Abstract
This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation on an indirect active type of solar dryer, using two distinct solar air collector and their impacts on drying agricultural products. The thermal performance of the proposed collectors has been evaluated using the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Experimental observations were done in climatic conditions Gödöllő, Hungary on the 2nd and 9th of October 2017. The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays. The mas flow rate of air was maintained as 0.038 kg/s and the dryer was operated from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. When a double-pass solar air collector's results are compared to a single-pass solar air collector's, it's evident that the double-pass solar air collector produces much more energy and efficiency. The experimental results showed that single-pass and double-pass collectors have daily efficiencies of 42.77% and 56.10%, respectively, with average exergy efficiency values ranging from 31% to 49% for single-pass and 51% to 67% for double-pass. The most significant aspect determining the collectors' thermal efficiency was the temperature rise between the collector outlet and inlet. The average drying efficiencies of the solar dryer for the single and double-pass collectors were evaluated as 12.16% and 16.45%, respectively. The maximum temperature rise for double-pass was determined to be 20 °C, whereas single-pass was found to be 6.5 °C. Furthermore, the highest drying rate was achieved when sliced apples were dried with a double-pass collector mode. It reduced 52% of the water content in the apple in the same amount of time as single-pass drying, compared to 35% in the case of single-pass drying.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 13
Claim · model-written summary
The single-pass collector had a daily efficiency of 42.77%.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticae0 - Treatment
- single-passe2
- Outcome
- daily efficienciese2
- Value
- 42.77%e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e2“The experimental results showed that single-pass and double-pass collectors have daily efficiencies of 42.77% and 56.10%, respectively, with average exergy efficiency values ranging from 31% to 49% for single-pass and 51% to 67% for double-pass”
Claim · model-written summary
The double-pass collector had a daily efficiency of 56.10%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-passe2
- Outcome
- daily efficienciese2
- Value
- 56.10%e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e2“The experimental results showed that single-pass and double-pass collectors have daily efficiencies of 42.77% and 56.10%, respectively, with average exergy efficiency values ranging from 31% to 49% for single-pass and 51% to 67% for double-pass”
Claim · model-written summary
The single-pass collector had average exergy efficiency values of 31% to 49%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- single-passe2
- Outcome
- average exergy efficiency valuese2
- Value
- 31% to 49%e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e2“The experimental results showed that single-pass and double-pass collectors have daily efficiencies of 42.77% and 56.10%, respectively, with average exergy efficiency values ranging from 31% to 49% for single-pass and 51% to 67% for double-pass”
Claim · model-written summary
The double-pass collector had average exergy efficiency values of 51% to 67%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-passe2
- Outcome
- average exergy efficiency valuese2
- Value
- 51% to 67%e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e2“The experimental results showed that single-pass and double-pass collectors have daily efficiencies of 42.77% and 56.10%, respectively, with average exergy efficiency values ranging from 31% to 49% for single-pass and 51% to 67% for double-pass”
Claim · model-written summary
The double-pass solar air collector produced much more energy and efficiency than the single-pass solar air collector.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-pass solar air collectore1
- Outcome
- energy and efficiencye1
- Direction
- produces much moree1
- Comparator
- single-pass solar air collectore1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e1“When a double-pass solar air collector's results are compared to a single-pass solar air collector's, it's evident that the double-pass solar air collector produces much more energy and efficiency”
Claim · model-written summary
The temperature rise between collector outlet and inlet was the most significant aspect determining collector thermal efficiency.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- the temperature rise between the collector outlet and inlete3
- Outcome
- thermal efficiencye3
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e3“The most significant aspect determining the collectors' thermal efficiency was the temperature rise between the collector outlet and inlet”
Claim · model-written summary
The single-pass collector gave an average drying efficiency of 12.16%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- singlee4
- Outcome
- average drying efficienciese4
- Value
- 12.16%e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e4“The average drying efficiencies of the solar dryer for the single and double-pass collectors were evaluated as 12.16% and 16.45%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The double-pass collector gave an average drying efficiency of 16.45%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-passe4
- Outcome
- average drying efficienciese4
- Value
- 16.45%e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e4“The average drying efficiencies of the solar dryer for the single and double-pass collectors were evaluated as 12.16% and 16.45%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The maximum temperature rise for the double-pass collector was 20 °C.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-passe5
- Outcome
- maximum temperature risee5
- Value
- 20 °Ce5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e5“The maximum temperature rise for double-pass was determined to be 20 °C, whereas single-pass was found to be 6.5 °C”
Claim · model-written summary
The maximum temperature rise for the single-pass collector was 6.5 °C.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- single-passe5
- Outcome
- maximum temperature risee5
- Value
- 6.5 °Ce5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e5“The maximum temperature rise for double-pass was determined to be 20 °C, whereas single-pass was found to be 6.5 °C”
Claim · model-written summary
The double-pass collector mode gave the highest drying rate when drying sliced apples.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-pass collector modee6
- Outcome
- drying ratee6
- Direction
- higheste6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e6“Furthermore, the highest drying rate was achieved when sliced apples were dried with a double-pass collector mode”
Claim · model-written summary
Drying sliced apples with the double-pass collector mode reduced apple water content by 52% in the same time as single-pass drying.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- double-pass collector modee6
- Outcome
- water content in the applee7
- Direction
- reducede7
- Value
- 52%e7
- Comparator
- single-pass dryinge7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e6“Furthermore, the highest drying rate was achieved when sliced apples were dried with a double-pass collector mode”
e7“It reduced 52% of the water content in the apple in the same amount of time as single-pass drying, compared to 35% in the case of single-pass drying”
Claim · model-written summary
Single-pass drying reduced apple water content by 35%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- single-pass dryinge7
- Outcome
- water content in the applee7
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede7
- Value
- 35%e7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The experiments were also carried out to dry 2 kg of sliced apples spread over the drying trays”
e7“It reduced 52% of the water content in the apple in the same amount of time as single-pass drying, compared to 35% in the case of single-pass drying”
The same questions in other papers
processing · soil: physics · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.