# Effect of Drying on Lettuce Leaves Using Indirect Solar Dryer Assisted with Photovoltaic Cells and Thermal Energy Storage

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

^{−1}, and process time ~10.0 h. Fifteen drying models were adjusted to the experimental data obtained; three models with maximum values of coefficient of determination (R

^{2})—Page, Midilli, and Kucuk, and Weibull Distribution, whose values of R

^{2}≥ 0.998, and other statistical parameters, χ

^{2}, SSE, and RMSE values closer to zero were chosen. The initial browning index BI = 120.5 ± 0.7 decreased compared to the dry sample BI = 78.99 ± 0.5, with chromatic coordinate degradations a* and b*; but not the luminosity L*; where ΔE = 8.26; whose meaning is that the dry sample is a “more opaque brownish color” due to the difference in the chroma ΔC = 6.65, and with a change from the yellow-green to yellow-red zone, and a difference in hue angle, Δh° = 14.27, between the fresh and the dried sample. D

_{eff}values for shredded lettuce leaves were 1.8 × 10

^{−9}m

^{2}s

^{−1}for values ≤ 52 °C.

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Materials and Methods

#### 2.1. Material

#### 2.2. Solar Drying Equipment

#### 2.3. Experimental Procedures

^{−1}; (d) inlet drying air temperature ≤ 60 °C; the drying process was conducted using the pilot solar dryer in the beginning summer in the southern hemisphere, December 2016–January 2017, with air temperatures in the environment between 17.0 and 23.0 °C over a one-day drying cycle, under relative humidity between 60.5 and 82.7%, with solar radiation changing between 8.25 and 8.74 kWh/m

^{2}in Antofagasta, Chile. In each of the drying chambers of the equipment, 350 to 440 g in weight of fresh shredded lettuce leaves were placed and uniformly distributed in the three trays at the beginning of the drying process, and the thickness of the thin layer was less than 10 mm. Every 20 min during the drying period, the weight of the three trays in each drying chamber was determined using a digital balance (0.05 g precision) (Radwag, WLC model 20/A2, Radom, Poland) coupled to them. The drying process was continued until the moisture content remained constant.

#### 2.4. Drying Curves

#### 2.5. Calculations for Determining the Drying Curves and Drying Rate

_{o}), both given in grams, which is known as moisture ratio ($\frac{M}{{M}_{o}}$) versus time. The moisture content (g water/g dry solids) was determined using the following equation:

_{o}: the initial weight of sample (g); W: amount of evaporated water (g); W

_{1}: the dry matter content of the sample (g). The moisture ratio (MR) was simplified to ($\frac{M}{{M}_{o}}$), being M

_{o}initial moisture content in the initial time = 0 in place of $\frac{\left(M-{M}_{e}\right)}{\left({M}_{o}-{M}_{e}\right)}$, for mathematical modeling of the solar drying curves due to the continuous fluctuation of the relative humidity of the drying air during the solar drying process [21].

#### 2.6. Modeling of Drying Curves

#### 2.7. Color Analysis

#### 2.8. Calculation of Effective Moisture Diffusivity

_{eff}is the effective diffusivity (m

^{2}·s

^{−1}), L is the half-thickness of the lettuce leaves (L = 0.00075 m), and n is a positive integer, also called the Fourier’s series number. Simplified by taking the first term of the series solution:

_{eff}value was calculated from Equation (11) as follows Equation (12):

#### 2.9. Statistical Analysis

^{2}, SSE, RMSE and, χ

^{2}, were used to determine the goodness of fit of the drying curves of the fifteen models studied. The determination coefficient (R

^{2}) was the primary criterion for selecting the most suitable equation to describe the drying curves of shredded lettuce leaves in the solar dryer [40]. In addition, other statistical parameters were used to compare the goodness of fit of the drying models with the experimental data, these being the standard error of estimated (SEE), which provides information on the long-term performance of the correlations by allowing a comparison of the actual deviation between predicted and measured values term by term; the root mean square error (RMSE) which provides information on the short term performance and, reduced the Chi-square (χ

^{2}) is the mean square of the deviations between the experimental and predicted moisture levels. The closest values to 1.0 for R

^{2}and those closest to zero for SSE, RMSE, and χ

^{2}are commonly regarded as the optimal criterion to evaluate the goodness of fit of the models used [28,41,42]. The Equations (13)–(16) for these statistical parameters are:

_{exp,i}stands for the experimental moisture ratio found in any measurement; MR

_{pre,i}predicted moisture ratio for this measurement; N, the total number of observations; n, number of constants [40,42].

^{2}≥ 0.998; χ

^{2}≤ 0.00025, SSE ≤ 0.00020, and RSME ≤ 0.0140.

## 3. Results and Discussion

#### 3.1. Drying Characteristics

#### 3.1.1. Drying Curve

#### 3.1.2. Drying Rate Curve

_{o}) of 17.16 g water/g dry solid, until reaching a moisture value of 16.45 g water/g dry solid at 60 min into the process where it arrives at an average drying rate of 0.0467 g water/g dry solid * min. At this stage, the air temperature reached mean values of 35.2 and 32.2 °C, chamber 1 and 2, respectively (Figure 2). From there the period of constant drying rate began to reach 280 min, remaining practically constant with average values of 0.0486 g water/g dry solid * min, and a mean value at the end of this stage for moisture content of 6.06 g water/g dry solid; this point in the curve is called critical moisture (M

_{crít.}), this trajectory passed during 220 min; that is, 3 h and 40 min. It is at this point that the falling rate period begins, and the drying rate will progressively fall until equilibrium, reaching average values of 0.00012 g water/g dry solid * min and a final moisture, called equilibrium moisture (M

_{eq}), with average values of 0.11 g water/g dry solid (Figure 3).

#### 3.2. Modeling of Drying Curves Statistical Parameters

^{2}, SSE, RMSE and R

^{2}, which were used to determine the goodness of fit of the drying curves of the fifteen models studied [40,42]. The criteria used for selecting the best fitting model was based primarily on the coefficient of determination (R

^{2}) with values closer to 1.0, and values closer to zero for χ

^{2}, SSE, and RMSE. Thus, the best fit model, according to the thermal history displayed in the process drying curve for the group of the three models derived from Newton’s law of cooling, Newton, Page, and Modified Page, was the Page model with values to R

^{2}, χ

^{2}, SSE, and RMSE of 0.9989, 1.49 × 10

^{−4}, 1.40 × 10

^{−4}, and 0.01182, respectively. The values of the kinetic constant (k), and the empirical parameter (n) were: 1.53 × 10

^{−5}min

^{−1}, and 1.98128, respectively. Amongst the tested models for the group of the nine models derived from Fick’s second law of diffusion, Henderson and Pabis, Modified Henderson and Pabis, Logarithm, Approach of diffusion, Midilli and Kucuk, Two-Term, Two-Term Exponential, Aghbashlo, and Verma models, the one with the best fit was that Midilli and Kucuk model with values to R

^{2}, χ2, SSE, and RMSE of 0.9988, 1.70 × 10

^{−4}, 1.48 × 10

^{−4}, and 0.01217, respectively; with empirical constants a, b, and n of, 1.00374, −1.92 × 10

^{−5}, 1.91162 and the kinetic constant (k) of 2.22 × 10

^{−5}min

^{−1}, respectively.

^{2}, χ

^{2}, SSE, and RMSE of 0.9985, 2.15 × 10

^{−4}, 1.87 × 10

^{−4}, and 0.01368, respectively; being the empirical constants a, b, and n of 1.01587, 0.00075, 1.88817 and the kinetic constant (k) of 2.60 × 10

^{−5}min

^{−1}, respectively (Table 2).

#### 3.3. Model Validation

^{1.98128})

^{1.91162}) + (−0.0000192 t)

^{1.88817})

#### 3.4. Chromatic Coordinates

#### 3.5. Effective Moisture Diffusivity (D_{eff})

_{eff}values of shredded lettuce leaves obtained from Equation (15) is shown in Figure 7 in which the ln (MR) is related to the drying time in order to obtain the slope K and from there perform the D

_{eff}determination.

_{eff}value for shredded lettuce leaves of 1.8 × 10

^{−9}m

^{2}·s

^{−1}was reached for temperature values ≤ 52 °C. D

_{eff}values for lettuce leaves has not been found in the literature, but the following values have been reported for other vegetable leaves in thin-layer drying for vegetable waste (as a mixture of lettuce and cauliflower leaves) from the wholesale market for a temperature range of 50–150 °C, D

_{eff}values varied from 6.03 × 10

^{−9}to 3.15 × 10

^{−8}m

^{2}s

^{−1}[19], demonstrating that D

_{eff}values are higher with increasing temperature. In the present solar dryer indirect, although the shredded lettuce leaves were subjected to a constant airspeed (1 m·s

^{−1}), its temperature throughout the drying process was rising, starting at 25 °C until reaching a maximum of 51.7 and ending at 41 °C, so that the value of the D

_{eff}is the result of a mean value obtained by fitting the function shown in Figure 7 to a straight line.

_{eff}values correspond to similar values obtained for other green leaves vegetables, herbs, and aromatic plants, for example, the thin-layer drying behavior of mint leaves for a temperature range of 35–60 °C, the D

_{eff}varied from 3.07 × 10

^{−9}to 1.94 × 10

^{−8}m

^{2}s

^{−1}and increased with the air temperature [54,55]. In another study on the thin layer drying of mint leaves [55,56], D

_{eff}values between 1.23 × 10

^{−10}and 2.66 × 10

^{−10}m

^{2}s

^{−1}were reported for a temperature range of 45 to 65 °C. Doymaz et al. [56,57] determined that the D

_{eff}values for 50, 60 and 70 °C were 6.69 × 10

^{−10}; 9.205 × 10

^{−10}, 1.434 × 10

^{−9}m

^{2}s

^{−1}for dill leaves, and 9.0 × 10

^{−10}, 1.36 × 10

^{−9}, 2.35 × 10

^{−9}m

^{2}s

^{−1}for parsley leaves, respectively.

## 4. Conclusions

## Supplementary Materials

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Karim, M.A.; Hawlader, M.N.A. Mathematical modelling and experimental investigation of tropical fruits drying. Int. J. Heat Mass Tran.
**2005**, 48, 4914–4925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Perumal, R. Comparative Performance of Solar Cabinet, Vacuum Assisted Solar and Open Sun Drying Methods. Master’s Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 2007; p. 100. Available online: http://digitool.Library.McGill.CA:80/R/-?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=18283&silo_library=GEN01 (accessed on 10 October 2020).
- Douglas, R.B.; Román, J.C.; Pantaleón, D.; Moreno-Álvarez, M.; Medina, C.; Ojeda, C. Efecto del secado solar en los contenidos de humedad, carbohidratos, carotenoides totales e índice de peróxidos del mesocarpio de la palma coroba (Attalea spp.). Interciencia
**2007**, 32, 257–261, ISSN 0378-184. [Google Scholar] - Jairaj, K.S.; Singh, S.P.; Srikant, K. A review of solar dryers developed for grape drying. Sol. Energy
**2009**, 83, 1698–1712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kadam, D.M.; Samuel, D.V.K. Convective Flat-plate Solar Heat Collector for Cauliflower Drying. Biosyst. Eng.
**2006**, 93, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Banout, J.; Ehl, P.; Havlik, J.; Lojka, B.; Polesny, Z.; Verner, V. Design and performance evaluation of a Double-pass solar drier for drying of red chilli (Capsicum annum L.). Sol. Energy
**2011**, 85, 506–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Chen, X.Y. Moisture Diffusivity in Food and Biological Materials’. Dry. Technol.
**2007**, 25, 1203–1213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Özbek, B.; Dadali, G. Thin-layer drying characteristics and modelling of mint leaves undergoing microwave treatment. J. Food Eng.
**2007**, 83, 541–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mou, B. Nutrient Content of Lettuce and its Improvement. Curr. Nutr. Food Sci.
**2009**, 5, 242–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gebhardt, S.E.; Thomas, R.G. Nutritive Values of Foods; Home Garden Bulletin; US Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; p. 90. Available online: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/HG72/hg72_2002 (accessed on 10 October 2020).
- Sánchez-Mongue, E. Flora Agrícola. Taxonomia de las Magnoliofitas (Angiospermas) de Interes Agricola, con Excepcion de las de Aprovechamiento Exclusivamente Ornamental o Forestal, I/II ed.; Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación: Madrid, Spain, 1991; ISBN 84-7479-901-5. [Google Scholar]
- Kirschmann, J.D.; Dunne, L.J.; Inc. Nutrition Search. Nutrition Almanac, 6th ed.; McGraw Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2007; p. 371. ISBN 13-978-0071436588. [Google Scholar]
- Walker, N.W. Fresh Vegetable and Fruit Juices: What’s Missing in Your Body? Book Publishing Co.: Summertown, TN, USA, 1978; p. 118. ISBN 0-89019-06704. [Google Scholar]
- Davidson, A. The Oxford Companion to Food; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1999; ISBN 0-19-211579-0. [Google Scholar]
- Saltveit, M.E. Physical and physiological changes in minimally processed fruits and vegetables. In Phytochemistry of Fruits and Vegetables; Tomás-Barberán, F.A., Robin, R.D., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1997; pp. 205–220. ISBN 0198577907. [Google Scholar]
- Loiza-Velarde, J.; Tomás-Barberán, F.A.; Saltveit, M.E. Effect of intensity and duration of heat-shock treatments on wound induced phenolic metabolism in iceberg lettuce. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci.
**1997**, 122, 873–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Degl’innocenti, E.; Guidi, L.; Pardossi, A.; Tognoni, F. Biochemical Study of Leaf Browning in Minimally Processed Leaves of Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. Var. Acephala). J. Agric. Food Chem.
**2005**, 53, 9980–9984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cantos, E.; Espin, J.C.; Tomás-Barberán, F. Effect of wounding on phenolic enzymes in six minimally processed lettuce cultivars upon storage. J. Agric. Food Chem.
**2001**, 49, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lopez, A.; Iguaz, A.; Esnoz, A.; Virseda, P. Thin-layer Drying behaviour of vegetable wastes from wholesale market. Dry. Technol.
**2000**, 18, 995–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Rojano-Aguilar, A.; Santos, A.; Flores, J.; Salazar-Moreno, R.; Ruiz-García, A. Solar drying device tested with lettuce leaves. Acta Hortic.
**2017**, 1182, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mahapatra, A.; Tripathy, P.P. Modeling and simulation of moisture transfer during solar drying of carrot slices. J. Food Process Eng.
**2018**, 41, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Erbay, Z.; Icier, F.A. Review of thin layer drying of foods: Theory, modeling, and experimental results, critical reviews. Food Sci. Nutr.
**2009**, 50, 441–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ayensu, A. Dehydration of food crops using a solar dryer with convective heat flow. Sol. Energy
**1997**, 59, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Page, G.E. Factors Influencing the Maximum Rates of Air Drying Shelled Corn in Thin Layers. Master’s Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Prude University, Prude, West Lafayette, IN, USA, January 1949. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Mahasneh, M.A.; Rababah, T.M.; Al-Shbool, M.A. Thin-layer drying kinetics of sesame hulls under forced convection and open sun drying. J. Food Process Eng.
**2007**, 30, 324–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Henderson, S.M.; Pabis, S. Grain drying theory I: Temperature effect on drying coefficient. J. Agric. Res. Eng.
**1961**, 6, 169–174. [Google Scholar] - Karathanos, V.T. Determination of water content of dried fruits by drying kinetics. J. Food Eng.
**1999**, 39, 337–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Toğrul, T.; Pehlivan, D. Modelling of drying kinetics of single apricot. J. Food Eng.
**2003**, 58, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Midilli, A.; Kucuk, H.; Yapar, Z. A new model for single layer drying. Dry. Technol.
**2002**, 20, 1503–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Henderson, S.M. Progress in developing the thin layer drying equation. Trans. ASAE
**1974**, 17, 1167–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sharaf-Elden, Y.I.; Blaisdell, J.L.; Hamdy, M.Y. A model for ear corn drying. Trans. ASAE
**1980**, 5, 1261–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Aghbashlo, M.; Kianmehr, M.H.; Arabhosseini, A.; Nazghelichi, T. Modelling the carrot thin layer drying in a semi-industrial continuous band dryer. Czech. J. Food Sci.
**2009**, 29, 528–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Verma, L.R.; Bucklin, R.A.; Endan, J.B.; Wratten, F.T. Effects of drying air parameters on rice drying models. Trans. ASAE
**1985**, 28, 296–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wang, C.Y.; Singh, R.P. A Single Layer Drying Equation for Rough Rice; Paper No. 78–3001; ASAE: St. Joseph, MI, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Kucuk, H.; Midilli, A.; Kilic, A.; Dincer, I. A Review on Thin-Layer Drying-Curve Equations. Dry. Technol.
**2014**, 32, 757–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Babalis, S.T.; Papanicolaou, E.; Kyriakis, N.; Belessiotis, V.G. Evaluation of thin-layer drying models for describing drying kinetics of figs (Ficus carica). J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 75, 205–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Vega, A.; Lemus, R.; Tello, C.; Miranda, M.; Yagnam, F. Kinetic study of convective drying of blueberry variety O’Neil (Vaccinium corymbosum L.). Chil. J. Agric. Res.
**2009**, 69, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ergüneş, G.; Tarha, S. Color retention of red peppers by chemical pretreatments during greenhouse and open sun drying. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 76, 446–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Crank, J. The Mathematics of Diffusion, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press: Oxford, UK, 1975; ISBN 0 19 853344 6. [Google Scholar]
- Yaldiz, O.; Ertekin, C. Thin layer solar drying of some vegetables. Dry. Technol.
**2001**, 19, 583–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Akpinar, E.K. Determination of suitable thin layer drying curve model for some vegetables and fruits. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 73, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gunhan, T.; Demir, V.; Hancioglu, E.; Hepbasli, A. Mathematical modeling of drying of bay leaves. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2005**, 46, 1667–1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Gutiérrez, F.; De La Vara, R. Análisis y Diseño de Experimentos, 3rd ed.; Mc Graw Hill- Interamericana: Madrid, de España, 2012; ISBN 6071507251. [Google Scholar]
- Ali, M.A.; Yusof, Y.A.; Chin, N.L.; Ibrahim, M.N.; Basra, S.M.A. Drying kinetics and colour analysis of Moringa oleifera leaves. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia
**2014**, 2, 394–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Rosa, D.P.; Luna-Solano, G.; Polachini, T.C.; Telis-Romero, J. Mathematical modeling of orange seed drying kinetics. Ciênc. Agrotechol.
**2015**, 39, 291–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version] - Akpinar, E.K. Mathematical modelling of thin layer drying process under open sun of some aromatic plants. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 77, 864–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Alara, O.R.; Abdurahman, N.H.; Mudalip, S.K.A.; Olarere, O.A. Mathematical modeling of thin layer drying using open sun and shade of Vernonia amygdalina leaves. Agric. Nat. Resour.
**2018**, 52, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Akpinar, E.K.; Bicer, Y.; Cetinkaya, F. Modelling of thin layer drying of parsley leaves in a convective dryer and under open sun. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 75, 308–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sobukola, O.P.; Dairo, O.U.; Sanni, L.O.; Odunewu, A.V.; Fafiolu, B.O. Thin Layer Drying Process of Some Leafy Vegetables under Open Sun. Food Sci. Technol. Int.
**2007**, 13, 35–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - El-Sebaii, A.A.; Shalaby, S.M. Experimental investigation of an indirect-mode forced convection solar dryer for drying thymus and mint. Energy Convers. Manag.
**2013**, 74, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Obón, J.M.; Castellar, M.R.; Alacid, M.; Fernández-López, J.A. Production of a red–purple food colorant from Opuntia stricta fruits by spray drying and its application in food model systems. J. Food Eng.
**2009**, 90, 471–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hong, S.I.; Han, J.H.; Krochta, J.M. Optical and surface properties of whey protein isolate coatings on plastic films as influenced by substrate, protein concentration, and plasticizer type. J. Appl. Polym. Sci.
**2004**, 92, 335–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Batu, A. Determination of acceptable firmness and colour values of tomatoes. J. Food Eng.
**2004**, 61, 471–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ahmed, J.; Kaur, A.; Shivhare, U. Color degradation kinetics of spinach, mustard leaves, and mixed puree. J. Food Sci.
**2002**, 3, 1088–1091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Doymaz, I. Thin-layer drying behaviour of mint leaves. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 74, 370–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kadam, D.M.; Goyal, R.K.; Singh, K.K.; Gupta, M.K. Thin layer convective drying of mint leaves. J. Med. Plants Res.
**2011**, 5, 164–170, ISSN: 1996-0875. [Google Scholar] - Doymaz, I.; Tugrul, N.; Pala, M. Drying characteristics of dill and parsley leaves. J. Food Eng.
**2006**, 7, 559–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**Schematic representation of the indirect solar dryer assisted with photovoltaic cells and with the thermal energy storage unit. (1) Three photovoltaic cells, (2) voltage controller, (3) electrical switches board, (4) battery, (5) heat exchanger air-water, (6) digital balance, (7) drying chamber # 2, (8) window for entry and exit of air dryer, (9) drying chamber # 1; (10) digital balance, (11) (12) solar collectors for water (U-pipe), (13) hydro-pneumatic tank water with inner membrane for thermal energy storage (with external insulation), (14) water pump, (15) variable speed drive for airflow, (16) water pump, (17) variable speed fan.

**Figure 2.**Relationship between the moisture ratio and the drying time and the air temperature versus drying time for the two drying chambers and heat exchanger outlet (mean values of the three runs performed).

**Figure 5.**Validation of experimental and predicted moisture ratio values from the Midilli and Kucuk model.

**Figure 6.**Validation of experimental and predicted moisture ratio values from the Weibull Distribution model.

N° | Model Name | Model | References |
---|---|---|---|

Models derived from Newton’s law of cooling | |||

1 | Newton | MR = exp (−k t) | [23] |

2 | Page | MR = exp (−k t ^{n}) | [24] |

3 | Modified Page I | MR = exp (−k t)^{n} | [25] |

Models derived from Fick’s second law of diffusion | |||

4 | Henderson and Pabis | MR = a exp (−k t) | [26] |

5 | Modified Henderson and Pabis. | MR = a exp (−k t) + b exp (−g t) + c exp (−h t) | [27] |

6 | Logarithmic | MR = a exp (−k t) + c | [28] |

7 | Approximation of diffusion | MR = a exp (−k t) + (1−a) exp (−k b t) | [28] |

8 | Midilli and Kucuk | MR = a exp (–k t ^{n}) + b t | [29] |

9 | Two Term | MR = a exp (−k_{0} t)+ b exp (−k_{1} t) | [30] |

10 | Two Term exponential | MR = a exp (−k t) + (1−a) exp (−k a t) | [31] |

11 | Aghbashlo Model | MR = exp (−(k_{1} t)/(1 + k_{2} t)) | [32] |

12 | Verma Model | MR = a exp(−k t) + (1−a) exp(−g t) | [33] |

Empirical models | |||

13 | Wang and Sing | MR = 1 + a t + b t^{2} | [34] |

14 | Thompson | MR = exp ((−a −(a^{2} + 4 b t)^{0.5})/2b) | [35] |

15 | Weibull Distribution | MR = a − b exp (− k t ^{n}) | [36] |

^{−1}), n and a: empirical parameters (dimensionless); t: drying time (min); b, c, g, h, k

_{o}, k

_{1}, and k

_{2}: empirical constants in the drying models [37].

**Table 2.**Statistical results from modeling the moisture content and drying time for shredded lettuce leaves.

N° | Models | Coefficients | R^{2} | χ2 | SSE | RMSE | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

1 | Newton | k = 3.85 × 10^{−3} | 0.8995 | 1.32 × 10^{−2} | 1.28 × 10^{−2} | 0.11302 | |||||

2 | Page | k = 1.53 × 10^{−5} | n = 1.98128 | 0.9989 | 1.49 × 10^{−4} | 1.40 × 10^{−4} | 0.01182 | ||||

3 | Modified Page | k = 9.61 × 10^{−3} | n = 0.40023 | 0.8995 | 1.37 × 10^{−2} | 1.28 × 10^{−2} | 0.11203 | ||||

4 | Henderson and Pabis | a = 1.20453 | k = 4.58 × 10^{−3} | 0.9385 | 8.36 × 10^{−3} | 7.82 × 10^{−3} | 0.08842 | ||||

5 | Modified Henderson & Pabis | a = 0.26382 | b = 0.26382 | c = 0.67678 | k = 4.56 × 10^{−3} | g = 4.56 × 10^{−3} | h = 4.58 × 10^{−3} | 0.9385 | 9.70 × 10^{−3} | 7.82 × 10^{−3} | 0.08842 |

6 | Logarithm | a = 1.60883 | c = −0.48434 | k = 2.27 × 10^{−3} | 0.9781 | 3.08 × 10^{−3} | 2.79 × 10^{−3} | 0.05277 | |||

7 | Approach of diffusion | a = −119.017 | b = 0.98918 | k = 9.31 × 10^{−3} | 0.9908 | 1.29 × 10^{−3} | 1.17 × 10^{−3} | 0.03414 | |||

8 | Midilli and Kucuk | a = 1.00374 | b = −1.92 × 10^{−5} | n = 1.91162 | k = 2.22 × 10^{−5} | 0.9988 | 1.70 × 10^{−4} | 1.48 × 10^{−4} | 0.01217 | ||

9 | Two Term | a = 12.7062 | b = −11.7499 | k = 8.93 × 10^{−3} | k_{1} = 9.99 × 10^{−3} | 0.9915 | 1.24 × 10^{−3} | 1.08 × 10^{−3} | 0.03284 | ||

10 | Two Term Exponential | a = 2.23266 | k = 6.67 × 10^{−3} | 0.9868 | 1.85 × 10^{−3} | 1.67 × 10^{−3} | 0.04093 | ||||

11 | Aghbashlo | k_{1} = 1.85 × 10^{−3} | k_{2} = −1.66 × 10^{−3} | 0.9928 | 9.80 × 10^{−4} | 9.17 × 10^{−4} | 0.03028 | ||||

12 | Verma | a = 14.6651 | k = 8.05 × 10^{−4} | g = 6.71 × 10^{−4} | 0.9650 | 4.93 × 10^{−3} | 4.45 × 10^{−3} | 0.06671 | |||

13 | Wang and Sing | a = −2.64 × 10^{−3} | b = 1.42 × 10^{−6} | 0.9678 | 4.37 × 10^{−3} | 4.09 × 10^{−3} | 0.06396 | ||||

14 | Thompson | a = −180.062 | b = 0.41438 | 0.9378 | 2.76 × 10^{−2} | 2.58 × 10^{−2} | 0.16060 | ||||

15 | Weibull Distribution | a = 1.01587 | b = 0.00746 | k = 2.60 × 10^{−5} | n = 1.88817 | 0.9985 | 2.15 × 10^{−4} | 1.87 × 10^{−4} | 0.01368 |

**Table 3.**Chromatic Coordinates of Lettuce in Fresh (n = 10) and after Drying process (n = 20). Color Difference (ΔE), Ratio of redness over yellowness (R), and Browning Index (BI) (n = 3), fresh and after the drying process.

Chromatic Coordinates and Others Parameters | Samples | |
---|---|---|

Fresh | Dried | |

L* | 27.97 ± 0.05 ^{a} | 28.92 ± 0.71 ^{a} |

a* | −4.5 ± 0.07 ^{a} | 0.8 ± 0.13 ^{b} |

b* | 22.27 ± 0.10 ^{a} | 16.5 ± 0.32 ^{b} |

ΔE | - | 8.26 ± 0.18 |

R =$\frac{{\mathit{a}}^{\mathbf{*}}}{{\mathit{b}}^{\mathbf{*}}}$ | −0.20 ± 0.00 ^{a} | 0.05 ± 0.01 ^{b} |

h° | 101.43 ± 0.15 ^{a} | 87.16 ± 0.41 ^{b} |

C | 22.72 ± 0.11 ^{a} | 16.07 ± 0.32 ^{b} |

BI | 120.50 ± 0.70 ^{a} | 78.99 ± 0.50 ^{b} |

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Cerezal Mezquita, P.; Álvarez López, A.; Bugueño Muñoz, W.
Effect of Drying on Lettuce Leaves Using Indirect Solar Dryer Assisted with Photovoltaic Cells and Thermal Energy Storage. *Processes* **2020**, *8*, 168.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8020168

**AMA Style**

Cerezal Mezquita P, Álvarez López A, Bugueño Muñoz W.
Effect of Drying on Lettuce Leaves Using Indirect Solar Dryer Assisted with Photovoltaic Cells and Thermal Energy Storage. *Processes*. 2020; 8(2):168.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8020168

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Cerezal Mezquita, Pedro, Aldo Álvarez López, and Waldo Bugueño Muñoz.
2020. "Effect of Drying on Lettuce Leaves Using Indirect Solar Dryer Assisted with Photovoltaic Cells and Thermal Energy Storage" *Processes* 8, no. 2: 168.
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8020168