DRYING TECHNOLOGY Vol. 22, No. 5, pp.

917932, 2004

Energy Aspects in Drying#,y

T. Kudra*
CANMET Energy Technology CentreVarennes, Varennes, PQ, Canada

ABSTRACT
The energy performance of a dryer and a drying process is characterized by various indices such as volumetric evaporation rate, steam consumption, unit heat consumption and energy (thermal) efficiency. Of all indices, energy efficiency is the most frequently quoted, in technical specifications. A thorough analysis of available information, including the Handbook of Industrial Drying, points to the inconsistency of terminology, definition and data interpretation. Thus, reported data on energy efficiency vary significantly and frequently contradict both drying theory and industrial practice. To establish a common platform to deal with energy issues, this article provides a concise overview of the most common definitions of energy efficiency,

# y

Keynote lecture at PRES03, Session PRS 12. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources, 2004. *Correspondence: Dr. T. Kudra, CANMET Energy Technology Centre Varennes, 1615 Lionel Boulet Blvd., Varennes, PQ, Canada J3X 1S6; Fax: (450) 652-5177; E-mail: tkudra@nrcan.gc.ca. 917

DOI: 10.1081/DRT-120038572 Published by Marcel Dekker, Inc.

0737-3937 (Print); 1532-2300 (Online) www.dekker.com

ORDER

REPRINTS

918 along with a critical review of the published data. A need for energy audit and benchmarking is pointed out. To eliminate shortcomings of the energy efficiency as a lumped parameter, and to allow analysis of energy consumption over time (batch drying) or distance (continuous drying), instantaneous and cumulative indices are proposed. Using these indices, the energy performance of selected dryers is examined, and possible modifications to dryer design and operating parameters are indicated in order to reduce the overall energy consumption. Key Words: Batch drying; Continuous drying; Efficiency; Fluid bed; Through-flow drying; Vibrated fluid bed.

Kudra

1. ENERGY CONSUMPTIONKEY FIGURES Industrial drying is a basic unit operation widely used in a variety of industries, including chemicals, foodstuffs, minerals, pulp and paper, wood, textiles, and many others. Because the latent heat of vaporization has to be supplied for moisture removal, thermal drying is probably the most energy intensive of the major industrial processes. When considering any energy figures, a distinction should be made between two types of energy use: primary and secondary. In Canada, the primary energy demand represents the total requirement for all uses of energy including energy used by the final consumer, intermediate uses of energy in transforming one energy form to another (e.g., coal to electricity), and energy used by suppliers in providing energy to the market (e.g., pipeline fuel). The secondary energy (or end-use energy) is the one used by final consumers for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural and transportation purposes, including hydrocarbons used for such nonenergy purposes as petrochemical feedstock.[1,2] The International Energy Agency accepts the respective terms, namely total primary energy supply (TPES) and total final consumption (TFC).[3] In 2002 (the latest available data), secondary energy use in Canada accounted for 70.3% of primary energy use, which translates into 65.6% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The industrial sector, being the largest energy user in Canada, consumed 39.2% (3069 PJ) of total secondary energy in year 2000. Considering subsectors in which drying constitutes essential part of the production chain, this industrial energy is consumed primarily in the P&P (30%), mining (15.5%), and chemicals (7.4%).[2] Between 1990 and 2000, increased industrial activity resulted in a 16.3% increase in energy use though it was somewhat mitigated by improvements in energy efficiency; without them, the increase in energy use would have been 25% higher.[3]

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

919

Depending on the industry and technology, drying can represent a significant fraction of the industrial energy use. For example, energy for drying consists up to 70% of the total energy in manufacturing most wood products, about 50% of finished textile fabrics, 27% of paper, and 33% of pulp production. Caution should be taken when analyzing potential energy savings based on purchased energy because a significant fraction of thermal energy in some industries comes from biofuel. For example, of 620 wood kilns in Quebec (Canada), 53% is heated by wood residues (bark, shavings, sawdust etc.), 29% is heated by natural gas, 7% by fuel oil, and the remaining uses electricity (dehumidification dryers).[4] Another example is the pulp and paper (P&P) industry, in which the portion of total energy supplied by biomass such as wood waste, sludge and pulping liquor, rose to 54.5% in year 1998.[5] Heat recovery option should also be considered to get a true picture of energy consumption because 65% of the energy used in thermo-mechanical pulping can be recovered as steam and used in the drying process thus reducing consumption of fossil fuels.[5] Energy conservation schemes are of interest nationwide. With respect to drying, the energy consumption is of interest to dryer manufacturers, as it is a key dryer index of market value. Definitely, low energy consumption is critical for dryer users who deal with commodity materials and inexpensive products as it affects running costs. But energy performance is also of interest to producers of high-value products though share of energy in overall costs of pharmaceuticals, enzymes, or specialty foods, for example, is relatively small. Legislation, such as a tax on energy use in industry introduced three years ago in United Kingdom (Climate Change Levy) is additional incentive for dryer users to reduce energy consumption, as 80% reduction in the levy is possible for efficient users.[6] At the national level, the energy issues are of prime interest because of market transformation initiatives to reduce energy consumption, lower GHG emissions, prioritize R&D, etc. It has long been recognized that the following factors contribute to changes in energy use:
. . . .

Structure: a shift toward less energy-intensive components of activity, Energy efficiency: the level of energy consumption of a product (or piece of equipment), Activity: changes in the level of activity in a sector, and Weather: fluctuations in environmental conditions.

Of these four factors, only energy efficiency can easily be affected to reduce overall energy consumption in a short-term horizon. Apparently,

ORDER

REPRINTS

920

Kudra

incremental improvement in energy efficiency in large-scale production (e.g., P&P in Canada that consumes about 30% of secondary energy) should result in the same energy savings in small-scale production but with large improvements in energy efficiency. Targeting most inefficient drying technologies and energy intensive industries as the best strategy towards energy conservation requires reliable data on energy efficiency and industrial energy use.

2. ENERGY EFFICIENCYA CRITICAL REVIEW As energy statistics provide in most cases the overall pattern of energy use by branches of industry, the most frequently quoted numbers on energy consumption for drying are the ones cited in Handbook of Industrial Drying.[7] These, however, are extracted from the relatively old sources, dated back to 1976 for USA,[8] 1978 for UK,[9] and years 1988 1989 for France.[10] Since then, not only has the sector pattern of energy use for drying changed along with energy requirements for dryers, but so did the overall energy consumption. For example, the most recently published estimates for the United Kingdom[11] indicate that approximately 348.6 PJ is to be consumed in drying operations. This is equivalent to 17.7% of the countrys total industrial energy consumption as compared to 11.6% in the 1970s. Depending on the methodology applied, these figures can reach 379.5 PJ or 19.3% of total annual UK industrial energy consumed for drying.[11] With respect to a particular drying technology it appears that the best picture on energy consumption does exist for spray drying.[1215] Besides correct methodology, careful use of source data is crucial for credible information. For example, Table 7 in Chapter 40 of the aforementioned Handbook of Industrial Drying[7] provides weighted average energy requirements and drying efficiency for industrial solids dryers. Close examination of the original report indicates, however, that the weighted averages were obtained by using selective judgement based on conversations with dryer manufacturers[8]; most probably such judgement does not reflect the real energy consumption. Another questionable data in the source report is the range of drying efficiency because query No 16 in the survey presented to dryer manufacturers sounds: what are typical drying efficiencies for the various types of dryers you make? Obviously, such a general question will result in a dramatic spread of quoted numbers as drying efficiency depends not only on the material characteristics and process parameters but also on dryer configuration. Thus, energy performance of a simple rotary dryer, for

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

921

example, cannot be compared with a three-pass rotary dryer where some sort of heat recovery is exploited due to the dryer design. Another problem when reporting energy efficiency is inconsistency in terminology because energy performance of a dryer and a drying process can be characterized by various indices including volumetric evaporation rate, evaporative efficiency, surface heat losses, steam consumption, unit heat consumption, energy efficiency, thermal efficiency and others. Of all indices, the energy efficiency is most frequently quoted in technical specifications. It commonly relates the energy used for moisture evaporation at the solids feed temperature (Eev) to the total energy supplied to the dryer (Ein).[7]  Eev Ein 1

For low humidity and low temperature convective drying when the specific heat capacities are constant, the energy efficiency for an adiabatic process can be approximated by the ratio of the ambient temperature (T0), the inlet air temperature (T1), and the outlet air temperature (T2) t T1 T2 T1 T0 2

Frequently, energy efficiency given in terms of temperature (Eq. (2)) is called the thermal efficiency.[7] Both terms are interchangeable, if defined by Eqs. (1) and (2). To avoid misinterpretation, thermal performance should therefore be used instead of thermal efficiency to define specific energy consumption as the quantity of heat required to evaporate unit mass of water.[13] Another misleading term is drying efficiency, which is often used in place of energy/thermal efficiency though both definitions might not be the same. For example, in the source report,[8] drying efficiency is defined as the ratio of evaporation actually obtainable to that theoretically possible from that portion of energy supplied to the system which is available for evaporation whereas in the above discussed Table 7, this drying efficiency is referred to as thermal efficiency. Clearly, the values from Table 7 interpreted as thermal efficiency will be overestimated because at least heat losses reduce the energy available for evaporation. This difference may be significant as the mean ratio of heat losses-to-heat input was found equal to 0.306 for single-stage spray dryers, and 0.127 for multi-stage spray dryers.[14] Evident misuse of terminology occurs when energy required to evaporate a unit mass of water is defined as drying efficiency instead of widely accepted specific energy consumption.[16]

ORDER

REPRINTS

922

Kudra

From Eq. (2) it follows that t can range theoretically from 0 to 1, although the maximum efficiency is expected when the outlet gas temperature in convective drying is equal to the wet bulb temperature or the adiabatic saturation temperature. Therefore, the statement in[7] that the thermal efficiency tends to infinity when T1 approaches T0 is not correct because then T2 equals T1 and t 1. For this reason, Fig. 1 in Chapter 40[7] reproduced from the book by Danilov and Leontchik[17] in order to illustrate the variation of thermal efficiency with temperature and ambient conditions is not credible, and should be revised for new edition of Handbook of Industrial Drying. An examination of Eq. (2) shows that better energy efficiencies for simple convective drying with one pass of the drying medium over the material layer are attained by the use of high inlet temperatures and by arranging for outlet air conditions close to saturation. However, the saturation degree of outlet air is limited by thermodynamic equilibrium of the product in contact with exhaust air, and by the conditions for air condensation. The resistance of drying materials to thermal degradation (both temperature level and exposure time) primarily limits the maximum inlet air temperature. Masters[12] points out that in small spray dryers, increasing inlet air temperature will increase feed rate to a point where the drying chamber becomes overloaded with air-born particles for the given air flow rate causing heavy wall deposit to occur. Moreover, the inlet air temperature may reach a maximum from an economic/investment point of view, even for thermally stable materials. Besides inlet air temperature and exhaust air conditions, the energy/ thermal efficiency depends on other operating parameters (e.g., recycle ratio, air flow rate, feed temperature and its moisture content, evaporation rate) and dryer design (type, configuration, mode of heating, heat recovery, and the like). The effect of most of these factors is thoroughly analyzed in reference books and some key articles, or can be deduced from different energy performance measures such as energy savings, specific energy consumption, evaporative efficiency etc.[12,13,1820] Just to point out the usually neglected effect of the shape of a drying chamber it is worth to cite the conclusion by Kutsakova and coworkers[21] that the efficiency of conical dryers would be either equal to or greater than the efficiency of cylindrical dryers. Because energy consumption for drying depends on dryer design and numerous parameters, the widely accepted standards seem to be necessary to qualify dryers from the energy point of view. Such standards that exist for grain dryers and domestic clothes dryers can be given as examples.[2225]

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

923

Figure 1. Instantaneous and cumulative drying and energy indices for fluid bed drying of alumina (a) and corn (b).

ORDER

REPRINTS

924

Kudra

3. INSTANTANEOUS AND CUMULATIVE ENERGY AND DRYING INDICES The energy efficiency as defined by Eq. (1) can be derived from heat and mass balances around the dryer, or determined as a product of partial efficiencies, which reflect external and internal factors affecting the heat consumption in a dryer.[26] Thus, the energy efficiency is regarded as a lumped (cumulative) parameter, calculated from the initial-final or inletoutlet data. For batch drying, the energy efficiency is therefore given as an average value over a drying time. For continuous drying the energy efficiency is averaged over the range of moisture content, or the dryer length, height or volume, depending on dryer configuration. However, the energy efficiency of a particular drying process depends on the material moisture content at any instant because thermal energy is used not only for material heating and evaporation of free moisture but also for removal of bound moisture and eventually breaking the material-moisture bonds. This is also evident from Eq. (2), as at constant inlet conditions in batch drying of most materials, the outlet air temperature (T2) varies with drying time due to moisture evaporation and progressive increase of the material temperature. In some types of continuous dryers (e.g., conveyor dryers or vibrated fluid bed dryers), the temperature variation is so significant that hot air from the end-section of the dryer is frequently back-mixed to recycle energy and therefore improve the energy performance. In other types of continuous dryers, like rotary dryers or pneumatic dryers, this variation is concealed because exhaust air is, in fact, a mixture of fractional air streams. The energy efficiency as a lumped parameter is useful when comparing different dryers but has limited application when analyzing a drying process and dryer configuration in the design stage. Such analysis can be done when using a concept of an instantaneous energy efficiency defined as "E energy required for evaporation at time t input energy at time t 3

Integration of the instantaneous energy efficiency gives the cumulative energy efficiency over a given time interval, which is equivalent of the moisture content range Z 1 t E " "E t dt 4 t 0 If the outlet air temperature is constant, or the time interval is short and the moisture content variation is not significant, the cumulative

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

925

energy efficiency is identical with the one given by Eq. (2). Conversely, if the variation of the outlet air temperature with time or moisture content is known Eq. (2) can be used to calculate the instantaneous energy efficiency from temperature data. Furthermore, if values of Eev and Ein are taken for small time increment, the instantaneous energy efficiency, suitable for dryer performance analysis, can be determined from Eq. (1). The energy efficiency as defined by Eqs. (3) and (4) indicates only what fraction of the available energy was used for evaporation of free water. A better measure of the quality of a drying process (the drying Q-factor) appears to be drying efficiency, which accounts for heat wasted with exhaust air and therefore indicates to what extent the sensible heat of a drying agent was used for evaporation.[27] Hence, the respective instantaneous and cumulative drying efficiency can be given as "D and D " 1 t Z
0 t

energy required for evaporation at time t (input energy exhaust energy) at time t

"D t dt

From Eq. (5) it follows that the drying efficiency tends to 1.0 for adiabatic evaporation of free surface water if a preheating period is insignificant and the exhaust air is saturated at the wet bulb temperature. For real materials, the drying efficiency is lower because a fraction of the sensible heat (besides heat losses and material preheating) is used for heating of the wet material as its temperature changes in the course of drying, local superheating of the vapor, overheating of the already dried layers of the material otherwise necessary to maintain the required temperature gradient and thus sufficient heat transfer rates, etc. Figure 1 illustrates typical variation of instantaneous indices (open symbols) and cumulative ones (solid symbols) with moisture content for alumina and corn that represent the capillary-porous and capillaryporous-colloidal materials with negligible and significant internal mass transfer resistance, respectively. It is evident that both energy and drying efficiencies depend on the solid moisture content although their absolute values differ significantly. In case of corn drying, a distinct maximum for the instantaneous drying efficiency can be attributed to the drying process being controlled by internal moisture diffusion. In the initial drying period, a significant fraction of input energy is utilized for material heating. As drying proceeds, the sensible heat in a drying agent is used for

ORDER

REPRINTS

926

Kudra

evaporation of unbound water near the material surface. When this water is evaporated, the instantaneous drying efficiency falls rapidly because most of the heat is now utilized for overheating of the already dry surface layers and removal of the micro-capillary water (bound water moisture content for grains is about 22% wb whereas the hygroscopic moisture content is about 36.5% wb). The maximum of drying efficiency for alumina beads is relatively weak because drying takes place in a first drying period during which free water is evaporated. Only at the end of drying, when the residual water is removed from micro-capillaries, the instantaneous drying efficiency drops rapidly. The run of cumulative drying efficiency is similar to the instantaneous one. However, because the cumulative efficiency expresses the integral average value from the beginning of drying to a certain time, the maximum is not as pronounced, and it is shifted towards the lower moisture contents. Considering the sensitivity of instantaneous and cumulative indices to moisture content variation, it appears that the drying efficiency index is more suitable for energy performance analysis than the energy efficiency index, and the instantaneous indices are more useful than the cumulative ones. The following examples illustrate the application of instantaneous drying and energy indices for the performance analysis of batch and continuous dryer for which all data necessary for calculations were taken from source papers. To keep the analysis transparent to the reader, the coordinates used in the original literature data were kept the same.

4. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS Batch Through-flow Dryer Through drying of a paper sheet was chosen as an example for batch dryer analysis. In the original experiments, the sample of a paper sheet made from unbleached Kraft pulp of basis weight 95 g/m2 and initial moisture content 2 kg/kg dry basis was dried in a hot air stream at 40 C and 2% relative humidity, flowing perpendicularly with superficial through-flow velocity of 0.08 m/s.[28] Drying curves and outlet air parameters determined from original authors records are marked in Fig. 2 by dashed lines. Solid line represents instantaneous energy and drying efficiencies calculated according to Eqs. (3) and (5). As can be seen from the graph, the instantaneous drying efficiency increases strongly in the initial drying period, reaching maximum close to 0.6. In this drying period, the outlet air temperature quickly drops as the

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

927

Figure 2.

Performance characteristics of a through-flow dryer.

material temperature rises to the wet bulb temperature. During the constant drying rate period, both drying and energy efficiencies stabilize around their maximum values because at constant operating parameters the drying rate is limited by external moisture diffusion. In this period, almost all sensible heat in the drying air is utilized for moisture evaporation. As the second drying period starts, the drying and energy efficiencies fall rapidly because most of the sensible heat is now utilized for overheating of the material and removal of water from microcapillaries. It should be noted that the drying and energy efficiencies averaged over an entire drying period equal 0.75 and 0.4, respectively. These values are much lower than might be expected from the respective curves in Fig. 2, but they result from the significant contribution of the very low efficiency in the falling drying rate period to the cumulative efficiency. Because in this period of drying the internal moisture transfer controls moisture removal, higher drying and energy efficiencies can be achieved by reducing the mass flow rate of the drying agent and increasing its temperature.

Continuous Cross-flow Dryer The original drying experiments were carried out in a pilot-scale horizontal vibro-fluidized bed dryer with a 2.1 0.2 m supporting grid through which hot air was forced perpendicularly to the drying material being transported along the grid due to adequate gas flow and dryer vibration. Details of a dryer design and experimental procedure are given in the article by Nilsson and Wimmerstedt.[29] For our calculations,

ORDER

REPRINTS

928

Kudra

Figure 3.

Performance characteristics of a vibrated fluid bed dryer.

the moisture content and air temperature were extracted from the authors original data and all characteristic parameters were compiled in Fig. 3. It can be seen that both instantaneous drying and energy efficiencies attain maximum values near the dryer inlet, which results from high drying rates due to evaporation of surface moisture. In this part of a dryer, the outlet air is completely saturated, which practically limits the drying rate. Further along the dryer, the energy and drying efficiencies diminish dramatically as drying proceeds in the falling rate period. Although the temperature of outlet air rises moderately along the dryer, the relative humidity falls sharply because of the reduced evaporation rate. At the dryer outlet, where the material is practically dry, the air temperature starts to increase and the relative humidity drops down to 5%. Considering the pattern of energy and drying efficiency in the dryer, one can conclude that better drying indices can be achieved by reducing the air flow rate at the dryer end. In practice, starting from 0.5 m from the dryer inlet, the internal mass transfer controls the drying rate, so reducing gas velocity may lower the energy consumption without significantly decreasing the drying rate. Because at the dryer inlet the outlet air is completely saturated, higher air flow rates are recommended to supply additional heat for water evaporation, and to increase the driving force for the mass transfer. The higher inlet air temperature in this part of the dryer should also be considered. In conclusion, the improved performance of this particular dryer both from drying rate and energy consumption points of view can be achieved by varying air flow rate and air temperature along the dryer length. This can be done by dividing the gas plenum into separate compartments to be fed with

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

929

individual air streams. Temperatures and superficial air velocities of each air stream can be set upon maximizing instantaneous drying efficiency throughout the dryer. Another example of performance analysis for a rotary dryer can be found elsewhere.[27] Recently, the instantaneous drying and energy indices have been applied to analyze the energy consumption in industrial band dryer for granular artificial rubber having initial moisture content of 0.2 kg/kg. It was found that sectioning of the dryer and mixing of the drying material between sections to level the moisture content distribution increases both drying and energy efficiencies. Moreover, by reducing the inlet air temperature from 100 C to 90 C in the third section, and to 70 C in the fourth section the energy performance can be improved by 12.5% and 37.5%, respectively.[30] The concept of instantaneous and cumulative indices can be extended to other measures of energy performance if these are time/moisture content related.

NOMENCLATURE E t T uD V X "D "E "D "E  t wb Energy (J) Time (s) Temperature (K ( C)) Drying rate (kg/m2s) Volumetric flow rate (m3/h) Material moisture content (db.) (kg/kg) Instantaneous drying efficiency () Instantaneous energy efficiency () Cumulative drying efficiency () Cumulative energy efficiency () Energy efficiency () Thermal efficiency () Relative gas humidity (%) Wet basis

Subscripts ev in 1 Evaporation Input Inlet

ORDER

REPRINTS

930

Kudra

2 0

Outlet Ambient

REFERENCES 1. National Energy Board. Canadian Energy Supply and Demand 1990 2010; (ISBN 0-662-18956-6), 1991; 472. 2. Improving Energy Performance in Canada, Report to Parliament under the Energy Efficiency Act. Natural Resources Canada. (ISBN 0-662-33548-1), 2003, 80. 3. International Energy Agency. Key World Energy Statistics; 2001; 73. 4. Amazouz, M.; Fortin, Y.; Savard, M. Progress-IB. Program for Reduction of Drying Energy ConsumptionWood Industry. Nov. 2003, 40 (in French). 5. Canadian Industry Program for Energy Conservation, 1998/1999 Annual Report, Office of Energy Efficiency, National Resources Canada, 1999, 86. 6. Baker, C.G.J. Energy efficient design and operation of dryers: the role of practice, theory and legislation. In PRES03, Hamilton, ON: Canada, Oct., 2629; 2003. 7. Mujumdar, A.S., Ed. Chapter 40. Handbook of Industrial Drying, 2nd Ed.; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: NY, 1995. 8. Richardson, A.S.; Jensen, W.P. Survey of industrial dryers for solids. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. July 1976, 57. 9. Baker, C.G.J.; Reay, D. Energy usage for drying in selected O.K. industrial sectors. In Proc. 3rd Int. Drying Symposium, 1982, Vol. 1, 201209. 10. Larreture, A.; Laniau, M. The state of drying in French industry. Drying Technology 1991, 9 (1), 263275 (based on Etude de loperation de sechage dans lindustrie. Report AFME, Feb 1989, 150.). 11. Gilmour, J.E.; Oliver, T.N.; Jay, S. Energy use for Drying Process: the Potential Benefits of Airless Drying, Drying98Proc. 11th Int. Drying Symposium, 1998, Vol. A, 573580. 12. Masters, K. Spray Drying in Practice; SprayDryConsult Int. ApS, 2002; 464. 13. Baker, C.G.J.; McKenzie, K.A. Energy Consumption of Industrial Spray Dryers, Drying2002Proc. 13th International Drying Symposium, Beijing, 2002; Vol. 1, 645652.

ORDER

REPRINTS

Energy Aspects in Drying

931

14. Baker, C.G.J. Energy Efficient Design and Operation of Dryers: The Roles of Practice, Theory and Legislation, PRES03, Hamilton, CanadaOct. 2629, 2003. 15. Spray dryer energy consumption. Energy Consumption Guide 79; Energy Efficiency Best Practice Programme (EEBBP) 2003. (www.energy-efficiency.gov.uk). 16. Yongsawatdigul, J.; Gunasekaran, S. Microwave-vacuum drying of cranberries: part I. Energy use and efficiency. J. Food Processing and Preservation 1996, 20, 121143. 17. Danilov, O.L.; Leontchik, B.I. Energy Economics in Thermal Drying; Energoatomizdat: Moscow, 1986 (in Russian). 18. Ashworth, J.C. Energy performance of drying and application of heat recovery devices. In The Scientific Approach to Solids Drying Problems; Ashworth, J.C., Ed.; Drying Research Ltd.: England, 1982. 19. Keey, R.B. Drying of Loose and Particulate Materials; Hemisphere Publishing Corporation: NY, 1992; 504. 20. Cook, E.M.; DuMont, H.D. Process Drying Practice; McGraw Hill, Inc.: NY, 1991; 256. 21. Kutsakova, V.K.; Romankov, P.G.; Rashkovskaya, N.B. Some kinetic relationships of the drying process in fluidized and spouted beds. J. Applied Chemistry of the USSR 1964, 37 (10), 21982202. 22. Agricultural Grain DryersDetermination of Drying Performance; ISO 11520-2:2001 (E). 23. Performance evaluation procedure for household tumble clothes dryers. AHAM HLD-1; Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers: Chicago, IL, USA. 24. Test method for measuring energy consumption and drum volume of electrically heated household tumble-type clothes dryers. 25. A National Standard of Canada. CAN/CSA-C361-92, Domestic gas clothes dryers. A National Standard of Canada. CAN1-7.1M85. 26. Strawinski, A. Proposal for Determination of Thermal Efficiency Factor for a Dryer, In Proc. of the Third International Drying Symposium, Ashworth, J.C., Ed.; Birmingham, England, 1982; Vol. 1. 27. Kudra, T. Instantaneous dryer indices for energy performance analysis. Inzynieria Chemiczna i Procesowa. 1998, 19 (1), 163172. 28. Polat, O.; Douglas, W.J.M.; Crotogino, R.H. Experimental study of through drying of paper. In Drying87; Mujumdar, A.S., Ed.; Hemisphere Publishing Company: Washington, 1987.

ORDER

REPRINTS

932

Kudra

29. Nilsson, L.; Wimmerstedt, R. Drying in longitudinal-flow vibrating fluid beds-pilot plant experiments and model simulations. Drying Technology 1987, 5 (3), 337361. 30. Menshutina, N.V.; Kudra, T.; Voynovskiy, A.A.; Goncharova, S.V. Drying process selection for minimal energy consumption. ACHEMA 2003, Germany.

Copyright of Drying Technology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.