![Sample our Physical Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110819/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Physical-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Low-pressure superheated steam drying (LPSSD) has recently been applied to drying of various heat-sensitive foods and bioproducts with success. Several studies have shown that the quality of LPSSD-dried products is superior to that obtained using conventional hot air or vacuum drying. However, drying time and energy consumption for LPSSD is generally greater than that for vacuum drying. Therefore, it is necessary to examine different methodologies to improve the energy efficiency of LPSSD. An intermittent drying scheme is one possible method to reduce the energy consumption of the process while maintaining the desired product quality. In this study, the effect of intermittent supply of energy (through an electric heater and steam injection to the dryer) and vacuum (through the use of a vacuum pump) at various intermittency values or on:off periods (10:5, 10:10 and 10:20 min in the case of intermittent supply of energy and 5:0, 5:5, and 5:10 min in the case of intermittent supply of vacuum) at the on-period setting temperatures of 70, 80, and 90°C on the drying kinetics and heat transfer behavior of the drying samples (banana chips) was studied. The effects of these intermittent drying schemes and conditions on the quality parameters of dried banana chips; i.e., color, shrinkage, texture, and ascorbic acid retention, were also studied. Finally, the energy consumption values for intermittent LPSSD and vacuum drying were monitored through the effective (or net) drying time at various intermittent drying conditions and compared with those using continuous LPSSD and vacuum drying.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their sincere appreciation to the Commission on Higher Education, the Thailand Research Fund (TRF), and the International Foundation for Science (IFS), Sweden, for supporting this study financially.
Notes
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).
N/A implies that, at this condition, the final banana moisture content of 0.025 kg/kg (d.b.) was not achievable.
Different letters in the same column indicate that values are significantly different (α < 0.05).