Air impingement and intermittent drying: Application to apple and to mango
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An original drying process combining air impingement and intermittent drying was studied on apple slices and mango cubes. The influence of four operating parameters (air velocity, drying/tempering periods, upper height, and air temperature) on the drying time and on the drying rate was evaluated. Continuous and intermittent drying were compared. The intermittency α = 1/7 (τ on = 10 seconds and τ off = 60 seconds) gave the best results. A time savings of 54% for apple and 67% for mango was reached. In continuous drying, a time savings of 4620 seconds was observed by increasing the air velocity from 6 to 40 m s −1 for apple. Air temperatures of 328 K for apple and of 328 K or 338 K for mango were determined as optimum to prevent case‐hardening. Experimental results were fitted with the analytical solution of Fick's second law and the modified Page equation (average values R 2 = 0.985 and 0.961, for apple and mango, respectively). For both products, the apparent moisture diffusivity D app , the drying constant k, the drying coefficient n, and the activation energy E a , were identified. Activation energies calculated from the analytical solution were 30.3 and 36.8 kJ mol −1 and were 25.4 and 30.0 kJ mol −1 using the modified Page equation for apple and mango, respectively. Mango has an increased temperature sensitivity and thus will need less energy for drying than apple.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".