Performance of Various Design of Solar Air Heaters for Crop Drying Applications

Abstract

Different heat sources are employed for the drying of agricultural products. However, in many rural locations in most developing countries, supplies of non-renewable sources of energy are either unavailable, unreliable or, for many farmers, too expensive. In renewable energy sources, solar energy is the most appropriate for drying systems. This energy allows independent systems to be constructed and possesses a thermal conversion mode which necessitates a simple technology which is adapted to the rural regions for crop drying applications. These systems are all based on the air heating flat plate solar collectors. Therefore, six different types of natural circulation air heating solar collectors (Model-1: single plastic glazing, black painted hardboard absorber and front-pass; Model-2: single plastic glazing, black painted flat plate absorber and front-pass; Model-3: single plastic glazing, black painted zigzag plate absorber and front-pass; Model-4: single plastic glazing, black painted flate plate absorber and back-pass; Model-5: single plastic glazing, black painted zigzag plate absorber and back-pass; Model-6: double plastic glazing, black painted flat plate absorber and back-pass) were designed, constructed and analysed for their performance in this study. Each collector mainly consisted of a frame constructed from hardboard, vent holes, hardboard insulation, absorbing surface made of black coated aluminium sheet and clear plastic glazing. All solar air heaters were mounted on a stand facing south at an inclination angle, and they were tested simultaneously under the same environmental conditions. The experimental setup was instrumented for the measurement of solar radiation, temperature and relative humidity of the atmosphere air, outlet air temperature, surface temperature of the back and edge insulator and absorber plate, air speed and wind velocity. It is understood from the results of the investigation that the performances of Model-1, Model-2, Model-3, Model-4, Model-5 and Model-6 are 42.11, 45.88, 44.23, 39.76, 39.05 and 36.94% respectively, and the performance of the most efficient collector (Model-2) is aproximately 9% more than the least efficient one (Model-6). In addition, it is seen that unlike number of glazing sheet and air pass method, the effect of the shape of the absorbing surface on the performance is considerably less. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.