i.e. head rice yield, thermal
properties, pasting properties, colour, translucent kernel, and
microstructure it can be stated that fluidized bed drying technique
can be applied to dry waxy rice [21]. Several research efforts in the
field of fluidized dryer design, focus on the evaluation of the opti-
mal conditions to maximise product quality while minimising en-
ergy consumption [22,23].
Fluidized bed drying have been used to dry agricultural prod-
ucts such as bird’s eye chilli [24], black tea [25], brown rice [8], car-
rots [19,26], celery [8], green peas [27], soybeans [28], wheat [9,29]
and corn [9]. However, to our knowledge, there is little or no infor-
mation in the literature about the drying behaviour of apples in flu-
idized bed dryer [13].
Apples are one of the leading fruits produced in the world and
apples plantations are cultivated all over the world in many coun-
tries. Poland is one of the leading producers of apple in the world.
Apples play a significant role in diet as they contain appreciable
amount of carbohydrate (12–14%) and about 0.1–0.3% proteins.
Approximately 80% of carbohydrates present are the soluble sug-
ars, sucrose (about 2%), glucose (2.4%), and fructose (6.0%). The to-
tal fiber content is about 2%. Apples also contain vitamins C and A
and important minerals namely calcium, iron, magnesium, phos-
phorus, potassium, sodium, and zinc [30].
Dried apples can be consumed directly or treated as a secondary
raw material, since dried apples form important components in
numerous prepared food including snack preparations, integral
breakfast foods and other varieties [31,32]. There is however no
information on the drying behaviour of apple variety Ligol.
The objectives of this study were to investigate the drying
kinetics of apple var. Ligol in a fluidized bed dryer, and the model-
ling the drying process of apple using theoretical, semi-theoretical
and empirical models available from the literature and three new
empirical models developed by authors of this study.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Material
Ligol variety apples used in this study were acquired in local
market. Homogeneous lots were selected according to such matu-
rity indicators as fruit size and appearance [30]. Large, yellow, and
covered with bright red blush apples were chosen. They had
cream-coloured, crispy, and juicy flesh and good aroma. The apples
were washed in running tap water, hand peeled and the seeds
were removed, and then cut into pieces using specially cutting ma-
chine. Samples were dried on the same day. The initial moisture
content of samples were ranged from 6.7 to 6.9 kg H2O kg1 dm
(from 87.0% to 87.3% wb). Other considered maturity indicators
were the same.
2.2. Drying equipment and experimental procedure
The drying experiments were carried out using the laboratory
dryer constructed in the Department of Fundamental Engineering,
Faculty of Production Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sci-
ences, Warsaw, Poland.
The laboratory fluidized bed dryer consists of an airflow control
unit, an electrical fan, a heating and heating control unit, the drying
chamber and measurement sensor. The airflow control unit regu-
lates the velocity of the drying air flowing through the drying
chamber. The desired air temperature was obtained by electrical
resistance heating and controlled by the heating control unit. The
drying air velocity and temperature were measured directly in
the drying chamber. The drying chamber consists of a column,
which is a Plexiglas cylinder of 12 cm in diameter and 180 cm in
height and an air distributor made of double wire gauze. Weighing
of samples was done manually outside the chamber.
The drying experiments were conducted at the drying air tem-
perature of 40, 50, 60, 70 and 80 °C. The air velocity was kept at a
constant value of 6 ms1 for all drying experiments (minimum flu-
idization velocity was 4 ms1). The initial mass of samples was
240 g. Apples were cut into 10 mm cubes thickness.
Prior to placing the sample in the drying chamber, the system
was run for about 1 h to obtain steady conditions. Once the air
temperature and fluidization velocity had stabilised, the sample
was put into the fluidized bed dryer and dried there. The fluidiza-
tion behaviour was as follows. At the air velocity 6 ms1 the air
bubbles were small at the gas distributor, however, they coalesced
rapidly and rose through the particle layer, causing vigorous mix-
ing of the fluidized particles. Insignificant attrition between the
particles were observed. The progression of the drying process
was followed by weighting the sample at regular intervals of
3 min during the first hour using an electronic balance (WPX
4500; Radwag, Radom, Poland) with the accuracy of ±0.01 g. After-
wards, the sample was weighed every 6 min. The electronic bal-
ance was placed next to the dryer. As the weighing procedure
took only a few seconds, no significant disturbances were imposed.
Drying was continued until there was no weight change for the
three successive readings. Experiments were replicated three
times. The weight of the bed once finished drying tests was within
the range of 31–37 g.
Taking into account that: (i) the room temperature of sample
put into the fluidized bed dryer was 22 °C, (ii) the fluidized parti-
cles were vigorously mixed, (iii) the time of drying varied between
2 and 5 h, (iv) the thickness of cubes was 10 mm, and (v) the heat
transfer rate during the fluidization was high, because of good con-
tact between the particles and the drying gas [17] it can be as-
sumed that the whole drying process was isothermal.
The drying air velocity was measured using a hot wire digital
anemometer ANT-93 (PMP IMG PAN, Kraków, Poland) with the
accuracy of ±0.1 ms1, and the temperature using thermocouple
TP-01b-W3 (NiCr–NiAl, CZAKI THERMO-PRODUCT, Raszyn, Poland)
with the accuracy of ±0.1 °C. Temperature reading was done with
EMT-08 metre (CZAKI THERMO-PRODUCT, Raszyn, Poland).
The initial and final moisture contents of apples were deter-
mined using the vacuum oven method at 70 °C for 24 h [33].
Taking into account that drying experiments were continued
until a constant weight was achieved it can be accepted that the fi-
nal moisture contents equal the equilibrium moisture contents.
The values of equilibrium moisture content were within the range
of 0.062–0.171 kg H2O kg1dm.
The volume changes of apple cubes during drying were mea-
sured by buoyancy method using petroleum benzine. Maximum
relative error was 5%. The samples were taken out the dryer and
the size was measured at specific time intervals chosen in accor-
dance with drying curve. Numerous samples were dried simulta-
neously in the dryer. They were taken out one after another. The
sample used to measure the volume was not placed back in the
dryer. It could be dangerous because of liquid used. Measurements
were replicated three times.
2.3. Mathematical modelling of drying curves
The semi-theoretical and empirical models used to describe the
drying kinetics of apples are shown in Table 1 (models 1–17),
where a, b, c, g, and n are the constants of the models; k, k1, k2
 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185 181

and k3 are the drying rate constants, s1; t is the drying time, s; MR is M  Me 512 X
1 X 1 X 1
¼ 6 b
the moisture ratio defined as (M–Me)/(M0–Me); M is the moisture Mc  Me p n¼0 m¼0 p¼0 n;m;p
content, dry basis; Me is the equilibrium moisture content, dry basis;  
p2 h 2 2
i
2 Dðt  t c Þ
M0 is the initial moisture content, dry basis. The models 1–10, 12, and  exp  ð2n þ 1Þ þ ð2m þ 1Þ þ ð2p þ 1Þ
4 s2
14–16 are available from the literature. The models 11, 13 and 17
were formulated by the authors of this study. Analysis of the dis- ð2Þ
cussed models equations shows that models 2–9 can be regarded
as various modifications of the Lewis (Newton) model, whereas mod- 1
bn;m;p ¼ ð3Þ
els 11–17 can be described as various modifications of the Page mod- ð2n þ 1Þ2 þ ð2m þ 1Þ2 þ ð2p þ 1Þ2
el. The succeeding modifications of the Lewis (Newton) model and
the Page model consist in introducing the additional terms and con- where D is the moisture diffusion coefficient, m2 s1; s is the cube
stants into the models. The criterion of the modifications was the half thickness, m and the critical moisture content is determined
goodness of fit of the formulated models to the experimental data. the same way as for model 18.
The formulated after this manner equations are empirical models The drying curves of apples obtained from experiments, M = f(t),
which neglect the fundamentals of the drying process and their where M is the moisture content of apples in dry basis and t is the
parameters have no physical meaning. The formulated by authors elapsed drying time in s, where converted into dimensionless
of this study models 11, 13, and 17 can be regarded as the modifica- moisture content MR (moisture ratio) using the following
tions of the Page model. Comparing with the models 2–9, similar equation:
modifications of the Page model were lacking. M  Me
The simplified model proposed by Jaros and Pabis [8] consists of MR ¼ ð4Þ
M0  Me
two equations: equation of the first drying period taking into ac-
count drying shrinkage (model 18a in Table 1) and semi-theoreti- Drying rate was calculated as following:
cal equation of the second drying period (model 18b in Table 1),
M tþdt  M t
where Mc is the critical moisture content, dry basis; N is the con- Drying rate ¼ ð5Þ
dt
stant of the model; tc is the time of drying while moisture content
M = Mc, s. The critical moisture content Mc is determined assuming where Mt is the moisture content at t and Mt+dt is the moisture con-
the continuity of the drying process. The assumption required that tent at t + dt.
when M is equal to Mc, the drying rate in the first and second per- Drying curves were fitted to nineteen different models (Table 1
iod be equal, that is when (dM/dt)I = (dM/dt)II [8]. and Eqs. (1)-(3)). A non-linear regression analysis was conducted
The theoretical model 19 used to describe the drying kinetics of to fit the models by the quasi-Newton method using the computer
apples consists of the linear model of the first drying period fol- program STATISTICA [50].
lowed by the theoretical model of the second drying period. The goodness of fit of the tested mathematical models to the
The course of the drying process in the first drying period is experimental data was evaluated with the correlation coefficient
determined by the external conditions of mass transfer. If the (R), the root mean square error (RMSE), and reduced chi-square
assumption is accepted that the shrinkage can be neglected the (v2). The higher the R value, and lower the RMSE and v2 values,
first drying period is described by linear model [48]. the better is the goodness of fit [4,6,51].
The effect of drying air temperature on the model constants and
M ¼ kt þ M0 ð1Þ
coefficients which can describe the drying characteristics of apples
It has been accepted that the drying characteristics of agricul- was also investigated. The constants and coefficients of the models
tural products in falling rate period can be described by using Fick’s 1–19 involving the mentioned drying variable were determined by
diffusion equation. The solution to this equation applied to the investigating following type of equations: linear Y = A + BT, rational
description of the second drying period of the apple cubes of thick- Y = A + BT1, and logarithmic Y = A + B ln(T), where: A, B are the
ness 2s takes the following form [49]: coefficients; T is the temperature, °C; Y is the variable.

Table 1
Semi-theoretical, empirical and simplifield models applied to drying curves.

Model no. Model equation Model name References

1 MR = exp (kt) Lewis (Newton) [34]
2 MR = a exp (kt) Henderson & Pabis [35]
3 MR = a exp (kt) + b Logarithmic [36]
4 MR = a exp (k1t) + b exp (k2t) Two-term [37]
5 MR = a exp (k1t) + b exp (k2t) + c Noomhorm & Verma [38]
6 MR = a exp (k1t) + b exp (k2t) + c exp (k3t) Modified Henderson & Pabis [39]
7 MR = a exp (kt) + (1  a) exp (akt) Two-term exponential [40]
8 MR = a exp (kt) + (1  a) exp (bkt) Diffusion approximation [41]
9 MR = a exp (kt) + (1  a) exp (gt) Verma et al. [42]
10 MR = exp (ktn) Page [43]
11 MR = a exp (ktn) Model formulated by the authors of this study This study
12 MR = a exp (ktn) + b exp (gtn) Hii et al. [44]
13 MR = a exp (ktn) + (1  a) exp (gtn) Model formulated by the authors of this study This study
14 MR = exp [(kt)n] Modified Page [45]
15 MR = a exp [(kt)n] Ademiluyi [46]
16 MR = a exp [(kt)n] + b Demir et al. [47]
17 MR = a exp [(kt)n] + b exp [(gt)n] Model formulated by the authors of this study This study
  N 
18a 1 1b b 0:85 Jaros & Pabis [48]
M ¼ M0 1b 1  NM 0
kt  1b ; b ¼ 1þM 0
  N1 
18b Jaros & Pabis [8]
M ¼ Me þ ðM c  M e Þ exp kðtt cÞ
M c M e 1  1b
NM0 kt c
182 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Drying characteristics
The fluidized bed drying of apple cubes was affected by drying
air temperature (Fig. 1). Each of the drying curves M(t) represents
empirical formula which approximates results of the three mea-
surement repetitions of the moisture content changes in time. Each
of the drying rate curves dM/dt was obtained by differentiation of
the drying curve.
Fig. 1 shows that the higher the air temperature, the shorter
was the drying time and the higher was the drying rate. Results
show that drying curves at 70 and 80 °C almost coincided at the
end of the process. The decrease in drying time and increase in dry-
ing rate with increase in the drying temperature have been ob-
served for: apple slices [31], banana slices [52], carrot slices [19],
hawthorn cake [53], sweet potato slices [4], potato slices [54],
and germinated brown rice [18].
During a drying process, quality degradation of dried agricul-
tural products occurs. Depending of the drying conditions, foods,
like fruits and vegetables, may undergo various degrees of shrink-
age. Important changes in structural properties can be observed as
water is removed from the moist material. Shrinkage occurs be-
cause food polymers cannot support their weight and, therefore,
collapse under gravitational force in the absence of moisture [5].
Fig. 2 shows experimental shrinkage data and values predicted
by following linear equation:
V M
¼ 0:7701 þ 0:2343 ðR2 ¼ 0:9977Þ
V0 M0
where V is the volume, m3; V0 is the initial volume, m3; M is the
moisture content, dry basis; M0 is the initial moisture content, dry
basis. Linear equation is very often used to describe the shrinkage
of agricultural products [55]. It turns out from the experiments that
temperature has no effect on the volumetric shrinkage of apple
cubes, which is in agreement with published results [7,26,56,57].
3.2. Evaluation of the models
The moisture content data obtained for the different drying air
temperatures were converted to the moisture ratio expression and
then curve fitting computations with the drying time were carried
on the nineteen considered drying models. As can be seen from the
statistical analysis results, generally high correlation coefficient R
was observed for all drying models except for the Diffusion
7 their experimental data to fit seven semi-theoretical and empirical
(kg H2O kg-1d.m.)
Moisture content
6 Two-term, Midilli et al.). These models exhibited high correlation
5
4 Logarithmic and Midilli et al. models were selected as the suitable
3 Midilli et al. models were chosen as the most adequate for the
2 els (Lewis (Newton), Henderson and Pabis, Page, and Modified
1
-0.010 -0.008 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 5000 10000
Drying rate (s-1) Time (s)
Fig. 1. Moisture content vs. time and drying rate vs. moisture content for drying of
apple cubes at different air temperatures; (——) 40 °C, (——) 50 °C, (— —) 60 °C,
(– –) 70 °C and (—) 80 °C.
1
Volume to initial volume ratio
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Moisture content to initial moisture content ratio
Fig. 2. Experimental shrinkage data for apple cubes dried at different air temper-
atures and prediction by linear Eq. (6); (h) 40 °C, (j) 50 °C, (N) 60 °C, (d) 70 °C and
() 80 °C.
approximation model. The R values varied between 0.9887 and
0.9995 and only for the Diffusion approximation model varied be-
tween 0.9139 and 0.9730. Three new developed models 11, 13, and
17 described the drying characteristics satisfactorily, because the R
values varied between 0.9977 and 0.9995. Taking into account,
moreover, the values of root mean square error RMSE and reduced
chi-square v2 it can be stated that the Page model and the model
11 formulated by the authors of this study can be considered as
the most appropriate. Their R values varied between 0.9977 and
0.9995, the root mean square error ranged from 0.0094 to
0.0167, and reduced chi-square changed from 0.0001 to 0.0002.
ð6Þ Taking into account values of correlation coefficient R it can be,
however, accepted that all considered models except the Diffusion
approximation model may be assumed to represent the drying
behaviour of apple cubes.
The same method of choosing the best models was applied by
other researchers. Doymaz [51] used his experimental data to fit
six semi-theoretical and empirical models (Lewis (Newton), Hen-
derson and Pabis, Logarithmic, Page, Midilli et al., and Weibull).
The R values of all considered models were above 0.99. The Midilli
et al., Page, and Weibull models were selected as the suitable mod-
els to represent the drying characteristics of persimmon slices.
Meziane [1] fitted ten drying models (Lewis (Newton), Page, Mod-
ified Page, Henderson and Pabis, Logarithmic, Two-term, Diffusion
approximation, Modified Henderson and Pabis, Wang and Singh,
and Midilli et al.) to the experimental moisture data. The high val-
ues of correlation coefficient (0.9850–0.9999) indicate in all cases a
good fit. The Midilli et al., Page, Modified Page, Diffusion approxi-
mation models were chosen as the most adequate in describing
the drying process of olive pomace. Arslan and Özcan [15] used
models (Lewis (Newton), Page, Henderson and Pabis, Logarithmic,
coefficient R, rating between 0.9960 and 0.9995. So, all these mod-
els could be used to describe the drying of rosemary leaves. The
models to the sun and oven drying. The Page, Modified Page, and
microwave oven drying. Falade and Solademi [4] tested four mod-
Page). The high R values (0.9051–0.9983) indicate that the four
models fitted very well to the experimental data. The Page and
Modified Page models were selected as the suitable models to rep-
resent the drying characteristics of sweet potato slices.
15000
Further regressions were undertaken to account for the effect of
the drying air temperature on the drying models parameters. The
following models, namely, the Page, the formulated by the authors
of this study model 11 and 13, the Modified Page, the Ademiluyi,
and the theoretical model 19 were used to describe the drying
 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185 183

process during drying of apple cubes. The effects of drying air tem-
perature on the models parameters were also included in the mod-
els. The linear, rational, and logarithmic type of equations were
tested. The multiple combination of the parameters that gave the
highest R-values were included in the final model. The coefficients
of parameter equations for chosen models of apple cubes drying
are presented in Table 2.
It can be seen that the drying rate constant k increase with the
increase in drying air temperature. These results were in good
agreement with the drying rate data, which follow the similar
trend. Similar observations have been reported by other research-
ers [1,4,13,51].
The linear, rational, and logarithmic equations with the coeffi-
cients given in Table 2 were then used to estimate the moisture
content of apple cubes at any time during process. Validation of
the established models was made by comparing the computed
moisture contents with the measured ones in any particular drying
run under certain conditions. The accuracy of the established mod-
els is presented in Table 2. Similar trends showed all experiments.
It can be therefore admitted that the Page model, the formulated
by the authors of this study model 11 and 13, the Modified Page
model, the Ademiluyi model, and the theoretical model 19 with
parameters expressed in terms of the drying air temperature can
be used to predict the dehydration characteristics of apple cubes.
The moisture diffusion coefficient determined from the model
19 was found to be between 2.01  1010 and 6.85  1010 m2s1
for apples. These values lie within the general range of 1013 to
106 m2s1 reported by Mujumdar [58] and Zogzas et al. [59] for
food materials. It was stated that moisture diffusion coefficient in-
creased with increased drying air temperature. Similar observa-
tions have been reported by other researchers [7,26,51,60].
The critical moisture content determined from the Jaros and Pa-
bis model and the model 19 was found to be between 3 and 5.4 kg
H2O kg1 d.m.
The results of statistical analyses point out that all considered
models except the Diffusion approximation model may be as-
sumed to represent the drying kinetics of apple cubes. These mod-
els are classified as theoretical, semi-theoretical and empirical.

Table 2
Coefficients of parameter equations for chosen models of apple cubes drying and comparison of results of statistical analyses on the modelling of apple cubes dried at 60 °C air
temperature.

Model no. Type of parameter equation Coefficients of parameter equation Parameter R RMSE v2
A B
10 Linear 0.060924 0.000997 k = 0.120758 0.9993 0.0182 0.0001
0.519243 0.00348 n = 0.728056
Rational 0.17 2.7975 k = 0.123375 0.9985 0.0272 0.0003
0.9175 10.7223 n = 0.738796
Logarithmic 0.10811 0.056299 k = 0.122401 0.9990 0.0213 0.0002
0.08825 0.200806 n = 0.733918
11 Linear 0.048318 0.001079 k = 0.11308 0.9995 0.0184 0.0001
0.547729 0.00326 n = 0.743323
0.96524 0.000272 a = 0.98158
Rational 0.1685 3.14675 k = 0.116054 0.9988 0.0276 0.0003
0.916875 9.82419 n = 0.753139
0.996625 0.86456 a = 0.982216
Logarithmic 0.13852 0.061892 k = 0.114887 0.9988 0.0276 0.0003
0.01414 0.186331 n = 0.748762
0.909601 0.017706 a = 0.982097
13 Linear 0.073385 0.000343 k = 0.093953 0.9976 0.0711 0.0013
0.489019 0.005112 n = 0.795766
0.006128 0.01232 a = 0.745353
0.10254 0.004067 g = 0.141454
Rational 0.094973 0.05764 k = 0.094012 0.9965 0.0303 0.0008
1.120263 18.343 n = 0.814546
1.522002 43.9021 a = 0.790301
0.375664 13.2394 g = 0.155008
Logarithmic 0.054006 0.009827 k = 0.09424 0.9970 0.0273 0.0006
0.49287 0.316995 n = 0.805019
2.31639 0.753167 a = 0.767339
0.83733 0.240774 g = 0.148482
14 Linear 0.02648 0.001382 k = 0.056425 0.9991 0.0195 0.0001
0.519242 0.00348 n = 0.728056
Rational 0.130914 4.21065 k = 0.060736 0.9978 0.0302 0.0004
0.9215 10.9349 n = 0.739251
Logarithmic 0.26237 0.078422 k = 0.058714 0.9986 0.0237 0.0003
0.08826 0.200807 n = 0.733917
15 Linear 0.02716 0.001367 k = 0.054876 0.9993 0.0198 0.0001
0.547414 0.003264 n = 0.743244
0.965423 0.00027 a = 0.981626
Rational 0.128843 4.18121 k = 0.059156 0.9982 0.0307 0.0004
0.921055 10.0513 n = 0.753534
1.000685 1.07738 a = 0.982729
Logarithmic 0.26111 0.077729 k = 0.057144 0.9988 0.0241 0.0003
0.01504 0.186533 n = 0.748689
0.910122 0.017589 a = 0.982139
19 Linear 2.96  1010 1.21  1011 D = 4.30  1010 0.9925 0.2903 0.0860
Rational 1.09  109 3.73  108 D = 4.68  1010 0.9918 0.3057 0.0954
Logarithmic 2.38  109 6.91  1010 D = 4.50  1010 0.9922 0.2969 0.0899
184 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185
Theoretical models generally use the simultaneous heat and mass
transfer equation with agricultural products properties. They take
into account fundamentals of the drying process and their param-
eters have physical meaning. The theoretical models are of great
importance in the scientific study of drying, however, application
of these models in the design or simulation of drying is more diffi-
cult and time consuming compared to semi-theoretical and empir-
ical models.
Semi-theoretical and empirical models, among them formu-
lated by the authors of this study models 11, 13, and 17 which
are the modifications of the Page model, provide adequate repre-
sentation of experimental results although the parameters of these
models have not physical meaning. Semi-theoretical and empirical
models do not need assumptions of material properties which
from practical point of view is very important. Therefore these
models give usually good results for engineering application.
Semi-theoretical and empirical models, however, frequently did
not allow the simulation of experiments carried out under different
conditions to those used to identify the model parameters. Never-
theless these models are widely used to describe the drying of dif-
ferent agricultural products [1,4,6,12–15].
4. Conclusion
Drying behaviour of apple (var. Ligol) cubes was investigated in
a fluidized bed dryer. The effect of drying air temperature was
investigated. Increase in drying air temperature caused a decrease
in the drying time and an increase in drying rate. Theoretical, semi-
theoretical, and empirical models available from the literature and
three new empirical models developed by the authors of this study
were investigated for their suitability to describe the drying behav-
iour of apple cubes. The new developed models are various modi-
fications of the Page model. The correlation coefficient, root mean
square error, and reduced chi-square were estimated for all models
considered to compare their goodness of fit the experimental dehy-
dration data. It can be accepted that all models except the Diffusion
approximation model described the drying data well. Three new
developed models described the drying characteristics satisfacto-
rily. Theoretical models give an explanation of the phenomena
occurring during drying but are difficult in application compared
to semi-theoretical and empirical models. Therefore, if the descrip-
tion of drying curves is only needed it is better to apply semi-the-
oretical and empirical models. Such need occurs especially in
practical drying. The Page model and the model 11 formulated
by the authors of this study can be considered as the most appro-
priate. To account for the effect of the drying air temperature on
the drying models parameters the following models, namely the
Page, the formulated by the authors of this study model 11 and
13, the Modified Page, the Ademiluyi model, and the theoretical
model 19 were chosen. Statistical analysis was carried out among
these models parameters and drying air temperature deriving
new useful drying relation. The values of the drying rate constant
k and moisture diffusion coefficient increased with the increase
in drying air temperature. The moisture diffusion coefficient varied
between 2.01  1010 and 6.85  1010 m2s1. The linear equation
was correlated to the data of shrinkage of apple cubes. Drying tem-
perature did not influence the shrinkage of apple cubes.
References
[1] Meziane S. Drying kinetics of olive pomace in a fluidized bed dryer. Energy
Convers Manage 2011;52:1644–9.
[2] Nazghelichi T, Kianmehr MH, Aghbashlo M. Thermodynamic analysis of
fluidized bed drying of carrot cubes. Energy 2010;35:4679–84.
[3] Sreekumar A, Manikantan PE, Vijayakumar KP. Performance of indirect solar
cabinet dryer. Energy Convers Manage 2008;49:1388–95.
[4] Falade KO, Solademi OJ. Modelling of air drying of fresh and blanched sweet
potato slices. Int J Food Sci Technol 2010;45:278–88.
[5] Colak N, Hepbasli A. A review of heat pump drying: Part 1 – Systems, models
and studies. Energy Convers Manage 2009;50:2180–6.
[6] Kaleta A, Górnicki K. Some remarks on evaluation of drying models of red beet
particles. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:2967–78.
[7] Zielinska M, Markowski M. Drying behaviour of carrots dried in spout-fluidized
bed dryer. Dry Technol 2007;25:261–70.
[8] Jaros M, Pabis S. Theoretical models for fluid bed drying of cut vegetables.
Biosys Eng 2006;93:45–55.
[9] Syahrul S, Dincer I, Hamdullaphur F. Thermodynamic modeling of fluidized
bed drying of moist particles. Int J Therm Sci 2003;42:691–701.
[10] Stakić M, Urošević T. Experimental study and simulation of vibrated fluidized
bed drying. Chem Eng Process 2011;50:428–37.
[11] Menges HO, Ertekin C. Thin layer drying model for treated and untreated
Stanley plums. Energy Convers Manage 2006;47:2337–48.
[12] Midilli A, Kucuk H. Mathematical modelling of thin layer drying of pistachio by
using solar energy. Energy Convers Manage 2003;44:1111–22.
[13] Kaleta A, Górnicki K. Evaluation of drying models of apple (var. McIntosh)
dried in a convective dryer. Int J Food Sci Technol 2010;45:891–8.
[14] Akpinar EK, Bicer Y. Mathematical modelling of thin layer drying process of
long green pepper in solar dryer and under open sun. Energy Convers Manage
2008;49:1367–75.
[15] Arslan D, Özcan MM. Evaluation of drying methods with respect to drying
kinetics, mineral content and colour characteristics of rosemary leaves. Energy
Convers Manage 2008;49:1258–64.
[16] Strumillo C, Kudra T. Drying: principles, applications, and design. USA: Gordon
& Breach Science Publishers; 1996.
[17] Izadifar M, Mowla D. Simulation of a cross-flow continuous fluidized bed dryer
for paddy rice. J Food Eng 2003;58:325–9.
[18] Cheevitsopon E, Noomhorm A. Effect of paraboiling and fluidized bed drying
on the physicochemical properties of germinated brown rice. Int J Food Sci
Technol 2011;46:2498–504.
[19] Prakash S, Jha SK, Datta N. Performance evaluation of blanched carrots dried by
three different driers. J Food Eng 2004;62:305–13.
[20] Niamnuy C, Devahastin S. Drying kinetics and quality of coconut dried in a
fluidized bed dryer. J Food Eng 2005;66:267–71.
[21] Jaiboon P, Prachayawarakorn S, Devahastin S, Soponronnarit S. Effects of
fluidized bed drying temperature and tempering time on quality of waxy rice. J
Food Eng 2009;95:517–24.
[22] Ko}ni M, Yu } zgeç U, Tu
} rker M, Dinçer H. Optimal quality control of baker’s yeast
drying in large scale batch fluidized bed. Chem Eng Process 2009;48:1361–
1370.
[23] Krokida MK, Kiranoudis CT. Pereto design of fluidized bed dryer. Chem Eng J
2000;79:1–12.
[24] Tasirin SM, Kamarudin SK, Ghani JA, Lee KF. Optimization of drying parameters
of bird’s eye chilli in a fluidized bed dryer. J Food Eng 2007;80:695–700.
[25] Temple SJ, van Boxtel AJB. Modelling of fluidised-bed drying of black tea. J Agr
Eng Res 1999;74:203–12.
[26] Hatamipour MS, Mowla D. Shrinkage of carrots during drying in inert medium
fluidized bed. J Food Eng 2002;55:247–52.
[27] Hatamipour MS, Mowla D. Correlation for shrinkage, density and diffusivity for
drying of maize and green peas in a fluidized bed with energy carried. J Food
Eng 2003;59:221–7.
[28] Osella CA, Gordo NA, González RJ, Tosi E, Ré E. Soybean heat-treated using a
fluidized bed. Lebensm–Wiss. Technol 1997;30:676–80.
[29] Özbey M, Söylemez MS. Effect of swirling flow on fluidized bed drying of
wheat grains. Energy Convers Manage 2005;46:1495–512.
[30] Sinha NK. Apples. In: Hui YH, editor. Handbook of fruits and fruit
processing. USA: Blackwell Publishing; 2006. p. 265–78.
[31] Vega-Gálvez A, Miranda M, Bilbao-Sáinz C, Uride E, Lemus-Mandaca R.
Empirical modelling od drying process of apple (cv. Granny Smith) slices at
different temperatures. J Food Proc Preserv 2008;32:972–86.
[32] Velić D, Planinić M, Tomas S, Bilić M. Influence of airflow velocity on kinetics of
convection apple drying. J Food Eng 2004;64:97–102.
[33] AOAC, Official method of analysis. Washington, D.C.: Association of Official
Analytical Chemists (No. 934.06); 1990.
[34] Lewis WK. The rate of drying of solid materials. Ind Eng Chem 1921;
13:427–32.
[35] Henderson SM, Pabis S. Grain drying theory. I. Temperature effect on drying
coefficient. J Agr Eng Res 1961;6:169–74.
[36] Yagcioglu A, Degirmencioglu A, Cagatay F. Drying characteristics of laurel
leaves under different drying conditions. In: Proceedings of the 7th
International congress on agricultural mechanization and energy, Adana,
Turkey, 1999, 26–27 May. p. 565–69.
[37] Henderson SM. Progress in developing the thin-layer drying equation. T ASAE
1974;17(1167–8):72.
[38] Noomhorm A, Verma LR. A generalized single-layer rice drying model. ASAE
Paper No: 86–3057, ASAE St. Joseph, Mi;.1986.
[39] Karathanos VT. Determination of water content of dried fruits by drying
kinetics. J Food Eng 1999;39:337–44.
[40] Sharaf-Eldeen YI, Blaisdell JL, Hamdy MY. A model for ear corn drying. T ASAE
1980;23(1261–5):71.
[41] Kassem AS. Comparative studies on thin layer drying models for wheat. In:
13th International congress on, agricultural engineering, vol. 6, February 2–6,
Marocco; 1998.
 A. Kaleta et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 67 (2013) 179–185
[42] Verma LR, Bucklin RA, Endan JB, Wratten FT. Effect of drying air parameters on
rice drying models. T ASAE 1985;28:296–301.
[43] Page GE. Factors influencing the maximum rates of air drying shelled corn in
thin layers. MSc Thesis, Purdue University; 1949.
[44] Hii CL, Law CL, Cloke M. Modelling of thin layer drying kinetics of cocoa beans
during artificial and natural drying. J Food Sci Technol 2008;3:1–10.
[45] Overhults DG, White HE, Hamilton HE, Ross IJ. Drying soybean with heated air.
T ASAE 1973;16:112–3.
[46] Ademiluyi T, Oboho EO, Owudogu M. Investigation into the thin layer drying
models of Nigerian popcorn varieties. Leonardo Electr J Pract Technol
2008;8:47–62.
[47] Demir V, Gunhan T, Yagcioglu AK. Mathematical modelling of convection
drying of green table olives. Biosyst Eng 2007;98:47–53.
[48] Pabis S. The initial phase of convection drying of vegetables and mushrooms
and the effect of shrinkage. J Agr Eng Res 1999;72:187–95.
[49] Pabis S, Jayas DS, Cenkowski S. Grain drying. Theory and practice. New
York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 1998.
[50] StatSoft, Inc. Electronic statistic texbook. Tulsa, OK; 2007. <http://
www.statsoft.com/textbook/stathome.html>.
[51] Doymaz I. Evaluation of some thin-layer drying models of persimmon slices
(Diospyros kaki L.). Energy Convers Manage 2012;56:199–205.
[52] Nguyen M-H, Price WE. Air-drying of banana: influence of experimental
parameters, slab thickness, banana maturity and harvesting season. J Food Eng
2007;79:2000–7.
View publication stats
185
[53] Wang DC, Zhang G, Han YP, Zhang JP, Tian XL. Feasibility analysis of heat pump
dryer to dry howthorn cake. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52:2919–24.
[54] Akpinar E, Midilli A, Bicer Y. Single layer drying behaviour of potato slices in a
convective cyclone dryer and mathematical modelling. Energy Convers
Manage 2003;44:1689–705.
[55] Górnicki K, Kaleta A. Some properties related to mathematical modelling of
mass transfer exemplified of convection drying of bilogical materials. In:
Hossain MM, editor. Heat and mass transfer – modeling and simulation. Rijeka,
Croatia: InTech; 2011. p. 143–66.
[56] Ochoa MR, Kesseler AG, Pirone BN, Márquez CA, De Michelis A. Analysis of
shrinkage phenomenon of whole sweet cherry fruits (Prunus avium) during
convective dehydration with very simple models. J Food Eng 2007;79:
657–61.
[57] Rahman N, Kumar S. Evaluation of convective heat transfer coefficient during
drying of shrinking bodies. Energy Convers Manage 2006;47:2591–601.
[58] Mujumdar AS. Handbook on industrial drying. USA: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1995.
[59] Zogzas NP, Maroulis ZB, Marinos-Kouris D. Moisture diffusivity data
compilation in foodstaffs. Dry Technol 1996;14:2225–53.
[60] Okos MR, Narimhan G, Singh RH, Weitnauer AC. Food dehydration. In:
Heldman DR, Lunel DB, editors. Handbook of food engineering. USA: Morcel
Inc.; 1995.