Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology 3(2): 127-131, 2011 ISSN: 2042-4876 Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2011

1 Received: January 31, 2011 Accepted: March 03, 2011

Published: April 10, 2011

Mathematical Model on Thin Layer Drying of Finger Millet (Eluesine coracana)

G.B. Radhika, 2S.V. Satyanarayana and 3D.G. Rao B.V. Raju Institute of Technology, Hyderabad, India 2 Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Anantapur, India 3 Caledonian College of Engineering, Muscat (Oman)
1 1

Abstract: Thin layer drying characteristics of the finger millet (Eluesine coracana) samples with an Initial Moisture Content (IMC) of 38.5%, on dry basis (db) were studied. The drying experiments were carried out in a conventional tray dryer at temperatures of 50, 70 and 80C. The drying data were fitted to nine thin layer models and a thin layer model for the finger millet was developed by regressing the coefficients of the best fit. The logarithmic model was found to satisfactorily describe the drying kinetics of the millet. The drying constants were found to vary linearly with temperature. Also, effective diffusivity was evaluated by using Ficks law, which varied from 1.526x10G10 to 2.85x10G10 m2/s. Temperature dependence of diffusivity was found by Arrhenius type of relationship and the activation energy for the diffusion of the moisture associated with the millet was found to be 35.37 kJ/gmol. Key words: Activation energy, drying constants, effective diffusivity, finger millet, mathematical model, moisture diffusion, thin layer drying characteristics INTRODUCTION Finger millet under study is an annual cereal plant. It is widely grown in the arid areas of Africa and Asia. It is the main food grain for many people, especially in the dry areas of India and Srilanka and is used in the form of flour. The products made of the finger millet flour are easily digestible and can be recommended for all age groups. Malted flour is used as staple food in many parts of India. Drying involves simultaneous heat and mass transfer. The main objective of drying is to reduce the moisture content and to increase the shelf life. Several mathematical models have been developed describing the drying process. However only thin layer drying models are widely used for the designing of the dryers. Some of the thin layer models reported were for drying of Toria seeds (Rangroo and Rao, 1992), Dates (Bakri and Hobani, 2000), chili pepper (Toyosi and Adeladun, 2010), two varieties of millet samples (Ojendiran and Raji, 2010), Srilankan paddy (Syamali et al., 2009), Sesame seeds (Khazaei and Daneshmandi, 2007), Amaranth grain (Ronoh et al., 2010), parboiled wheat (Debabandya and Srinivas, 2005). The objective of the present study was to develop the thin layer model and determination of effective diffusion coefficients for drying of finger millets using tray drier, which were not reported earlier. Also, the temperature dependence of diffusivity was assessed by Arrhenius type equation. Activation energy required for moisture diffusion was also calculated. MATERIALS AND METHODS The experimental studies were carried out in laboratory of department of Chemical Engineering, B.V.Raju Institute of Technology of Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad, India in August2010. Sample preparation: Finger millet samples were procured from the local market. Initial moisture content of the samples was determined by the standard oven method (AOAC, 1960), which was found to be 11.23% (db). Grain samples of known weight (~ 400 g) were soaked for 3 hrs. at 45C in a constant temperature water bath, the excess water was drained and the surface moisture was removed. Further, the samples were stored in self sealed covers for equilibration for 24 h. there by increasing the moisture content to 38.5% (db) Experimental apparatus and procedure: Conventional laboratory tray dryer was used for the study, which consisted of a heater, digital temperature controller and a blower. The dimensions of the drying chamber were 0.2*0.2*0.3 m. Finger millet samples of around 100g were dried in a laboratory tray drier at temperatures of 50, 70 and

Corresponding Author: S.V. Satyanarayana, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Anantapur, India. Tel: 91-9849509167; Fax: 91-8554-273007

127

Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol., 3(2): 127-131, 2011

Table 1: Thin layer mathematical models S.No. Model name 1. Page 2. Modified page 3. Modified page II 4. Lewis 5. Henderson and Pabis 6. Logarithmic 7. Two term model 8. Simplifed Ficks diffusion 9. Wang and Singh Model equation MR = exp(-ktn) MR = exp(-kt)n MR = exp(-c(t/L2)n) MR = exp(-kt) MR = a exp(-kt) MR = a exp(-kt)+c MR = aexp(-kot)+bexp(-k1t) MR = aexp(-c (t/L2)) MR = 1+at+bt2 Reference Page (1949) White et al. (1981) Diamante and Munro (1991) Bruce (1985) Henderson and Pabis (1961) Togrul and Pehlivan (2002) Henderson (1974) Diamante and Munro (1991) Wang and Singh (1978)

80C.The air velocity was 2.2 -2.4 m/s, which was measured using the hot air anemometer. Moisture loss was recorded using a digital balance with an accuracy of 0.01g. Drying studies were continued till the equilibrium was reached. The data was collected in triplicates. Mathematical modeling: Drying characteristics can be investigated by effectively modeling the drying behavior. Hence, the experimental data of the finger millet at three different temperatures were fitted to nine thin layer drying models, presented in Table 1. The dimensionless moisture ratio in these models was given by equation MR = (MMe)/(Mo-Me) where M is the moisture content at any time, Mo is the initial moisture content and Me is the equilibrium moisture content. The values of Me may be relatively small compared to M and Mo, so the equation can be simplified to MR = M/Mo (Akgun and Doymaz, 2005; Togrul and Pehlivan, 2002; Thakor et al., 1999). The non linear regression analysis in the present study was performed using the software MATLAB 7.0. The goodness of the fit of the tested mathematical models to the experimental data was evaluated with the correlation coefficient (R2), the reduced chi square (P2) and the root mean square error (RMSE). The best fit was that which results in higher R2 and the lowest P2 and RMSE. (Yaldiz and Ertekin, 2004; Gunhan et al., 2005; Ozdemir and Devres, 1999). The reduced P2 and RMSE were evaluated as:

can be used to evaluate effective diffusivity of spherical particles

MR =

6 2

n
n= 1

1
2

n 2 D 2t exp r2

(3)

where, D is the effective diffusivity and R is the radius of the grain. For long drying times Eq. (3) can be further simplified to first term of the series (Tutuncu and Labuza, 1996). Thus Eq. (3) can be written in the logarithmic form as Eq. (4):

InMR = ln

6 2 Dt 2 r2

(4)

Diffusion coefficients were determined by plotting ln MR verses drying time, t. The plot yields a straight line with the slope of B2D/r2 from which the effective diffusivity was evaluated. Temperature dependence of diffusivity and calculation of activation energy: Temperature dependence of diffusivity was studied by the Arrhenius type relationship, since temperature plays a significant role in the process of drying (Ozdemir and Derves, 1999). The relation is given by equation D = Do exp (-Ea/RT), where Ea is the activation energy

( MR =
n i =1

exp,i MR pre.i

Nz
pre ,i

(1)

RMSE =

( MR
n i=1

required for moisture diffusion (kJ/gmol), R is the universal gas constant. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The effect of drying temperature at a particular air velocity (2.2-2.4 m/s) on drying curves was presented in Fig. 1, which indicated that the moisture ratio decreased with the increased drying time. Further it can be observed from the drying curves that the temperature significantly affects the rate of drying and the total drying process was found to be occurred in the falling rate period only. This indicated that the process describing the drying behavior of the finger millet was diffusion governed (Singh and Sodhi, 2000). 128

MRexp,i

(2)

where, MRexp,i is the ith experimentally observed moisture ratio, MRpre,i is the ith predicted moisture ratio, N is the number of observations and Z, the number of constants in models (Akpinar, 2006). Evaluation of effective diffusivities: The drying characteristics in the falling rate period can be described by using Ficks diffusion equation (Crank, 1975), Eq. (3)

Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol., 3(2): 127-131, 2011

Table 2: Statistical results of different thin layer models Model constants -------------------------------------------------------------------Model Temperature (C) Lewis 50 k = 0.00927 70 k = 0.01749 80 k = 0.02281 Page 50 k = 0.008799 n = 1.011 70 k = 0.03243 n = 0.8531 80 k = 0.03849 n = 0.8667 Modified page 50 k = -0.01421 n = -0.6547 70 k = 0.04349 n = 0.4022 80 k = 0.1249 N = 0.1826 Henderson and Pabis 50 a = 1.033 k = 0.009648 70 a = 0.9541 k = 0.01657 80 a = 0.9706 n = 0.1826 Logarithmic 50 a = 1.011 c = 0.04089 k = 0.0108 70 a = 0.9416 c = 0.07519 k = 0.0222 80 a = 0.9031 c = 0.077 k = 0.0302 Two term model 50 a = 1.033 b = -0.08725 k1 = 0.0097 k2 = 1.911 70 a = 0.5648 b = 0.5027 k1 = 0.0404 k2 = 0.0101 -5 80 a = -0.01622 b = 6.86e k1 = 0.0734 k2 = 0.0145 Wang and Singh 50 a = -0.003137 b = -0.02947 t = 2.613 70 a = -0.01271 b = 4.26e-5 t = 1.456 -5 80 a = -0.01622 b = 6.86e t = 1.2463 Simplified Ficks diffusion 50 L = 13.02 a = 1.033 c = 1.634 70 L = 9.516 a = 0.9535 c = 1.499 80 L = 10.58 a = 0.9706 c = 2.464 Modified page equation II 50 L = 0.731 c = 0.01773 n = 0.2803 70 L = 5.63 c = 1.862 n = 0.2977 80 L = 10.57 c = -2.181 n = -1.169

R2 0.9966 0.9807 0.9773 0.9965 0.9919 0.9862 0.9963 0.9807 0.9773 0.9978 0.9833 0.9782 0.9992 0.9989 0.9987 0.9978 0.9988 0.9985 0.8789 0.9287 0.9236 0.9978 0.9833 0.9782 0.9963 0.9786 0.9773

RMSE 0.01613 0.03541 0.0393 0.01629 0.02355 0.03157 0.01697 0.03633 0.04059 0.01303 0.03383 0.03974 0.008204 0.01693 0.01116 0.01356 0.009432 0.01119 0.09915 0.06984 0.07441 0.01329 0.03476 0.04113 0.01731 0.03733 0.04202

P2 0.008328 0.02508 0.02472 0.008222 0.01054 0.01495 0.007489 0.02508 0.02472 0.004412 0.02175 0.02369 0.001683 0.005159 0.001278 0.004412

0.001512 0.001629 0.2458 0.09267 0.08306 0.004414 0.02175 0.02369 0.007489 0.02508 0.02472

The moisture ratio calculated from the drying data at different temperatures was fitted to the thin layer models given in Table 1. The statistical regression results of different models, including the drying model coefficients were listed in Table 2. The R2 values were greater than 0.97 for the different models except for Wang and Singh model. Further, it is assumed that the model which has highest R2 and the lowest P2 and RMSE could be considered as the best fit. Consequently logarithmic model was selected to predict the drying characteristics in the present study. Hence, the effect of temperature on the drying constants of the Logarithmic model was taken into account by developing the relation between these constants and the drying temperature. The regression equations relating the constants of the selected model and the drying temperature are the following: MR = a exp(-kt)+c where a, k, c are constants a = 1.188 0.003546T, k = -0.0213 + 0.00064T, c = -0.01847 + 0.001162T, R2 = 0.9991 R2 = 0.9923 R2 = 0.9343

1.0 80C 70C 50C

0.8

Moisture ratio

0.6

0.4

0.3

0.0 0 50 100 150 200 250 Drying time(min) 300 350

Fig. 1: Drying curves of finger millet at different temperatures

Thus, the thin layer model for the finger millet was MR= (1.188 0.003546T) exp[(0.0213 - 0.00064T)t]+ ( -0.01847 + 0.001162T) 129

Figure 2 gives the experimental MR verses t curve as compared to that of predicted by the logarithmic model at the three temperatures and it may be observed from the figure that there is good matching between experimental values and predicted values. Effective diffusivities of the finger millet at three different temperatures was evaluated by plotting ln MR vs t (Fig. 3) and the data was presented in Table 3. The values varied from 1.526 x 10G10 to 2.851 x 10G10 m2/s, and as expected the diffusion coefficient has increased

Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol., 3(2): 127-131, 2011

1.0 Exp 80 Pre 80 Exp 70 Pre 70 Pre 50 0.6

0.8
Moisture ratio

Table 3: Effective diffusivities of finger millet at different temperatures S. No. Temperature (0C) Diffusivity (m2/s) 1 50 1.526x10-10 2 70 2.259x10-10 3 80 2.851x10-10

0.4

0.3

0.0

the range reported in literature, 10G9 to10G11 m2/s (Madamba et al., 1996). Further, a plot (Fig. 4.) was made between 1/T verses lnD and it may be observed from Fig. 4 that a linear relationship is obtained. Therefore, the diffusion kinetics follows Arrhenius type relationship. The slope of this line gives the value of Ea/R, from which the activation energy was evaluated as 35.37 kJ/gmol.
180

20

40

60

80 100 120 Drying time(min)

140

160

CONCLUSION The conclusions drawn from the present study were that the Logarithmic model gave an excellent fit for the drying data of the finger millet. The effective diffusivities increased with the drying temperature and varied from 1.526 x 10G10 to 2.851 x 10G10 m2/s. The temperature dependence of diffusivity follows Arrhenius type of relationship and the activation energy for the diffusion of moisture was found to be 35.37 kJ/gmol. ACKNOWLEDGMENT One of the authors (G.B. Radhika) acknowledge the Management, Principal and the Head, Department of Chemical Engineering, B.V. Raju Institute of Technology for providing the necessary facilities to carry out the work. REFERENCES

Fig. 2: Drying curves for the experimental data and that predicted based on the logarithmic model
-0.5 -0.6 -0.7
InMR

50C 70C 80C

-0.8 -0.9 -1.0 -1.1 0 20 40 80 60 100 Drying time(min) 120 140 160

Fig. 3: lnMR vs drying time (min)

-21.9 -22.0 -22.1 -22.2
InD

-22.3 -22.4 -22.5 -22.6 0.00280 0.00285 0.00290 0.00295 0.003000.00305 0.00310 1/T(l/K)

Fig. 4: Variation of effective diffusivity as function of temperature

with the increasing drying temperature. The diffusion coefficients of the finger millet were in accordance with 130

AOAC, 1960. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official Methods of Analysis. 9th Edn., Washington, DC. Akgun, N.A. and Y. Doymaz, 2005. Modeling of olive cake thin layer drying process. J. Food Eng., 68: 455-461. Akpinar, E.K., 2006. Determination of suitable thin layer model for some vegetables and fruits. J. Food Eng., 73: 75-84. Bakri, H.H. and A.I. Hobani, 2000. Thin layer drying of dates. J. Food Process Eng., 23: 177-189. Bruce, D.M., 1985. Exposed layer barley drying, three models fitted to new data up to 150oC. J. Agric. Eng. Res., 32: 337-347. Crank, J., 1975. The Mathematics of Diffusion. 2nd Edn., Oxford University Press, London. Debabandya, M. and R.P. Srinivas, 2005. A thin layer drying model of parboiled wheat. J. Food Eng., 66: 513-518.

Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol., 3(2): 127-131, 2011 Diamante, L.M. and P.A. Munro, 1991. Mathematical modeling of hot air drying of sweet potato slices. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., 26: 99. Gunhan, T., V. Demir, E. Hancioglu and A. Hepbasli, 2005. Mathematical modeling of drying of bay leaves. Energ. Conser. Manage., 46(11): 1667-1669. Henderson, S.M., 1974. Progress in developing the thin layer drying equation. Tran. ASAC, 17: 1167-1172. Henderson, S.M. and S. Pabis, 1961. Grain drying theory. II. Temperature effects on drying coefficients. J. Agric. Eng. Res., 6: 169-174. Khazaei, J. and S. Daneshmandi, 2007. Modeling of thin layer drying kinetics of sesame seeds: Mathematical and neural networks modeling. Int. Agrophys., 21: 335-348. Madamba, P.S., R.H. Driscoll and K.A. Buckle, 1996. The thin layer drying characteristics of garlic slices. J. Food Eng., 29: 75-97. Ojendiran, J.O. and A.O. Raji, 2010. Thin layer drying of millet and effect of temperature on drying characteristics. Int. Food Res. J., 17: 1095-1106. Ozdemir, M. and Y.O. Devres, 1999. The thin layer drying characteristics of hazelnuts during roasting. J. Food Eng., 42: 225-233. Page, G.E., 1949. Factors influencing the maximum rates of air drying shelled corn in thin layers. M.S. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, purdue, USA. Rangroo, S. and D.G. Rao, 1992. Drying of Toria seeds (Brassica Campestris): Part 2, Drying Conditions. J. Food Eng., 17: 59-68. Ronoh, E.K., C.L. Kanali, J.T. Mailutha and D. Shitanda, 2010. Thin layer drying kinetics of Amaranth grains in a natural convection solar tent dryer. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev., 10(3): 2218-2233. Syamali, A.K., H.H.E. Jayaweera and T.R. Ariyaratne, 2009. Thin layer drying of some Srilankan paddy varieties under low humid conditions. Proceedings of Technical Sessions, Institute of Physics, Srilanka, 25: 36-44. Singh, H. and N. Sodhi, 2000. Dehydration kinetics of onions. J. Food Sci. Technol., 37(5): 520-522. Thakor, N.J., S. Sokhansanj, F.W. Sosulski and S. Yannacopoulos, 1999. Mass and dimensional changes of single canola kernels during drying. J. Food Eng., 40: 153-160. Togrul, I.T. and D. Pehlivan, 2002. Mathematical modeling of solar drying of apricots in thin layers. J. Food Eng., 55: 209-216. Toyosi, Y.T. and A. Adeladun, 2010. Air drying characteristics of chili pepper. Int. J. Food Eng., 6(1): 1-15. Tutuncu, M.A. and T.P. Labuza, 1996. Effect of geometry on the effective moisture transfer diffusion coefficient. J. Food Eng., 30: 433-447. Wang, C.Y. and R.P. Singh, 1978. Use of variable equilibrium moisture content in modeling rice drying. Tran. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., 11: 668-672. White, G.M., I.J. Ross and R. Ponelert, 1981. Fully exposed drying of popcorn. Tran. ASAE, 24: 466-468. Yaldiz, O. and C. Ertekin, 2004. Drying of egg plant and selection of a suitable thin layer drying model. J. Food Eng., 63: 349-359. AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION G.B. Radhika: Main worker for the paper as a part of her Ph.D. work, collected the experimental data, and processed the data, prepared the manuscript. S.V. Satyanarayana: Co-supervisor for the Ph.D. work, assisted in data processing and drafting the manuscript. D.G. Rao: Supervisor for the Ph.D. work, mainly conceived the project, assisted in data processing, redrafted the manuscript with editorial corrections.

131