African Journal of
Agricultural Research

  • Abbreviation: Afr. J. Agric. Res.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1991-637X
  • DOI: 10.5897/AJAR
  • Start Year: 2006
  • Published Articles: 6860

Full Length Research Paper

Variation of static pressure in a crambe (Crambe abyssinica Hochst) grains column

Fernando João Bispo Brandão
  • Fernando João Bispo Brandão
  • Departament of Rural Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences (FCA), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Fazenda Experimental Lageado, CEP 18603970 - Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Magnun Antonio Penariol da Silva
  • Magnun Antonio Penariol da Silva
  • Departament of Rural Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences (FCA), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Fazenda Experimental Lageado, CEP 18603970 - Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Felipe Carlos Speneski Sperotto
  • Felipe Carlos Speneski Sperotto
  • Departament of Rural Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences (FCA), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Fazenda Experimental Lageado, CEP 18603970 - Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Samir Paulo Jasper
  • Samir Paulo Jasper
  • Sector of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Soil and Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Rua dos Funcionário 1540, Bairro Juventude, CEP 80035050, Curitiba-PR, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Pedro Henrique Silva Bezerra
  • Pedro Henrique Silva Bezerra
  • Departament of Rural Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences (FCA), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Fazenda Experimental Lageado, CEP 18603970 - Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Marco Antonio Martin Biaggioni
  • Marco Antonio Martin Biaggioni
  • Departament of Rural Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences (FCA), São Paulo State University (UNESP), Fazenda Experimental Lageado, CEP 18603970 - Botucatu, SP, Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 05 October 2015
  •  Accepted: 09 December 2015
  •  Published: 07 January 2016

 ABSTRACT

The crambe has emerged as an option for the production of biodiesel, constituting itself as an alternative for off-season grain in Brazil. To obtain the best performance in the post-harvest product processing, knowledge of physical characteristics of the grains to as well as of the design of machines and structure storage is necessary. After pre-cleaning, the crambe (Crambe abyssinica Hochst) with a water content of 8% (wb) was placed into a silo prototype, provided a fan and plenum, and subjected to five airflow densities that were pre-determined in a total of four repetitions for each tested airflow. The static pressure was measured through the column in five layers. The results show that there is a significant effect of air flow on the static air pressure in the crambe column, which increased linearly with depth. The experimental data fitted with good accuracy the models of Hunter and Shedd, thus enabling their use for the crambe column as well. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the variation of static pressure along a column of grains of crambe that were subjected to five airflow densities and check the fit of this variation following mathematical models suggested by Sheed and Hunter.

 

Key words: Crambe abyssinica, resistance to airflow, Sheed, Hunter.


 INTRODUCTION

The crambe is a species native from the Mediterranean region belonging to the Brassicaceae family, of annual cycle, with seeds presenting an oil content ranging from 28 to 60%. Thus, the crambe becomes a promising crop for biodiesel production (Carneiro et al., 2009; Silva et al., 2013, 2014).
 
In Brazil, the crambe have been noted as a great option for the intercrop, because it is a winter crop that is characterized by both frost tolerance and drought resistance (Oliva et al., 2012).
 
The introduction of crambe in the country is recent. The first experiments  indicated the year 1995 as the year tha
 
crambe was introduced. Therefore, there is a lack of information about the culture in Brazilian conditions, particularly technical issues related to post-harvest and for instance, their physical characteristics.
 
For the consolidation of crops in the country, the information about the drying and storage of the product becomes important, thus enabling post-harvesting structures to be built with technical parameters that are
suitable for the crambe (Biaggioni et al., 2005).
 
The knowledge of the resistance to airflow in the grain bed is essential to design grain-drying and ventilation systems (Chun et al., 2011). This knowledge is also vital to select a ventilator that adequately provides the airflow that can overcome the pressure gradient supplied by grain (Abou-el-Hana and Younis, 2008).
 
The distribution of airflow in the grain mass depends on several factors, including the method of filling the grain, porosity, depth of grain yield, grain morphology and con-figuration, the air velocity, and impurity (Khatchatourian et al., 2009).
 
One can make some inferences about the static pressure. The greater the thickness of the grain mass, the higher the static pressure will be. Small grains offer more static pressure than big grains; lower water content in grains can increase the pressure to the passage of air. Therefore, experiments with low water levels have a higher safety margin in the formulation of projects.
 
In a mass of grains or seeds, the decrease of static pressure exhibited when traversed by airflow can be estimated by empirical curves, in which the static pressure is related to the airflow (Biaggioni et al., 2005). A frequently used model is a graph in logarithmic scale proposed by Shedd (1953) with a ratio to 22 types of grains. Another model used is proposed by Hunter (1983), who studied the static pressure difference through a mass of grains representing the Ergun model (1952) by the following equation:
 
 

 

Where M and N represent the parameters of the fluid and the granular mass required for Ergun’s formulation (1952).

 

A large number of studies exist with regard to airflow resistance of cereals, oilseeds, and vegetables, but no information about the crambe that exhibits resistance to an airflow of 33 crops exists in the literature or is even compiled (ASAE, 2011).

 

This study aimed at evaluating the variation of the static pressure along a column of grains of crambe with 8% water content that was submitted to five airflow densities; it also aimed at checking the fit of this variation by following the mathematical models suggested by Sheed and Hunter.

 


 MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was  conducted at  the  Universidade  Estadual  Paulista (UNESP), Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Campus of Botucatu/São Paulo. Crambe grains with 8% water content after pre-cleaning were placed into a silo prototype characterized by a galvanized steel column (with five taken for measuring the static pressure), plenum, and fan (Figure 1).

 

Crambe grains were placed in free fall within the prototype, reaching a height of 1 m. The test consisted of static pressure measurements by using an inclined tube differential pressure gauge (18°), Dwyer brand; 0.5 mm precision of water column, at different depths, for each of the four repetitions, totaling twenty measures of depth in the column.

 

The densities of airflows used were as follows: 4.76, 6.41, 8.51, 9.90, and 10.47 m³min-1m-2. The experimental design was completely randomized, with five lots of crambe and four replications. After obtaining the results, the averages were submitted to an analysis of variance and means were compared by the “t” test (p ≤ 0.05).

 

For adjusting the equations proposed by Sheed (1953) and Hunter (1983), the parameters a and b were used in Equation 1 and M and N were used in Equation 2. These parameters emerge from the specific physiological characteristics of each type of grain, and it is necessary to obtain these parameters by using simple linear regression analysis.

 

In the determination of the best adjustment, the coefficient of determination (R2) and the average percentage deviation (P) were used.

where P is the average deviation in percentage,%; n is the amount of experimental data; Ap exp is the pressure gradient values obtained experimentally, Pa m-1; and Ap calc is the pressure gradient values predicted by the model, Pa m -1.


 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results show that there was a significant effect of all air flow densities, suggesting the influence of this variable in the resistance to airflow. The pressure drop is related to the increase in bulk density as well as reduction of the porosity of the mass of grains is promoted by raising the water content in the product (Amanlou and Zomorodian, 2011).
 
In the physical characterization of crambe, it was found out that the density of 347.36 kg m-3 corroborates with that of Silva et al. (2013) and Gonçalves et al. (2014). The porosity of crambe vary from 43 to 48% depending on the temperature and water content, corroborating the average for other grains, around 35 to 50% voids, this fact is due to the physical characteristics of the tegument crambe (Gonçalves et al., 2014).
 
The results of the variation of the static pressure gradient in function of air flux density are shown in Table 1. For the densities of airflow used (4.76 to 10.47 m³ min-1 m-2), the gradient of precision statics ranged from 165.0 to 427.5 m Pa-1. The values showed that there was a significant effect between all densities of the airflow, which suggests the influence of this variable in the resistance to airflow.
 
 
The increase of the pressure drop from rising air flow can be attributed to  the  increase of kinetic dissipation as
air speed increases (Agullo and Marenya, 2005).
 
However, the relationship between the air flow velocity and pressure gradient are different for each type of grain. This is due to factors such as, geometric shape of the grains, porosity, water content, compaction factor as others that provide differences in the roughness of the particle surface and thus alter the static pressure of the grains (Khatchatourian and Binello, 2008).
 
The variation in static pressure gradient measured in five layers and five airflow densities is as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2  establishes a dependency between the air flow velocity and static air pressure in the grain mass to varying depths of the storage layer. It is possible to look at a linear behavior of the static pressure curve with respect to depth from the crambe grain layer depicted. The increase in the static pressure of the gradient with the highest airflows is noted. These results corroborate those obtained in other experiments, such as quinoa (Gratão et al., 2013), peanut pods (Figueiredo et al., 2012), macadamia nut (Biaggioni et al., 2005), canola (Santos et al., 1999), white (Lukaszuk et al., 2008), grains, and cereals in general (ASAE, 2011).
 
According to Neethirajan et al. (2006) who have a seed compaction at the bottom of the silo. Possivelmete is one of the factors that causes signficant differences in static pressure drop at different depths, however, for Khatchatourian et al. (2009), simply increasing the depth of the grain mass can promote the increase of resistance to air flow, not necessarily being the increase in the degree of compaction in the deeper layers solely responsible for the increased resistance to air passage. The coefficients a and b, from Shedd model, and M and N, from Hunter model, are shown in Table 2. The coefficients of determination (R2), 98% (Shedd) and 99% (Hunter), near 1 indicate a good adjustment and suggest good applicability of the two models for crambe culture. For the Hunter model, it is proposed to insert the constant K in the following equation:
where K is a constant.
 
The model that has the best description of resistance to the air passage is one that has the highest coefficient of determination, and the lowest average percentage deviation (P) is recommended to be less than 5% (Kashaninejad and Tabil, 2009). The two settings used were below this recommendation in evaluating this parameter. The Shedd model was more suitable, because it presented a lower value than the Hunter model.
 
The results corroborate research with other agricultural products such as canola (Andrade et al., 2001), quinoa (Gratão et al., 2013), and chickpeas (Shahbazi, 2011).
In Figures 3 and 4, the experimental data are shown as comparing the static pressure drop of the crambe grains column by using the Shedd and Hunter model. The results corroborate research with other agricultural products such as quinoa (Gratão et al., 2013), chickpeas (Shahbazi, 2011), and pistachio (Kashaninejad and Tabil, 2009), which point to the Shedd model as being the most suitable for determining the static pressure due to the higher coefficient of determination (R2) compared with the Hunter model.
 
The Figure 5 shows the pressure loss in the function of air flux density with different grains in comparison to the crambe. It can be seen from Figure 5 that the static pressure exerted by crambe is greater than that of other grains like soy, corn, and coffee, and approximates to the resistance offered by small grains such as barley and oats; this fact is due to the size and shape of the crambe grains with characteristics that are very similar to these small grains (ASAE, 2011).


 CONCLUSIONS

The static pressure increased linearly with an increase in air density and flow with an increase in depth of the vertical column of crambe. The variation of the static pressure provided by crambe, approaches from oat and barley. The Shedd and Hunter models adjusted satisfactorily to the experimental data in the airflow range investigated for crambe.


 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The São Paulo State University, to CAPES and CNPq are thanked for their financial support. 


 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.



 REFERENCES

Abou-el-Hana NH, Younis MA (2008). Pressure drop through shelled corn as affected by airflow rates, moisture content and air temperature. Misr. J. Agric. Eng. 25(3):944-956.
 

Agullo JO, Marenya MO (2005). Airflow Resistance of Parchment Arabica Coffee. Biosyst. Eng. 91(2):149-156.
Crossref

  
 

Amanlou Y, Zomorodian A (2011). Evaluation of air flow resistance across a green fig bed for selecting an appropriate pressure drop prediction equation. Food Bioproducts Process. 89:157-162.
Crossref

  
 

Andrade ET, Couto SM, Queiroz DM (2001). Distribuição da pressão estática em uma coluna de canola: análise por elementos finitos. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 5(2):288-295.
Crossref

  
 

ASAE D272. (R2011). Resistance to airflow of grains, seeds, other agricultural products, and perforated metal sheets. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. pp. 1-7.

  
 

Biaggioni MAM, Piza PLBT, Ferreira WA (2005). Queda de pressão estática por meio de uma coluna de noz de macadâmia. Engenharia Agrícola 25:499-507.
Crossref

  
 

Carneiro SMTPG, Romano E, Marianowski T, Oliveira JP, Garbim THS, Araújo PM (2009). Ocorrência de Alternaria brassicicola em crambe (Crambe abyssinica) no estado do Paraná. Comunicações. Summa Phytopathol. 35(2):154.
Crossref

  
 

Chun DS, Maghirang RG, Kim YS, Kim MS (2011). Effects of moisture and fine material on static pressure drops in a bed of grain sorghum and rough rice. Food Process Eng. Institute Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 44(2):331-336.

  
 

Ergun S (1952). Fluid flow through packed columns. Chem. Eng. Progress 48:89-94.

  
 

Figueiredo NAF, Dantas BF, Silva JC, Olivier NC, Silva MF (2012). Resistência ao fluxo de ar das vagens de amendoim com diferentes percentuais de impurezas. Rev. Nucleus 9(1):85-91.
Crossref

  
 

Gratão PTS, Devilla IA, Servulo ACO, Jesus FF, Ferreira DA (2013). Perda de pressão estática em uma coluna de grãos de quinoa. Rev. Bras. Engenharia Agríc. Ambient. 17(8):848-854.

  
 

Gonçalves DN, Resende O, Costa LM, Prado MC (2014). Determination of physical properties of crambe fruits during drying. Engenharia Agrícola 34(5):972-979.
Crossref

  
 

Hunter AJ (1983). Pressure difference across an aerated seed bulk for some common duct and store crosssections. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 28(5):437-450.
Crossref

  
 

Kashaninejad M, Tabil LG (2009). Resistance of Bulk Pistachio Nuts (Ohadi Variety) to Airflow. J. Food Eng. (90):104-109.
Crossref

  
 

Khatchatourian OA, Binelo MO (2008). Simulation of three-dimensional airflow in grain storage bins. Biosyst. Eng. 101:225-238.
Crossref

  
 

Khatchatourian OA, Toniazzo NA, Gortyshov YF (2009). Simulation of airflow in grain bulks under anisotropic conditions. Biosyst. Eng. 104:205-215.
Crossref

  
 

Lukaszuk J, Molenda M, Horabik J, Szot B, Montross MD (2008). Airflow resistance of wheat bedding as influenced by the filling method. Res. Agric. Eng. 54:50-57.

  
 

Neethirajan S, Karunakaran C, Jayas DS, White NDG (2006). Xray computed tomography image analysis to explain the airflow resistance differences in grain bulks. Biosyst. Eng. 94(4):545-555.
Crossref

  
 

Oliva ACE, Biaggioni MAM, Cavariani C (2012). Efeito imediato do método de secagem na qualidade de sementes de crambe. Energia na Agricultura 27(3):16-30.
Crossref

  
 

Santos VP, Damasceno GS, Corrêa PC, Sinicio R(1999). Estudo da resistência ao fluxo de ar em uma camada de canola iciola-41 (Brassica napus L. var. oleifera). Engenharia Agrícola. 18(3):101-110.

  
 

Silva MAP, Biaggioni MAM, Sperotto FCS, Bezerra PHS, Brandão FJB (2013). Qualidade do óleo bruto de grãos de crambe (Crambe Abyssinica Hochst) sob diferentes métodos de secagem. Energia Agric. 28(3):193-198.

  
 

Silva MAP, Biaggioni MAM, Sperotto FCS, Puteri ACH, Saath R (2014). Influência do pericarpo no teste de condutividade elétrica em sementes de crambe (Crambe abyssinica Hochst) submetidas a métodos de secagem. Energia Agric. 29(4):301-305.

  
 

Shedd CK (1953). Resistance of grains and seeds to airflow. Agric. Eng. 34(9):616-619.

  
 

Shahbazi F (2011). Resistance of Bulk Chickpea Seeds to Airflow. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 13:665-676.

  

 




Copyright © 2024 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.

This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

Back to Vol. 11 No. 1
Back to articles
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
SUBMIT MANUSCRIPT
CONFERENCES
          */?>