4.5 Article

Drying of organic blackberry in combined hot air-infrared dryer with ultrasound pretreatment

期刊

DRYING TECHNOLOGY
卷 39, 期 14, 页码 2075-2091

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/07373937.2020.1753066

关键词

Energy; Exergy; Blackberry; combined hot air-infrared dryer; GHG emissions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study predicted and analyzed energy and exergy of a combined hot air-infrared dryer with ultrasound pretreatment for organic blackberry. Results showed that increasing inlet air temperature and ultrasound pretreatment time can reduce color change rate and improve energy utilization and exergy efficiency. Prediction results by ANN and ANFIS methods indicated that ANFIS achieved higher (R)(2) and lower (RMS) than ANN, with the highest GHG emissions observed in samples without pretreatment at 50°C temperature.
In this study, prediction and analysis of energy and exergy in a combined hot air-infrared dryer with ultrasound pretreatment for organic blackberry was carried out. The effect on product color and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission was assessed. To predict energy and exergy parameters such as energy utilization ratio, energy utilization, exergy loss, and exergy efficiency, both the artificial neural network (ANN) and adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) methods were employed. Drying experiments were undertaken at three temperature levels of 50, 60, and 70 degrees C in air speed of 1 m/s and ultrasound pretreatment time 15, 30, and 45 min, as compared to controlled samples (without pretreatment). Results demonstrated that by raising the inlet air temperature and ultrasound pretreatment time, color change rate decreased, while energy utilization and exergy efficiency increased. Energy and exergy prediction results by means of ANN and ANFIS methods showed that ANFIS method achieved a higher (R)(2) and lower (RMS) as compared to ANN. The highest level of GHG emission (NOx, CO2) was obtained at 50 degrees C temperature for samples without pretreatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据