Comparative Study on Performance of Passive and Active Solar Dryer

Key Engineering Materials Pub Date : 2024-03-27 DOI:10.4028/p-2gfc9w

Eakpoom Boonthum, Sirichai Sirichana, Aphainun Namkhet, U. Teeboonma

{"title":"Comparative Study on Performance of Passive and Active Solar Dryer","authors":"Eakpoom Boonthum, Sirichai Sirichana, Aphainun Namkhet, U. Teeboonma","doi":"10.4028/p-2gfc9w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Performance of solar dryers were tested. In the past, to study the efficiency of solar dryers. A dryer with one drying chamber was built and tested by changing the conditions. In each experiment, the solar irradiance value is different, which can cause the results to be inaccurate. Therefore, in this study, a number of drying chambers are designed according to the number of experimental conditions to be studied during the same period. To reduce factors that will cause discrepancies in the experimental results. The solar dryer with 4 drying chambers was constructed in 1 unit and tested the performance of passive solar dryer (PSD) and active solar dryer (ASD). Air flowrate of ASD varied at 0.03 m3/s (ASD0.03), 0.06 m3/s (ASD0.06) and 0.09 m3/s (ASD0.09). Pork was selected as testing material with initial moisture content of 265% dry basis. Drying rate, solar dryer efficiency and specific energy consumption are criteria to evaluate of solar dryer performance. Result from the experimental was found that the performance of PSD is lowest compared with ASDs. Furthermore, it was revealed that the drying rate of ASD0.06 is higher than that for PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 22% 10% and 8%, respectively. Results from the experimental reveal the ASDs performance are higher than that of PSD. Moreover, it was found that the drying rate of ASD0.06 is higher than that for PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 22% 10% and 8%, respectively. Whereas, specific energy consumption of ASD0.06 is lower than that PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 26%, 11% and 9%, respectively. Finally, it was also found that solar dryer efficiency of PSD, ASD0.03, ASD0.06 and ASD0.09 are 11.68%, 13.34%, 14.89% and 13.73%, respectively.","PeriodicalId":507685,"journal":{"name":"Key Engineering Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Key Engineering Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4028/p-2gfc9w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Performance of solar dryers were tested. In the past, to study the efficiency of solar dryers. A dryer with one drying chamber was built and tested by changing the conditions. In each experiment, the solar irradiance value is different, which can cause the results to be inaccurate. Therefore, in this study, a number of drying chambers are designed according to the number of experimental conditions to be studied during the same period. To reduce factors that will cause discrepancies in the experimental results. The solar dryer with 4 drying chambers was constructed in 1 unit and tested the performance of passive solar dryer (PSD) and active solar dryer (ASD). Air flowrate of ASD varied at 0.03 m3/s (ASD0.03), 0.06 m3/s (ASD0.06) and 0.09 m3/s (ASD0.09). Pork was selected as testing material with initial moisture content of 265% dry basis. Drying rate, solar dryer efficiency and specific energy consumption are criteria to evaluate of solar dryer performance. Result from the experimental was found that the performance of PSD is lowest compared with ASDs. Furthermore, it was revealed that the drying rate of ASD0.06 is higher than that for PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 22% 10% and 8%, respectively. Results from the experimental reveal the ASDs performance are higher than that of PSD. Moreover, it was found that the drying rate of ASD0.06 is higher than that for PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 22% 10% and 8%, respectively. Whereas, specific energy consumption of ASD0.06 is lower than that PSD, ASD0.03 and ASD0.09 by 26%, 11% and 9%, respectively. Finally, it was also found that solar dryer efficiency of PSD, ASD0.03, ASD0.06 and ASD0.09 are 11.68%, 13.34%, 14.89% and 13.73%, respectively.

查看原文本刊更多论文

被动式和主动式太阳能干燥器性能比较研究

测试太阳能干燥机的性能。过去，为了研究太阳能干燥机的效率。建立了一个带有一个干燥室的干燥器，并通过改变条件进行测试。在每次实验中，太阳辐照度值都不同，这会导致实验结果不准确。因此，在本研究中，根据同一时期要研究的实验条件的数量设计了多个干燥箱。以减少造成实验结果差异的因素。该太阳能干燥器由 4 个干燥室组成，并测试了被动式太阳能干燥器（PSD）和主动式太阳能干燥器（ASD）的性能。主动式太阳能干燥器的空气流量分别为 0.03 立方米/秒（ASD0.03）、0.06 立方米/秒（ASD0.06）和 0.09 立方米/秒（ASD0.09）。猪肉被选为测试材料，初始含水量为干基的 265%。干燥速率、太阳能干燥机效率和比能量消耗是评价太阳能干燥机性能的标准。实验结果表明，与 ASD 相比，PSD 的性能最低。此外，ASD0.06 的干燥速率比 PSD、ASD0.03 和 ASD0.09 分别高出 22% 10% 和 8% 。实验结果表明 ASD 的性能高于 PSD。此外，还发现 ASD0.06 的干燥速率比 PSD、ASD0.03 和 ASD0.09 分别高出 22% 10% 和 8%。而 ASD0.06 的具体能耗分别比 PSD、ASD0.03 和 ASD0.09 低 26%、11% 和 9%。最后还发现，PSD、ASD0.03、ASD0.06 和 ASD0.09 的太阳能干燥机效率分别为 11.68%、13.34%、14.89% 和 13.73%。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Key Engineering Materials

自引率

0.00%

发文量