See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223739890

Design of Tray Dryers for Food

Dehydration

Article in Journal of Food Engineering May 1997

DOI: 10.1016/S0260-8774(97)00010-1

CITATIONS READS

24 2,518

4 authors, including:

Chris Kiranoudis Michael Tsamparlis

National Technical University National and Kapodistrian Un
146 PUBLICATIONS 3,997 95 PUBLICATIONS 1,017 CITATIONS
CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

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

Cartan symmetries of holonomic and unholonomic Lagrangian systems

View project

Geometrization of symmetries of differential equations View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Zacharias B Maroulis on 24 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journulof Food Engineering32(1907)26Y-2Y1
0 1997 Elsevier Science Limited
All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain
PII: SO260-8774(97)00010-l 0260-8774197
$17.00
+ 0.00
ELSEVIER

Design of lkay Dryers for Food Dehydration

C. T. Kiranoudis, Z. B. Marouliqa D. Marinos-Kouris,

and M. Tsamparlis
Department of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University, GR-15780, Athens.
Greece
Department of Physics, University of Athens, GR-15783, Athens, Greece

(Received 9 August 1996; accepted 11 February 1997)

ABSTRACT

A mathematical model for the semi-batch operation of industrial dryers with

trucks and trays is presented and analysed. Design aspects are discussed
concerning problems involving both single dryer and systems of parallel dryers.
In both cases, optimum flowsheet configuration and operation conditions arc
sought and verified by appropriate formulation of design and optimization
strategies. The optimization objective is the total annual cost of the plant,
subjected to constraints imposed by the operation of the dryer; thermodynamics,
and construction reasoning. The decision variables were the number of trucks
and the drying air stream humidity for each dryer involved, as well as the total
number of dryers. The MINLP nature of the design problem required
mathematical programming techniques for its solution. The optimization was
carried out for a wide range of production capacities, and the optimal points,
where a new truck or a new dryer is introduced, were evaluated. The effect of
market economic figures on the design results is illustrated. The analysis focused
on the design of two commercial agricultural products - namely, raisins and
currants. A characteristic case study is presented in order to demonstrate the
effectiveness of the proposed approach. 0 1997 Elsevier Science Limited

NOTATION

Al,AZ,A.3 Constants of Antoine equation (eqn 23)

aw Water activity of air streams
c* Unit total annual cost ($)

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

269
270 C. T Kiranoudis et al.

Unit total annual cost at infinite production level ($)

Capital cost ($)
CE Cost of electricity ($/kWh)
Ctl Concentration of fuel in hydrogen (kg/kg)
Operational cost ($/h)
Specific heat of air (kJikg*K)
Specific heat of dry solid (kJ/kg*K)
Specific heat of vapor (kJ/kg*K)
Specific heat of water &I/kg-K)
Total annual cost ($)
CZ Cost of fuel ($/kg)
E Electrical energy consumed by the motor of the blowers (kWh)
Percentage of capital cost on an annual rate
>A
F A0
Flowrate of inlet air stream (kg/h*db)
Flowrate of fresh air stream (kg/h*db)
Flowrate of drying air stream (kg/h-db)
y Specific enthalpy of wet air stream (kJ/kg)
pecific enthalpy of fresh air stream (kJ/kg)
h A0
Specific enthalpy of drying air stream &l/kg)
ii:: Specific enthalpy of inlet air stream (kJ/kg)
hs Specific enthalpy of humid product (kJ/kg)
Truck of dryer
k, Drying constant (l/h)
ko,k, Constants of drying constant equation (eqn 22)
LM Heat of combustion of fuel &I/kg)
N Number of trucks
nWflD,nE,nZ Parameters of capital cost equation (eqn 29)
ND Number of dryers
P Total pressure (kPa)
Pl Economic coefficient expressing capital cost inflation
P2 Economic coefficient expressing operating cost inflation
psat Water vapor pressure (kPa)
R Ideal gas constant (kJ/mol-K)
Rw Production of water in combustion (kg/h)
Time (h)
fR Cycle period (h)
TA Temperature of output air stream (C)
T AC Temperature of drying air stream (C)
T AM Temperature of inlet air stream (C)
T A0 Temperature of fresh air stream (C)
top Operating time (h/year)
Ts Temperature of product (C)
MAX
TA Maximum temperature level for no thermal degradation observec
(C)
UA Volumetric heat transfer coefficient (kW/kg.K)
W Truck load (kg-db)
XA Absolute humidity of output air stream (kg/kg-db)
X AC Absolute humidity of drying air stream (kg/kg*db)
X AM Absolute humidity of inlet air stream (kg/kg*db)
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 271

Absolute humidity of fresh air stream (kg/kg*db)

Material moisture content (kg/kg*db)
Equilibrium material moisture content (kg/kg*db)
Desired material moisture content (kg/kgdb)
Constants of the GAB (Guggenheim-Anderson-de Boer) equations
(eqns (18-20))
Fuel flowrate (kg/h)
Fuel consumed per cycle of operation (kg/cycle)

Greek letters

Parameters of capital cost equation (eqn 29)

Latent heat of vaporization of water (kJ/kg)

Latent heat of vaporization of water at reference temperature (kJ/
kg)
AP Mean pressure drop through the train of trucks (kPa)
ATMAX Maximum allowed temperature diminuation through the train of
trucks (C)
43 Mass ratio of water and air molecules

INTRODUCTION

Dehydration operations are important activities of the chemical and food processing
industries. The basic objective in drying food products is the removal of water in the
solids up to a certain level, at which microbial spoilage is significantly minimized.
The wide variety of dehydrated foods that are now available to the consumer
(snacks, dry mixes and soups, dried fruits, etc.) and the increasing concern for
meeting quality specifications and conserving energy emphasize the need for a
thorough understanding of the drying operation and the problems related to the
design and operation of dryers. In particular, process design principally involves
structural and parametric optimization methodologies, carried out under flowsheet
constraints, in order to formulate mathematical problems that tackle predefined
construction and operational needs. Despite the explicit importance of developing a
proper design methodology for dealing with these problems, empiricism still pre-
vails. In the case of dryers, design has become an increasingly challenging problem
aiming at the evaluation of the appropriate type of equipment, its associated flow-
sheet structure, its optimum construction characteristics, and the operating
conditions of each unit involved in the overall flowsheet. In addition, auxiliary
equipment should be appropriately chosen together with its performance character-
istics. However, most design efforts in this field face problems of extreme difficulty,
related to the complex drying conditions. The latter include many interconnected
and opposing phenomena, associated mainly with to the complex nature of drying
(Kiranoudis et al., 1995). Although the modelling of drying processes is well
developed, with adequate comprehension of the process itself, most models incor-
porate a large number of thermophysical properties and transport coefficients,
272 C. T. Kiranoudis et al.

which in most cases are only imprecisely known, producing inaccurate or erroneous
results on large-scale industrial applications.
Tray dryers constitute an important family of convective dryers, where the drying
medium is hot air or combustion gases coming from a furnance. They are adaptable
to the drying of almost any material that can be put in a tray. In general, batch or
semi-batch operation is used. In all cases, design efforts in this field focus on the
determination of the appropriate equipment configuration: i.e. number of parallel
processor lines, trucks, and trays, determination of flowsheet sizing, and correspond-
ing operational conditions within each processor. Despite the obvious importance of
deriving design methodologies in this field, limited efforts are cited in the literature.
Bertin and Blazquez (1986) presented a mathematical model for a tunnel dehy-
drator, of the California type, for plum drying, and searched for the optimum
capacity of the dryer. The model was obtained by heat and mass transfer balances at
two levels: the product compartment and inside the tunnel itself. The optimum
condition was given by the maximum production capacity of the dryer satisfying the
final product quality. It was found that recirculation of a proportion of the exhaust
air improved the dryer efficiency in terms of energy. Wentz and Thygeson (1988)
tackle design through a list of short-cut equations. A simplified equation was used to
calculate the total amount of tray area required for the specified production rates.
The necessary data, usually obtained from laboratory tests, were the drying time for
the given initial and final moisture content and the desired tray loading. The
calculated tray area was then distributed in appropriate trucks and trays. The
remaining process variables were calculated by means of the corresponding mass
and energy balances over the dryer. Vagenas and Marinos-Kouris (1991) presented
a mathematical model for the design and optimization of an industrial dryer for
sultana grapes and applied it to the determination of size and optimal operating
conditions of the dryer. The optimal conditions were evaluated by minimizing the
heat consumption, expressed as the ratio of thermal load to production, with certain
constraints regarding the production rate of the dryer and the maximum permissible
air temperature. The optimization variables were temperature and humidity of the
drying air and product loading thickness on the trays. The optimum conditions
required the operation of the dryer at the maximum permissible air humidity,
corresponding to a high degree of recirculation of exhaust air. This was achieved by
automatic control of fresh air and humid air inlet and exhaust dampers along the
length of dryer, during the entire drying cycle. Kiranoudis et al. (1996) presented a
mathematical model for the design and operational optimization of an industrial
semi-batch dryer for the dehydration of grapes. Its nominal conditions were evalu-
ated by minimizing the fuel demand for the dryer per unit mass of dried product
processed in each cycle period. The optimal operation of the dryer was evaluated by
maximizing the total profit from the operation of the dryer. In this way, energy
economy was achieved and the dryer operated at the maximum thermal efficiency,
while the production rate was also maintained at a high level.
In the present work, the mathematical model for the semi-batch operation of a
system of parallel industrial dryers with trucks and trays is presented and analysed.
Design was carried out by appropriate optimizing of the total annual cost of the
plant subject to constraints imposed by the operation of the dryer. Design was
formulated as a mixed-integer non-linear optimization (MINLP) problem and was
solved by using mathematical programming techniques. The optimization was
carried out for a wide range of production capacities and the optimal points where
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 273

a new truck or a new dryer is introduced were evaluated. The effect of market
economic figures on design results was presented.

MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF TRAY DRYERS

The industrial dryer examined here is a tunnel dryer with trucks and trays operating
in semi-batch fashion. This configuration is typical for most industrial applications.
The dryer contains a number of trucks, each of which behaves as a separate batch
tray dryer. Material particles are placed uniformly on the surface of each tray. The
air is blown over the trays containing the product, and the movement of the air is
reversed for each truck, so that the product has uniform moisture content at the end
of drying. The trucks enter through a batch operation and, at predefined intervals,
move along the dryer counter-currently with the drying air. When the first truck of
the train reaches the desired material moisture content, it is withdrawn from the
dryer. The remaining trucks proceed towards the exit and a new truck is introduced
at the end of the train. In this way a semi-batch procedure is introduced and a
periodic operation is adopted. Recirculated air is heated by directly introducing
combustion gases coming from a conventional burner. The burner operates with a
hydrocarbon fuel and fresh air necessary for burning the fuel. A fraction of recircu-
lated air, equal to the amount of combustion burner gases, leaves the dryer just after
the train of trucks. It is common practice that temperature and humidity of the
drying air stream entering the product are controlled. In this case, the final control
elements are the fuel induction valve and the fresh air dumper, respectively. It is
possible that, when the production capacity is high enough, more than one dryer
operate in parallel. The interior of the dryer as well as the arrangements of its
control facilities are included in Fig. 1.
The mathematical model of the dryer involves heat and mass balances of air
streams and product trays in the dryer and the burner. In addition to the above,
heat and mass transfer phenomena taking place during drying must also be taken
into consideration. Moreover, the resulting equations are subject to quality and
thermodynamic constraints. The arrangement of product and air streams within the
dryer and burner compartments is also given in Fig. 1. The analysis of model
components will commence with the corresponding heat and mass balances over
each individual truck. We assume that the dryer involves N trucks and that each
truck i (i = 1,. . . ,N) can be loaded to a maximum total load. The corresponding
product dry mass is W and can be readily computed as a function of the maximum
total load of the truck and the initial material moisture content of the product. Heat
and mass transfer phenomena during drying are indeed complicated and their
solution demands considerable computational time. They involve coupled transfer
mechanisms within both the solid and the gas phase. A mathematical model expli-
citly accounting for all transfer mechanisms should not be appropriate for
optimization purposes since it demands considerable computational time. Computa-
tional time is of utmost importance when a mathematical model is to be solved
repeatedly in an optimization convergence procedure. In this case, a simplified
model is considered. It involves first-order kinetics and contains a mass transfer
coefficient of a phenomenological nature, which is usually called the drying constant.
This constant chiefly accounts for mass diffusion within the solid phase, but also
214 C. ?: Kimzoudket al.

embodies boundary layer phenomena when it is considered to be a function of all

process variables affecting drying. Ample accuracy is combined with sufficient low
computation time (Kiranoudis et al., 1995). On the basis of the above, moisture
transfer mechanisms in the ith truck, are expressed by the following equation:

dX$
- - = k&&-X$,)
dt
Heat transfer is chiefly controlled by the heat transfer coeffient at the air boundary
layer (Kiranoudis et al., 1995). For the purpose of developing the particular mathe-
matical model, it is assumed that an overall phenomenological heat transfer
coefficient embodying both conduction and boundary layer phenomena can be
applied. On the basis of the above, heat transfer within the ith truck is expressed by
means of the following equation:

Fan Burner I I

I
I
I

w
Trucks

FAC

xi-1
A
Ti4
A

Fig. 1. Industrial dryer with trucks and trays.

 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 275

dh$ dX;
- = UA(7&Tj;)+AHs- (2)
dt dt
The form of heat transfer implied by eqn (2) suggests that accumulation of energy
within the truck, expressed by the product specific enthalpy derivative, is controlled
by heat removed by the drying air stream and the corresponding moisture evapora-
tion within the truck. Mass balance of air passing through the ith truck is given by
the following relationship, suggesting that moisture evaporated within each truck is
directly conveyed to the gas phase:
dx,
&-(X&X;)+W - =0
dt

The corresponding heat balance for the drying air stream passing through the ith
truck suggests that its specific enthalpy diminution through the product is equal to
the amount of heat removed from the drying air stream, as expressed by the
following equation:
F&hi - hc ) + WU,(Ti - 7-i) = 0 (4)
Equations (l-4) constitute the mathematical model of each drying truck for both
product tray and drying air stream. Repetition of this model for all trucks participat-
ing in the dryer form the overall mathematical model of the drying compartment.
Clearly, the individual equations are connected with the intermediate drying stream
variables as enter each truck. Thus, these variables are related to the dryer drying
stream variables shown in Fig. 1 as follows:
xi =X*c (5)
TA= TAC (5)

xg = X* (7)

T; = TA (8)
The electrical energy consumed by the motor of the dryer blowers is given by the
following equation:
E = APFAC

A simplified model of the actual burner is presented. We assume that the fuel is
hydrocarbon and is burned using fresh ambient air to give the combustion products,
solely carbon dioxide and water. The production rate of water vapor is given by the
following equation, which expresses the elementary combustion reactions:
Rw = 9CHZ (10)
Based on eqn (lo), the total balance and the moisture balance over the burner are
given by the following equations, which describe the combustion process:
FA = F,,+Z (11)

FAXAM = FAOXAO + Rw (14

276 C. I: Kirunoudis et al.

Assuming that the fuel has the same thermophysical properties as air, the corre-
sponding energy balance over the dryer is given by the following relationship:
F&AM = FAohAo+ XLM (13)
In the dryer point where the combustion gases are mixed with recirculation air, the
mass and energy balances are as follows:
FACXAC=(FAC-FAWA+FAXAM (14)

F/&c = WAC- FAh + FAhAM (15)

The mathematical model of the dryer involves thermophysical properties as well as
transport coefficients. The specific enthalpy of the product, as a function of its
temperature and moisture content, can be calculated by means of the following
equation, assuming a reference temperature of 0C (Pakowski et al., 1991):
hs = c&s + cpwTs& (16)
The specific enthalpy of an air stream, as a function of its temperature and absolute
humidity, is given by the following equation, assuming a reference temperature of
0C (Pakowski et al., 1991):
hA = CPATA+@HO+CPVTA)XA (17)
The equilibrium moisture content of desorption of product, as a function of water
activity and temperature of the surrounding air, can be computed by using the well
known GAB (Guggenheim-Anderson-de Boer) equation, which can be successfully
applied in the case of most foods (Maroulis et al., 1988):

xM,CKUw
XSE (18)
(1 -Kaw>[l -(I -C)Kaw]

c = C,[eXp(AH,/RT,)] (19)
K = K,[exp(AH,lRT,)] (20)
The drying air stream water activity used in eqn (18) can be evaluated by the
following equation of the phychrometric chart (Pakowski et al., 1991):

x Ap

+ = (~,+xA)pt (21)

The drying constant used in eqn (1) as a function of drying air temperature is given
by the following empirical equation, appropriately applied using regression analysis
to the experiments carried out by Vagenas (1988):
kM = k,,Tk,: (22)
Water vapor pressure can be computed by means of the Antoine equation:
In pat = Al -Az/(A3+TA) (23)
The latent heat of water vaporization can be evaluated by means of the Clausius-
Clapeyron equation:
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 217

(24)

The volumetric heat transfer coefficient is assumed to be constant for the drying air
stream temperature and velocity range studied.
As mentioned before, the dryer operates in cycles. The exact transition period, tR,
is determined by a critical constraint requiring that the material moisture content of
the extreme truck reach the desired value:
X&,) = Xgrget (25)
Futhermore, the drying air temperature at the entrance of the truck train should not
exceed an upper limit which affects product quality and prevent thermal degrada-
tion:
T; 5 Tgax (26)
Thermodynamics dictate that the moisture content of the product should be greater
than the corresponding equilibrium material moisture content imposed by the oper-
ating conditions over the truck:
Xi; 2 XSE(Ti,ab) (27)
Uniform drying throughout the truck train is desirable so that the corresponding
drying air temperature gradient can not create steep drying fronts within the dryer.
This is guaranteed by not allowing the drying air stream temperature diminution
through the truck train to exceed a predefined upper limit, at any time point of
operation:
T; - T; I ATMAX (28)
Equations (l-28) constitute the mathematical model of the dryer. It involves five
decision variables: the number of trucks, N, the cycle period of batches, tR; the
drying air stream humidity, x,& the drying air stream temperature, T,+C.;the drying
air stream flowrate, FAC. In this case, however, the cycle period of the operation is
evaluated so that eqn (25) is satisfied. Drying air temperature is chiefly constrained
by the relation of eqn (26). Drying air flowrate is also restricted by the relation of
eqn (28), in the sense that minimum cost is reached when the equality holds. As a
result of this, the only decision variables remaining are the number of utilized trucks
and the drying air humidity. If parallel processors are used, then the total number
of decision variables are the number of utilized trucks and the drying air humidity
for each dryer plus the total number of dryers used.
On the basis of the above, the capital cost of a single dryer is expressed by means
of the following equation:
ccp = cx&VW+ SIJP + CY(EEI
+ C.+,.P (29
The first term is the cost of trucks, the second is the cost of the dryer and auxilliary
equipment as a function of the number of trucks, the third term is the cost of
blowers as a function of the motor electrical power, and the last term is the cost of
the burner as a function of the fuel flowrate. All cost terms obey economy of scale
laws. The corresponding operational cost is given by the following equation where
the first term expresses the electricity cost and the second the cost of fuel consumed:
COP = c&+czZ cm
278 C. I Kiranoudis et al.

The total annual cost of the plant can be expressed by means of the following
equation:
CT = w&P + PdOPCOP (31)

In this expression the economic coefficients, p1 and p2, express the way in which
each total cost component is affected by the current market economic situation for
the purchased equipment and the utilities involved, respectively. The process
description adopted formulates an MINLP problem subject to non-linear con-
straints, for the determination of the optimal flowsheet structure and the operating
conditions. In this case, the total annual cost objective function is minimized subject
to model constraints. Such problems are solved using appropriate mathematical
optimization techniques. Throughout the paper optimization was carried out by
means of the successive quadratic programming algorithm implemented in the form
of subroutine E04UCF/NAG. The periodic form of the problem requires iterative
evaluation of the mathematical model until all variables converge at the end of the
cycle time. All computations were performed on a SG Indy Workstation under
UNIX.

DESIGN OF TRAY DRYERS

The single dryer case

In the discussion concerning the general design problem of tray dryers, it was clearly
stated that, for a given production level, the objective of any design strategy should
aim at the determination of the following:
(1) The optimum number of dryers and their corresponding number of pre-
defined sized trucks (flowsheet structure)
(2) The optimal set points of controllers for each dryer involved (operating
conditions)
When the production capacity of the plant is specified, a reasonable objective
should be the minimization of the total annual cost of the plant. Taking into
consideration that the mathematical model of the plant involves a significant
number of design variables (i.e. integer and continuous), the problem is of an
MINLP nature and therefore a cumbersome case to solve. Our first attempt to solve
the general multi-dryer case is to consider the case of a single dryer. Our study will
be focused on the processing of two very popular agricultural products (namely,
raisins and currants), which are typical materials for this type of dryer. In this case,
a maximum processing temperature of 75C is taken into consideration so that
thermal degradation of the product is prevented, a typical truck loading of 1 tn*wb
is used, and a minimum temperature diminution of 10C through the train of trucks
is considered. The ambient temperature and air humidity are considered to be 25C
and 0.01 kg/kg*db, respectively. Raisins are dried from an initial material moiture
content of 4 kg/kg.db to a desired one of O-2 kg/kg*db, while the corresponding
values for currants are 3 kg/kg*db and 0.1 kg/kg*db.
In the single dryer case and for a specific product processed, the way in which the
decision variables (i.e. the number of trucks and the drying air stream humidity)
affect the fundamental process variables which determine cost is depicted in Fig. 2.
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 279

20 20
Raisins ClnTants

s
10

0 I_
0
__~-

_
I
0.05
X,
N=5

I
0.1
0wks db)
I
0.15
/

(a)
s
10

0
A;
III-
0.05 0.1
X,Gwks
N=5

0.15
db)
( 2

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

X, (kg/kg db) X, kk db)

300

Fig. 2. Effect of decision

7
0.05
X,
T
0.1
--__
0.15
(kg/kg db)
012
2
$

z?
N
200

100 I
0
\

I
0.05

variables on process variables affecting cost. (a) Cycle period.

X,
I
0.1
Wk
0.15
db)
I
1

(b)
Recycle flowrate. (c) Fuel consumption.
 C. 7: Kiranoudis et al.

Three variables are considered in this analysis: cycle period, flowrate of recircula-
tion, and cycle fuel consumption. Figure 2(a) shows that, as drying air humidity
increases, cycle period also increases. At high humidity levels, the drying conditions
become less intense and, as a concequence, the product has to be treated for longer
periods in the dryer. When the number of trucks participating in the dryer increases,
the cycle period increases as well; although the drying conditions are more intense
when the fewer trucks are used, the total residence time of a truck within the dryer
involving more trucks is similar, since more cycles will be used to reach the desired
material moisture content level. There is a maximum level of drying air humidity
within the dryer, that for raisins being higher than that for currants. Obviously, when
drying air humidity reaches this level, the cycle time approaches infinity, and beyond
this value the dryer has to be equipped with more trucks so that a bigger production
capacity is achieved. The corresponding recycle flowrate is determined when the
equality holds for constraint (eqn (28)); the smaller the flowrate, the lower the cost
of fans and electricity, but less intense drying conditions will prevail; therefore, the
optimum is always located at the equality. Figure 2(b) implies that, as drying air
humidity increases, recycle flowrate decreases. At high humidity levels the desired
temperature diminuation through the train of trucks can be achieved will lower
recirculation levels. When the number of trucks participating in the dryer increases,
the recycle flowrate increases too; in this case, the drying conditions have to be
more intense when more trucks are used, so that the desired temperature diminu-
tion through the train of trucks can be achieved. The same effect is observed for
fuel consumption within a cycle, as suggested by Fig. 2(c). We note that, as the
drying air stream humidity increases, batch fuel consumption decreases. Again the
reason is obvious: the higher the drying air stream humidity, the less the demand for
fresh air and, subsequently, the less the rejection of hot recirculated air. In this way
more energy is conserved and, therefore, the demand for fuel consumption is lower.
Obviously, the number of trucks has no effect on fuel consumption. Clearly, at low
values of drying air stream humidity energy consumption is higher, but more cycles
can be performed within a production planning horizon. At high values of drying air
stream humidity, it is the other way around. In other words, when striving for high
production rates under considerable energy conservation, there arises a trade-off
between fuel consumption and production capacity of the dryer.
The optimum structure and operating conditions of the dryer was determined by
suitably optimizing the total annual cost of the dryer. Typical Greek market eco-
nomic figures were taken into consideration for determining cost. Each 1 tn trucks
costs 4000 $/truck, increased with a power law of 0.95. The dryer costs 3500 $/truck,
increased with a power law of O-67. The cost of fans is 500 $/kWh of motor power,
and for the burner 200 $/kg of fuel are utilized on an hour basis. The corresponding
power laws are 0.3 and 0.4, respectively. The cost of the electrical unit is 0.08 $/kWh
and of the fuel 0.2 $/kg. The fuel is a hydrocarbon with hydrogen content of 0.15 kg/
kg and corresponding heat of combustion 40000 kJ/kg. The capital cost economic
coefficient pl is chosen to be 4 while the corresponding coefficient for the operating
cost, p2, was fixed to a value of 2. For a given production capacity of the plant, the
optimal unit total annual cost and its corresponding decision variables (i.e. drying
air humidity and number of trucks) are given in Fig. 3 for the case of raisins. The
unit total annual cost is presented in Fig. 3(a) as a function of plant production
capacity. We note that it exhibits several local minima, while it varies considerably
at low production capacity levels. For high production capacity levels the curves
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 281

0.25

0.23 --

5 0.21 --

z 0.19 --

5 0.17 -- \

0.15 --

0.13 1
0 100 200 400 500 ml

Q &$wW

(a)

Q k/h wb)
(b)

loo 200 300 400 500 600

Q (kg/h wb)
(cl
Fig. 3. Objective and decision variables as a function of production capacity for the single
dryer case. (a) Unit total annual cost. (b) Drying air humidity. (c) Number of trucks.
 C. T. Kiranoudis et al.

varies smoothly, although local minima still remain. This behavior is justified by the
fact that the corresponding optimal number of trucks within the dryer increases as
a function of production capacity. For a specific dryer configuration, where the
number of trucks is fixed, there is only one global minimum for the unit total annual
cost and this value corresponds to a fixed level of production capacity: i.e. for a
given dryer there is always only one production capacity level where the dryer
operates optimally with respect to cost. When this level is exceeded, then the
production of more product units will cost more non-proportionally. There exists a
production level where introduction of one more trucks to the train will result in
lower cost. We note that introduction of a new truck in the dryer (i.e. enrichment of
its structure) takes place on equally spaced intervals of production capacity, as
suggested by the linear form of the corresponding curve of Fig. 3(c), where the
optimal number of trucks is given as a function of the production capacity of the
dryer. As implied by Fig. 3(b), within each production capacity width, where the
structure of the dryer remains constant, the drying air stream humidity decreases as
the production capacity increases, introducing in this way more extreme drying
conditions for processing the product. The envelope of the unit total annual cost
curve signifies the correponding cost curve if the number of trucks in the dryer was
a continuous variable. This envelope decreases rapidly up to a certain level (around
300 kg/h*wb for the case of raisins) where a global minimum is reached. Clearly,
processing more product with the specified dryer, no matter how many more trucks
are introduced, will no longer produce products of even less unit cost. At this point,
the need for introduction of a new dryer parallel to the one mentioned above is
obvious. The situation will be further analysed in the following section.

Systems of parallel dryers

The design procedure adopted in the previous section is further expanded to the
case of systems of parallel dryers. This problem is the one most frequently encoun-
tered in industrial practice, since more processors are used to handle higher
production capacity levels. Apart from the drying air humidity and number of trucks
for each dryer utilized, a new decision variable is introduced in this case: i.e. the
total number of parallel dryers. For a given production capacity, these variables are
to be estimated by suitably optimizing the total annual cost of the entire plant. The
problem is MINLP nature and more complex than the one tackled before.
In the case of systems of parallel dryers, the unit total annual cost of the plant for
the two materials considered is given in Fig. 4. The local minima encountered in the
previous section for the same variable studied are again present. In this case,
however, the envelope of the curve does not exhibit a global optimum, but remains
constant as the production capacity increases. In the case of raisins, the second
dryer parallel to the first is introduced at a production capacity of around 300 kg/
h.wb, as predicted in the previous section, followed by an introduction of a third one
at around 550 kg/h*wb and of a fourth at around 800 kg/h*wb. We note a systematic
introduction of a new parallel dryer at intervals of production capacity of about
250 kg/h-wb. The behavior of the unit total annual cost curve for the case of currants
is similar to the one for raisins. In this case, however, the cost is significantly lower
and the production capacity intervals for the introduction of new trucks in a dryer
and new dryers in the entire flowsheet are wider. The second dryer is introduced at
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 283

a production capacity level of around 450 kg/h*wb, while the corresponding produc-
tion capacity interval for the introduction of the rest is around 330 kg/h.wb.
The variation of decision variables within each dryer as a function of production
capacity is given in Fig. 5, for the case of raisins. The optimal production flowrate
of each individual dryer is presented in Fig. 5(a). At low production levels only one
dryer exists and its flowrate is identical to the production capacity of the plant.
When a new dryer is introduced, the new flowrate profiles are again linear in shape,
they coincide in certain periodic intervals and are different in some others. Clearly,
the flowrates are the same when the dryers involve the same number of trucks.
Otherwise, higher values of flowrates are computed for the dryers that have more
trucks. The slopes of the interrupted lines are different for each dryer system. As
the number of parallel dryers increases (and so does the production capacity of the
plant), the slope of the linear flowrate curves of each individual dryer decreases due
to multiple splitting of the entire production capacity. The situation becomes more

0.25

M-
SingleDryer :
0.23
r:

3 Dryers : 4 Dryers
z 0.17 --
3
3
5 0.15 --

cl

0.13 --

0.11 --
Currants

0.09 --

Single Dryer 2 Dryers 3 Dryers

0.07 ~~

-I

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Q (kg/h wb)
Fig. 4. Unit total annual cost versus production capacity for the multiple dryer case.
284 C. 7: Kiranoudis et al.

p^ 250
3

100

50

0
0 200 400 800 1000

Q O<g/hw;
(4

12 -

10 --

8 --

z 6 --

4 --

Istdryer,
2

0
0 200 400 800 1000
Q (kg/h w;
(b)

0.16

s 3rddwr : &dryer
", 0.12

+
2 0.08

P
x 0.04

0 2lxl 400 800 1000

Q (kg/h w;
Cc)
Fig. 5. Decision variables as a function of production capacity for the multiple dryer case. (a)
Dryer flowrate. (b) Number of trucks. (c) Drying air humidity.
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 2%

obvious when observing the corresponding curves of Fig. 5(b), where the number of
trucks for each individual dryer are plotted against the production capacity of the
plant. We note that each new truck is symmetrically placed in the cascade of dryers
before the introduction of a new dryer. We imply that the design dictates that, for
a given number of trucks, these are uniformly distributed to the rival parallel dryers.
The drying air humidity for each dryer as a function of production capacity is
presented in Fig. 5(c). It resembles the corresponding single dryer case, where the
envelopes amplitude decays as the production capacity increases. Clearly, at high
levels of production capacity, the drying air humidity is restricted to values around
0.08 kg/kg.db. More process variables are given in Fig. 6 for the case of raisins. They
involve the cycle period, the recycle flowrate, and the fuel consumption for each
dryer involved in the flowsheet. Again, the impact of splitting is significant at all
levels.
From the analysis presented above, it is obvious that there are three basic process
variables that can express the entire design procedure discussed so far: the total
number of parallel processors, the total number of trucks involved, and the unit
total annual cost at infinite production capacity (this value is actually the optimal
unit total annual cost at relatively high production capacity levels up to infinity).
Clearly, for a given production capacity, the flowsheet configuration will be given in
terms of the total number of dryers and the total number of trucks, uniformly
distributed in the dryers. The unit total annual cost at infinite production capacity
will give us a clear indication of the unit product cost of the process. The impact of
the economic environment of these variables is quite significant for design. In this
analysis, the economic environment is expressed by the ratio of capital to opera-
tional expenses, in other words by the ratio of economic coefficients, p,/p2. This
ratio is small when the cost of equipment is significantly lower than the one of the
utilities, as in situations where materials and technology are cheaper than energy. In
situations where energy is less expensive than materials and technology, it is the
other way round. The effect of economic environment on these variables for a wide
range of production capacities is given in Fig. 7, for both materials studied. The
total number of dryers is greatly affected by the economic terms of the market.
Clearly, as suggested by Fig. 7(a), for a fixed production capacity less expensive
technology implies the use of more dryers. Unlike the total number of dryers used,
the total number of trucks utilised is clearly unaffected by the economic figures of
the market, being a function of solely production capacity, as suggested by Fig. 7(b).
Furthermore, Fig. 7(c) implies that the unit total annual cost at infinite production
capacity increases as capital costs become superior to operational expenses.

CASE STUDY

The effectiveness of the proposed approach can be illustrated by application to the

design of a system of parallel tray dryer that can handle a production capacity of
750 kg/h.wb. Both cases involving raisins and currants were studied. The economic
figures used are those mentioned in the previous paragraphs. The design procedure
adopted, proposed for the case of raisins a configuration of three parallel dryers.
Each dryer involved ten trucks. The product flowrate in each truck was 250 kgih.wb.
The drying air humidity controller was set up to 0.081 kg/kg.db, while the corre-
sponding cycle period was 4 h, the recycle flowrate was 157300 m/h, and the fuel
286 C. T Kiranoudis et al.

0 200 450 600 800 loo0

Q O<g/h
wb)
(4

200

Y 100
r&

50 7

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Q (kg/hwb)
(b)

200

5
t
e 150
3
N

loo
0 200 400 600 800 loo0

Q Wh wb)
(4
Fig. 6. Process variables as a function of production capacity for the multiple dryer case. (a)
Cycle period. (b) Recycle flowrate. (c) Fuel consumption.
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 287

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 35(x)

Q &g/h wb) Q (kg/hwb)

(a)

150
150

100
100
z
z P,lP2=1

50
50

0 1
0 L
----T I 1 I I
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3OOCl3500
0 500 1000 1500 COCCI2500 3000 3500
Q (kg/hwb)
Q otti wb)
03

0.3

0
0 1 2 3 4

(cl

Fig. 7. Effect of market economics on basic design variables of tray dryers. (a) Number of
parallel processors. (b) Number of trucks. (c) Unit total annual cost at infinite production
capacity.
288 C. ?: Kiranoudis et al.

(a)

3
x
co.oaot

(4

Fig. 8. Variation of material and drying air process variables as a function of time. (a)
Material moisture content (upper curve is for the last truck, lower curve is for the first truck).
(b) Material temperature (upper curve is for the first truck, lower curve is for the last truck).
(c) Drying air stream humidity (upper curve is for the last truck, lower curve is for the first
truck). (d) Drying air stream temperature (upper curve is for the first truck, lower curve is
for the last truck).
 Design of tray driers ,for food dehydration 8)

4. 4
CUtGUN.

ij

XU
2
0

75
I0
Truck
F

I$
Xn
2

74
1
,/
5
/

--

Truck
IO

_.

74 - 73
73
72
72

e 71.
en
70

69 69

0 68 PI 68 rC
0 5 10 0 5 10
Truck

(b)

0.0692 .-

0.0808 T
gj 0.0807

3 0.0806

X< 0.0805

0.0804 1 I
0 5 10
Truck

75 - T-
,

u^
e
c<
70 \ g
c<
70. \
65 65 +-
0 5 10 0 5 10
Truck Truck

Fig. 9. Material and air process variables profiles within the process cycle. (a) Material
moisture content. (h) Material temperature. (c) Drying air stream humidity. (d) Drying air
stream temperature.
290 C. iYKiranoudis et al.

consumption was 118.4 kg/cycle. For the case of currants, the optimal configuration
involved two parallel dryers. Each dryer involved seven trucks. The product flowrate
in each truck was 375 kg/h*wb. The drying air humidity controller was set up to
0.069 kg/kg-db, while the corresponding cycle period was 2.7 h, the recycle flowrate
was 116700 m3/h, and the fuel consumption was 115.6 kg/cycle.
The variation of material and drying air stream process variables within the cycle
period for both cases are given in Fig. 8. They involve material moisture content and
temperature and drying air stream humidity and temperature. They include varia-
tion of these variables for each and every truck of the dryer. The curves are linear,
except for the temperatures of material and drying air stream of the last truck which
is introduced at the beginning of the change-over period. These particular curves
exhibit the non-linear behavior of heat effects in the dryer.
The material and drying air stream profiles at the end of the change-over period
within the dryer are given in Fig. 9. The material moisture content decreases
through the trucks and so does its corresponding temperature which reaches the
drying air stream temperature for the first truck of the train. Similar results are
obtained for drying air stream humidity and temperature. Product temperature
diminution is more abrupt than its corresponding drying air stream. Obviously, more
intense drying conditions would result in greater fuel consumption but lower
change-over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Design of tray dryers involve the determination of its optimum flowsheet configura-
tion and operation conditions. Optimization seeks the total annual cost of the plant
subjected to constraints imposed by the operation of the dryer, thermodynamics,
and construction reasoning. The decision variables are the number of trucks and the
drying air stream humidity for each dryer involved as well as the total number of
dryers. The problem formulation is of an MINLP nature and involves implementa-
tion of mathematical programming techniques for its solution. The introduction of
new trucks in a dryer or a new dryer in the cascade, takes place for different
production levels which are evaluated by the optimization procedure. The effect of
market economic figures on design is critical for the number of dryers used and the
overall cost of the plant.

REFERENCES

Bertin, R. & Blazquez, M. (1986). Modelling and optimization of a dryer. Dying Technology,
4, 45-66.
Kiranoudis, C. T., Maroulis, Z. B. & Marinos-Kouris, D. (1995). Heat and mass transfer
model building in drying with multiresponse data. International Journal of Heat Mass
Transfer, 38, 463-480.
Kiranoudis, C. T., Maroulis, Z. B., Marinos-Kouris, D. & Tsamparlis, M. (1996) Modeling
and optimization of a tunnel grape dryer. DIying Technology, 14, 1695-1718.
Maroulis, Z. B., Tsami, E., Marinos-Kouris, D. & Saravacos, G. D. (1988). Application of the
GAB model to the moisture sorption isotherms for dried fruits. JoumaE of Food Engineer-
ing, 7, 63-75.
 Design of tray driers for food dehydration 291

Pakowski, Z., Bartczak, Z., Strumillo, C. & Stenstrom, S. (1991). Evaluation of equations
approximating thermodynamic and transport properties of water, stream and air for use in
CAD of drying processes. Dlying Technology, 9, 753-773.
Vagenas, G. K. (1988) An application of heat and mass transfer principles to the drying of
food materials. Ph.D. thesis, National Technical University, Athens.
Vagenas, G. K. & Marinos-Kouris, D. (1991). The design and optimization of an industrial
dryer for sultana raisins. Dying Technology, 9, 439-461.
Wentz, T. H. & Thygeson, J. R. (1988) Drying of wet solids. In Handbook of Separation
Techniques for Chemical Engineers, ed. P. A. Schweitzer, pp. 4-159. McGraw-Hill, New
York.

View publication stats