Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solar Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/solener

On the design, modelling and analysis of multi-shelf inclined solar cooker- T

cum-dryer
⁎
Manpreet Singh, V.P. Sethi
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: A novel design of multi-shelf side loading inclined solar cooker-cum-dryer (ISCCD) is designed using single
Inclined solar cooker reflector North Facing Booster Mirror (NFBM) to improve the performance of both cooking and drying opera-
Solar dryer tions particularly in winter months. Innovative parallelepiped shape vessel (PSV) is designed (having longest
Cooker-cum-dryer inclined south facing wall) to further enhance the performance of ISCCD in cooking mode. Solar radiation
Thermal model
capture model by ISCCD is used in developed thermal model for various interactive components such as; glass
Drying model
Techno-economic analysis
covers, chamber air, absorber plate, cooking vessel and vessel water while considering the effect of NFBM and
experimentally validated at Ludhiana climate (30°N latitude), India. Volume to aperture area ratio along with
size of PSV is optimized in such a way that ISCCD with three-shelves is capable of cooking three times more food
as compared to the conventional horizontally placed solar cooker (HPSC). Due to optimized vessel design and
NFBM effect, ISCCD can be effectively used in extreme winter conditions when maximum temperature during
the day hovers around 15–20 °C (on sunny days) at latitudes > 30°N for both cooking as well as drying operation
when conventional HPSC and dryer (generally not fitted with booster mirror) do not perform well due to lower
solar radiation availability. Stagnation test (first figure of merit F1) and sensible heat test (second figure of merit
F2) were also computed and compared with HPSC to ascertain the performance of ISCCD. In drying mode, ISCCD
was tested for drying gooseberry (Emblica officinalis) (local name amla) under natural as well as forced con-
vention modes with and without the effect of NFBM. The Logarithmic drying model was found to be the best fit
for drying gooseberry. Techno-economic analysis showed that in cooking mode ISCCD can be used to cook at
least one meal per day for a joint family of 10 persons during 280 days in a year and can recover its cost within
65 months if compared with wood burning costs besides having the advantage of being used as an efficient dryer
thereby saving the cost of second gadget. In terms of savings in biomass fuel burning, ISCCD can mitigate much
higher CO2 emissions as compared to conventional HPSC.

1. Introduction
Energy is fairly essential, meanwhile life is directly influenced by
energy and its consumption. Present cooking fuels are originated from
fossil fuels like LPG, kerosene and biomass such as firewood, crop re-
sidue and cow dung. These biomass based energy resources still play a
vital role in global energy consumption, but due to continuous burning
of these fuels adverse affects on environment, human and soil heath are
attaining alarming levels particularly in developing countries (Sahin
et al., 2007). Solar energy is recognised as one of the most promising
future renewable energy source and becoming a viable substitute since
it diminishes the utilisation of conventional energy and enhances pro-
duction adeptness. Solar energy is most commonly employed for solar
cooking, water heating and solar drying applications. As cooking is an
integral part of every human being, it expends a prime portion of the
domestic energy requirement. Under the current scenario, solar cooking
is green, clean and environment friendly replacement which precludes
global warming due to non-emission of greenhouse gases and also di-
minishes indoor air pollution besides preventing health problems.
Moreover, adequate cooking temperatures in solar cooking devices also
help to preserve food nutrients (Muthusivagami et al., 2010).
Numerous designs of solar cookers have been presented by eminent
researchers over the last more than half a century. These are classified
mainly into three types; (i) box type (ii) focusing type and (iii) ad-
vanced or indirect type. Simple structure, easy operation mode and low
cost have attracted the attention of researchers towards box-type solar
cookers. Various improvements have been incorporated in solar box
cookers (SBCs) in order to: (i) increase the thermal performance, energy
saving and durability; (ii) decrease the weight, cost and payback period
as reported by Mahavar et al. (2011) and Mahavar et al. (2013).

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: vpsethi@pau.edu, vpsethi68@yahoo.co.in (V.P. Sethi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.01.045
Received 3 October 2017; Received in revised form 4 January 2018; Accepted 15 January 2018
0038-092X/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Nomenclature Ta ambient air temperature, °C

Tg1 upper glass cover temperature, °C
Ae edge area, m2 Tg2 lower glass cover temperature, °C
Ag1 area of upper glass cover, m2 Tch chamber air temperature, °C
Ag2 area of lower glass cover, m2 Tv vessel temperature, °C
Ap area of absorber plate, m2 Tpm mean plate temperature, °C
Av area of vessel, m2 Tp temperature of absorber plate of ISCCD, °C
F1 first figure of merit, dimensionless Tp1 temperature of absorber plate of HPSC, °C
F2 second figure of merit, dimensionless Tw temperature of water in vessel of ISCCD, °C
FC forced convection Two temperature of water in vessel of HPSC, °C
hg1-a convective heat transfer coefficient between upper glass Tv1 circular vessel’s temperature, °C
cover and ambient air, (4.5 Wm−2 °C−1) t time taken by ISCCD for drying, h
hch-g2 convective heat transfer coefficient between chamber air Ub bottom heat loss coefficient of ISCCD, W m−2 °C−1
and lower glass cover, (5.2 Wm−2 °C−1) Ue edge heat loss coefficient of ISCCD, W m−2 °C−1
hp-ch convective heat transfer coefficient between absorber Ul overall heat loss coefficient of ISCCD, W m−2 °C−1
plate and chamber air, (5.4 W m−2°C−1) Ut top heat loss coefficient of the ISCCD, W m−2 °C−1
hv-ch convective heat transfer coefficient between vessel and Va velocity of air flowing over glazing of ISCCD, m sec−1
chamber air, (5.4 W m−2 °C−1) wi initial weight of product, gm
hv-w convective heat transfer coefficient between vessel and wf final weight of product, gm
water, (6.0 W m−2 °C−1)
hw wind loss coefficient, (12.0 W m−2 °C−1) Greek letters
Ib beam solar radiation, W m−2
Id diffuse solar radiation, W m−2 ρm reflectivity of north facing booster mirror, dimensionless
ISCCD inclined solar cooker-cum-dryer ρ reflectivity of ground, dimensionless
It total solar radiation incident on the aperture of ISCCD, β slope of the ISCCD with horizontal, degrees
W m−2 βr slope of north facing booster mirror with horizontal sur-
Ih total solar radiation incident on the aperture of horizontal face, degrees
cooker, W m−2 ϕ latitude of selected location, degrees
k drying rate, gm h−1 τg transmissivity of glass, dimensionless
Kin thermal conductivity of insulation, Wm−1 °C−1 εp emissivity of the absorber plate, dimensionless (0.28)
Lin thickness of insulation, m εv emissivity of the vessel, dimensionless (0.10)
mp moisture evaporated, gm εg1 emissivity of the upper glass cover, dimensionless (0.35)
qab heat energy absorbed by the absorber plate of ISCCD, εg2 emissivity of the lower glass cover, dimensionless (0.35)
MJ m−2 αg1 absorptivity of upper glass cover, dimensionless (0.17)
ql heat energy lost, MJ m−2 αg2 absorptivity of lower glass cover, dimensionless (0.17)
qu useful heat energy, MJ m−2 αp absorptivity of absorber plate, dimensionless (0.70)
Rb conversion factor for beam radiation, dimensionless αv absorptivity of vessel, dimensionless (0.90)
Rb’ conversion factor for reflected beam radiation from north σ Stefan-Boltzmann constant, 5.67 × 10−8 W m−2 K4
facing booster mirrors, dimensionless ατ absorptivity transmissivity coefficient, dimensionless
Rd conversion factor for diffuse radiation, dimensionless ηt thermal efficiency of solar cooker, dimensionless
Rr conversion factor for reflected radiation, dimensionless

Detailed information on the salient features, types, functioning designs
of many diversified cookers with theoretical and experimental studies
have been described in many review articles such as Doraswami (1994),
Lakhar et al. (2010), Muthusivagami et al. (2010), Panwara et al.
(2012) and Cuce and Cuce (2013). Saxena et al. (2011) performed a
thermodynamic review on box type solar cookers to optimize various
major parameters. Harmin et al. (2014) presented a review of research
works and studies carried out in the development of solar cooking to
focus on diverse box type solar cookers consisting of (i) simple solar box
cooker with a tilted absorber-plate, (ii) a double exposure solar cooker
and (iii) a novel non-tracking solar box cooker, which is equipped with
a fixed asymmetric compound parabolic concentrator (CPC) as booster-
reflector and its absorber-plate, is in a form of a step. Hereza et al.
(2017) reviewed the principle and classification, parameters influen-
cing the performance of a solar cooker along with energy and exergy
analysis. Coccia et al. (2017) designed and tested a high concentration
ratio (11.12) solar box cooker prototype to cook food at high tem-
perature (> 200 °C) with good optical efficiency and thermal insula-
tion.
Thermal performance analysis on solar box cookers has been con-
ducted by many researchers such as Grupp et al. (1991), Jubran and
Alsaad (1991), Mullick et al. (1997) and Subodh (2004). Funk and
Larson (1991) developed a parametric model for prediction of cooking
power of a solar cooker depending upon the different controlled and
uncontrolled parameters such as solar intercept area, overall heat loss
coefficient, absorber plate thermal conductivity, insolation, tempera-
ture difference and load distribution. Regression analysis of experi-
mental data was done for obtaining coefficients of each term in the
model. Channiwala and Doshi (1989) presented complete procedure to
determine the heat loss coefficient of box type solar cookers. Esan
(2004) studied the thermal performance of a solar cooker integrated
vacuum-tube collector with heat pipes containing different refrigerants.
Detailed temperature distributions and their time dependences were
measured. The maximum temperature obtained in a pot containing 7 L
of edible oil was 175 °C. Also, the cooker was successfully used to cook
several foods.
Reddy and Narasimha (2007) tested a double-glass solar cooker to
examine the heat flow process and derived a mathematical model. Kurt
et al. (2008) predicted the thermal performance parameters using ar-
tificial neural network. Kumar et al. (2011) emphasized the need of
thermal performance indicators determined through exergy analysis for
solar cookers. Sengar et al. (2014) studied the mathematical formalism
of energy and distribution pattern in solar hot boxes for global solar
radiation capture. Nwosu et al. (2014) introduced an inclined box-type

621
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi
solar cooker employed with tracking and compared its performance
with conventional box-type solar cooker on the basis of thermal per-
formance. Terres et al. (2014) predicted the transitory thermal beha-
viour of box-type solar cooker with internal reflectors by numeric si-
mulation and validated with experimental values. A box type solar
cooker was tested and modelled by Verdugo (2015) in Madrid (Spain)
climate by developing convective heat transfer coefficient model.
Guidara et al. (2017) developed a mathematical model based on
thermal balances and implemented to predict the thermal performances
of the solar cooker.
Apart from reviews conducted and mentioned above, many other
studies on the design modifications of solar box cookers have also been
presented.
A solar cooker cum drier was designed by Pande and Thanvi (1988)
in which optimum booster-collector geometry was considered to elim-
inate sun tracking. Tilting arrangements were also provided to capture
more solar energy. The device worked well for cooking as well as de-
hydrating fruits and vegetables.
A box-type solar cooker with multi-step inner reflectors was de-
signed by El-Sebaii (1994). A double exposure solar cooker has been
designed and tested by Amer (2003). The proposed cooker performed
well in all seasons. Rao and Subramanyam (2003) worked on im-
provement in cooking vessel designs of solar cookers. A truncated
pyramid-type efficient multipurpose domestic solar cooker/dryer was
developed by Kumar et al. (2008). Mirdha and Dhariwal (2008) pro-
posed a conventional box type cooker with three changes in positions of
the side booster mirrors without moving the cooker as a whole to arrive
at a final design and concluded that new design provide sufficiently
high temperatures to enable cooking two meals a day. Al-Soud et al.
(2010) designed a parabolic solar cooker with automatic two-axis sun
tracking system and tested for its year round performance.
Kumar et al. (2010) designed, fabricated and tested truncated pyr-
amid geometry based multipurpose solar device which can be used for
domestic cooking as well as for water heating. A building-material
housing solar cooker (BMHSC) was developed and studied by Sengar
et al. (2010) and Sengar et al. (2011). Yettou et al. (2012) showed that
design of solar cooker with mirror reflectors for two tracking modes of
north–south and east–west facing were found favourable for more en-
ergy collection. Harmin et al. (2013) developed a non-tracking box-type
solar cooker equipped with a fixed asymmetric compound parabolic
concentrator (CPC) as booster reflector in which performance para-
meters and standardized cooking power were computed. Otte (2014)
investigated the end-user's needs for the design of solar cookers. The
paper concludes that solar cookers could improve the current cooking
situation if combined with heat storage, back up, or a hybrid system
that ensures reliability also during evening hours and rainy days. Erdem
and Pinar (2013) described that out of all existing designs, SBCs are
more popular due to ease of operation and low cost.
Sethi et al. (2014) presented an optimally inclined box type solar
cooker design with single booster mirror. Although it performed well
but the drawback was the uneasiness in loading and unloading of food
material from the front side which caused the loss of stagnation tem-
perature while opening the chamber. Moreover, opening the top cover
also disturbed the optimum angle of the booster mirror. Thermal
modelling of the inclined cooker was also not performed.
Solar drying is an effective, inexpensive and harmless approach
which gives desirable product quality as contrasted with open sun
drying. Kumar et al. (2016a,b) reviewed the drying applications of
different kinds of solar dryers. Different dryers like, a conventional
greenhouse solar dryer (east–west orientation) using inclined north
wall reflection (INWR) for faster drying under natural as well as forced
convection mode was improved by Sethi and Arora (2009), which saved
16.67% of the total drying time. Further, Srivasuki (2012) had reviewed
the benefits of amla (Emblica officinalis) and found it as most celebrated
herb of traditional systems of medicine in Asia particularly in South and
South-east Asia.
622
Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636
Sajith and Muraleedharan (2014) described a hybrid photovoltaic
thermal (PV/T) solar dryer for drying amla fruits. A prototype north
wall insulated greenhouse dryer in no-load conditions under natural
convection mode was tested by Chauhan and Kumar (2016).
Padmanaban et al. (2016) tested a forced convection based solar dryer
for drying amla. The average time required to dry 1 kg amla on wet
basis was found to be 36 h whereas 7 days in open sun drying. Zarezade
and Mostafaeipour (2016) identified the effective factors and risks
which may impact on the use of solar dryers and used data for Yazd
province in Iran for analysis purposes. Yahya et al. (2016)investigated
the performance of a solar dryer (SD) and a solar-assisted heat pump
dryer (SAHPD) for drying of cassava chips which decreased the mass of
cassava from 30.8 kg to 17.4 kg within 13 and 9 h at average tem-
peratures of 40 °C and 45 °C, respectively. Kumar et al. (2016a,b) re-
viewed various types of solar dryers namely, direct solar dryers, in-
direct solar dryers, hybrid solar dryers and their various drying
applications with techno-economic study.
Baniasadi et al. (2017) experimentally analysed the performance of
a forced convection mixed-mode solar dryer to dry fresh apricot slices
at different working conditions. The moisture pick-up efficiency and the
overall thermal efficiency of the dryer were about 10% and 11%, re-
spectively. Tomar et al. (2017) discussed the influences of key en-
vironmental, operational and design parameters for solar dryers such as
psychrometry of drying processes and ambient conditions, initial crop
properties, feasibility of using powered components such as fans and
air-heating solar collector selection etc.
Even though, many independent studies for cooking as well as
drying applications have been performed along with a few cooking-
cum-drying applications having complex designs such as solar oven-
cum-dryer developed by Nandwani and Gomez (1993), solar dryer-
cum-cooker by Senger and Kurchania (2005), truncated pyramid-type
solar cooker by Kumar et al. (2008) and horizontal solar cooker-cum-
dryer by Sayyad et al. (2015). Nandwani et al. (2007) developed a
hybrid solar food processor in the climate of Costa Rica. BadranIbrahim
et al. (2010) developed a portable solar cooker-cum-water heater. The
main application was for the campers and those who use recreation
vehicles. An ordinary dish of 150 cm diameter was covered with a re-
flective aluminium foil and used as a concentrator for solar radiation
capture. It was found that, when the device was operated in the bare
cooker mode, 7 kg of water at 20 °C was brought to boil in just 1 h.
Putting the pot inside the glass box reduced the time required for
boiling to 40 min and the cooking power was increased by 275%.
Despite of all these improvements and implementations, solar
cooking has not gained substantial popularity among the users. It re-
flects the fact that there are some major hindrances in the populariza-
tion of solar cookers. It is therefore felt that if conventional horizontally
placed box-type solar cooker which is recommended as the best due to
low cost and ease of operation at domestic level is further improved for
its thermal performance particularly in winter and capacity (using
improved vessel design) combined with one additional application of
drying (natural as well as forced convection mode) without incurring
any additional cost to convert it into an efficient dual purpose solar
gadget named as multi-shelf inclined solar cooker-cum dryer (ISCCD)
may have the potential for popularization in rural as well as urban areas
at domestic or small scale commercial level. This design of ISCCD has a
fairly large sized parallelepiped cooking vessels placed on three-tier
shelves (optimally inclined) that would be very beneficial for a joint
family of about 10 persons in order to cook two meals per day in
summer and at least one meal per day in winter along with drying of
vegetables and fruits without additional expenditure of purchasing a
crop dryer.
Hence, in this study an efficient inclined solar cooker-cum-dryer
having simple geometry, low cost and easy side loading and unloading
along with innovative parallelepiped vessel design for cooking appli-
cations has been designed. The same gadget has been modified and
tested for drying operations under natural as well as forced convection
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

modes. Thermal model of inclined solar cooker has been developed by

incorporating the effect of solar radiation capture with and without the
effect of north facing booster mirror and experimentally validated.
Performance evaluation in cooking as per BIS standards has been per-
formed and compared with conventional HPSC. Comparative solar ra-
diation capture ratio for ISCCD and HPSC along with the effect of north
facing booster mirror on solar radiation enhancement at selected lati-
tudes is also described. Statistical analysis of various drying models for
gooseberry drying under natural and forced convection modes and best
fit model is presented. To complete the study, techno-economic and 6 cm
environmental impact analysis of ISCCD in terms of payback period, net
present value and breakeven point as biomass fuel replacement and CO2
mitigation potential has been described and compared with conven-
tional HPSC.

2. Methods and materials

2.1. Design details of inclined solar cooker-cum-dryer (ISCCD)

A side loaded multi-shelf (three shelves) inclined solar cooker-cum-

dryer (ISCCD) was designed and developed for both cooking as well as
drying operations at domestic level as shown in Fig. 1a. Galvanised iron
(GI) sheet of 0.8 mm thickness (20 SWG) was used for fabrication. The
front and back surfaces were sloped at 45° with horizontal (ϕ + 15 for
winter maximized solar radiation capture at 30°N latitude) and mea-
sures 75 × 62 cm and 71 × 62 cm respectively. The width of ISCCD was
27 cm to accommodate the optimally designed parallelepiped cooking
vessel and drying trays. The ISCCD was placed on an angle iron stand
(43 cm high from the ground) having rollers fitted on all the four legs
for easy tracking and uniform balance. Double glazing toughened glass
(10 mm gap between the two layers) was used at the front side and fully
fixed to minimize the top loss coefficient (Fig. 1b). The total aperture
area of the ISCCD was 0.4066 m2 (72.8 × 59.8 cm). The base of the
absorber measured 0.36 m2 and painted black for maximum solar ra-
diation absorption. Inside the chamber, three shelves were provided at
equal distance for horizontal placement of parallelepiped shaped ves-
sels (PSV) to avoid any food spillage in inclined position. Glass wool
insulation of 5 cm thickness was provided along all sides, back and
bottom of ISCCD to minimize the heat losses. Specially designed 10 cm
Fig. 1b. Side view of Inclined Solar Cooker-Cum-Dryer (ISCCD).
wide fully insulated and sealed side door was provided for easy loading
and unloading for both cooking as well as drying operations. A north
facing booster mirror was provided to enhance the solar radiation
capture by ISCCD particularly during winter months and fitted with
screwed knob arrangement (74 × 62 cm) for alteration of inclination
angle to capture maximum reflected solar radiation onto the absorber
plate of ISCCD (Fig. 1c) as suggested by Sethi et al. (2014).
In order to use the ISCCD for drying operation, suitable modifica-
tions were made by providing 6 inlet holes of 1.25 cm diameter at the
base end of the cooker (equally distributed) for suction of fresh air from
outside (Fig. 1d). These holes were kept bolted with rubber seals during
cooking operation. One through hole of diameter 7.65 cm was created
at the upper end of the ISCCD and a PVC pipe was inserted (fully sealed
at the top to avoid any hot air leakage) up to the chamber fitted with
suitable diameter fan and a variable speed regulator for moist air re-
moval during drying operation (Figs. 1d and 4b). The fan was not

Fig. 1a. Schematic view of Inclined Solar Cooker-Cum-

Dryer (ISCCD).
Double
glazing
62
62

75 27

75

North facing Side

booster mirror loading
43

Insulation

64
All dimensions in cm

623
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi
Fig. 1c. Pictorial view of optimally inclined multi-shelf side loading ISCCD with paral-
lelepiped cooking vessel design for maximizing the capacity.
operated during the natural ventilation mode and the hole acted as
natural hot and moist air removal duct.
2.2. Parallelepiped shaped cooking vessel design
Three cooking vessels of parallelepiped shape having 49 cm length,
15 cm width and 9 cm height (each) were designed and fabricated using
0.8 mm thick aluminium sheet so as to comfortably fit inside the whole
volume of ISCCD. The gap between two consecutive shelves of ISCCD
was optimised as 20 cm so that shadow of upper vessel/tray did not fall
on the lower tray at solar noon (highest solar altitude angle) for max-
imum absorption of beam and reflected solar radiation on the paralle-
lepiped vessels all along the day.
Aperture area of the designed ISCCD was almost double (0.4066 m2)
than that of the conventional HPSC (0.2136 m2). Volume of each PSV
was four times (0.005 m3 each) than that of CV of HPSC (0.0012 m3
each). Therefore, the ratio of aperture area to the total volume of three
vessels of ISCCD was 27.10 as compared to 59.33 for conventional
circular vessels of HPSC (more than twice) as shown in Fig. 2. The
parallelepiped vessel designed in a study conducted by Sethi et al.
(2014) was not optimized to minimize the ratio of aperture area to the
total volume for attaining maximum cooking capacity. Moreover, the
vessel lid had a long and deep cavity resulting in the reduction of in-
ternal volume which is not desirable for maximizing the food capacity
of the vessel. In this study, the proposed ISCCD is optimally designed for
maximizing the cooking capacity of food as compared to conventional
HPSC. The vessels were provided with airtight covers and were painted
black.
2.3. Drying tray design
Three rectangular wire mesh trays of dimensions 48 × 16 × 2 cm
were fabricated for placing on the shelves for drying operations. The
especially designed sun shade covers made of aluminium sheet were
also fabricated and placed over the trays to protect the drying material
from direct solar radiation (Fig. 3). The wire mesh trays and covers
allowed the heated air to pass through the product under natural as well
as forced convection drying modes. Testing of ISCCD under cooking
mode and drying mode is shown in Fig. 4 with parallelepiped cooking
vessels placed on three shelves (Fig. 4a) and shaded drying trays with
cover in (Fig. 4b).
624
Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636
2.4. Experimental testing
During cooking operations, no load and full load tests were carried
out as per BIS standards to ascertain F1, F2, standard boiling time (tboil)
and cooking power (P) were calculated as discussed by Sethi et al.
(2014). Cooking performance of ISCCD was also compared with HPSC
and discussed in results and discussion section. The experiments were
conducted from 10 am to 4 pm on selected sunny days. Ambient air (Ta)
and chamber air (Tch) temperature was recorded with help a stem type
mercury thermometer (0–200 °C, least count ± 1 °C). Absorber plate
temperature (Tp), water temperature (Tw), lower glass temperature
(Tg2), upper glass temperature (Tg1) and cooking vessels temperature
(Tv) were also recorded after every 30 min interval with the help of
calibrated J type iron-constantan thermocouples (least count ± 0.1 °C).
Solar radiation on the horizontal as well as inclined surface of the
cooker was measured with the help of a two solarimeters (Model SM-
201 of CEI, measuring range 0–1200 W m−2). Multiple digital tem-
perature indicators were used for temperature measurement of different
surfaces having, measuring temperature range of 0–800 °C.
During drying operations, process of blanching was performed by
boiling whole gooseberry (amla) samples for 7 min and then giving
necessary time for cooling as described by Padmanaban et al. (2016).
After that, each whole amla was cut into six pieces along the vertical
grooves and homogenously distributed in 3 trays with uniform weight
(300 gm) on each tray, electronic balance (Model VX-221, measuring
range 0–10 kg and least count of 0.1 gm) was used for measuring weight
of dried sample. Moisture loss from sample was calculated during the
drying period at 1 h interval. The initial moisture content (400%, db) of
amla was calculated consciously by standard oven drying method
(AOAC, 2000). One fan of 7.67 cm diameter was used with two-step
speed regulator during forced convection drying mode drawing air at
1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1 through the sample placed in trays. In every
experiment fresh amla was used and experiments were performed
under natural and forced convection modes separately with and
without the use of north facing booster mirror.
2.5. Theoretical
2.5.1. Solar radiation capture model of ISCCD
The total solar radiation incident(It) on the aperture of inclined
solar cooker-cum-dryer (ISCCD) was computed by incorporating the
effects of beam radiation (Ib), diffuse radiation (Id) and reflected ra-
diation from north facing booster mirror as provided by Sethi et al.
(2014).
It = Ib Rb + ρm Ib Rb′ + Id Rd + ρRr (Ib + Id ) (1)
Ih = IN cosθz (2a)
Total solar radiation flux (W m−2) incident on aperture of ISCCD
was calculated using above solar radiation model at each hour from 8
am to 4 pm on representative day of each month.
Incident solar radiation (W m−2) is converted into hourly insolation
G (MJ m−2) by summation of instant value over one hour interval as
shown below.
3600
G= It ×
1000000 (2b)
Fig. 1d. Bottom holes for fresh air entry and top
side exhaust fan for removal of moist air in drying
mode of ISCCD.
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Fig. 2. Innovatively designed Parallelepiped

cooking vessel (b) and conventional circular
vessel (a) (all dimensions in cm).
6.5

9
49
(a) (b)

dTg 2
Cover m g 2 cg 2 = τg1 Q1 + Q5 + 3Q6−Q4 + Q7
dt (4)
2
where

48 Q5 is heat flow by convection from chamber air to lower glass

16 Tray = hch − g 2 Ag 2 (Tch−Tg 2)
Q6 is heat flow by radiation from vessel to lower glass
Fig. 3. Drying tray with cover (cm).
= Av σε v (Tv4−Tg42)
Q7 is heat flow by radiation from absorber plate to lower glass
2.5.2. Thermal modelling of ISCCD = Ap σεp (Tp4−Tg42) .
Energy balance equations were modified and used to develop
thermal model of ISCCD between various interactive components as 2.5.2.3. Chamber air. Heat loss and gain by chamber air depends upon
suggested by Terres et al. (2014). Gain and loss of energy for each its interaction with different components of ISCCD as discussed below
component were taken into account for numerical simulation. Incident
dTch
solar radiation on aperture of ISCCD (direct + reflected from booster) mch cch = Q8 + 3Q9−Q5
dt (5)
as obtained from solar radiation capture model was used in subsequent
energy balance equations. where

2.5.2.1. Upper glass cover. The energy balance equation for upper glass Q8 is heat flow by convection from absorber plate to chamber air
cover of ISCCD is given as = hp − ch Ap (Tp−Tch)
Q9 is heat flow by convection from vessel to chamber air
dTg1
m g1 cg1 = Q1−Q2−Q3 + Q4 = h v − ch Av (Tv−Tch) .
dt (3)

where 2.5.2.4. Absorber plate. Heat gain by absorber plate depends on solar
radiation falling on it after transmitting through two glass covers.
Q1 is heat gain by upper glass by solar radiation incident on it Various heat losses by absorber plate are given below
= Ag1 It αg1 dTp
Q2 is heat flow by convection from upper glass to ambient air m p cp = Q10−Q11−Q8−Q12−Q7
dt (6)
= hg1 − a Ag1 (Tg1−Ta)
Q3 is heat flow by radiation from upper glass towards the sky where
= Ag1 εg1 σ (Tg41−Ts4 )
Q4 is heat flow by radiation from lower glass to upper glass Q10 is the solar radiation capture by absorber plate = Ap It τg2 αp
= Ag 2 εg 2 σ (Tg42−Tg41) . Q11 is heat flow by conduction from absorber plate to ambient air
kin Ap (Tp − Ta)
= Lin
2.5.2.2. Lower glass cover. After transmitting the solar radiation by Q12 is heat flow by radiation from absorber plate to vessel
upper glass it falls on lower glass cover. Various energy balances of heat = Ap εp σ (Tp4−Tv4 ) .
influx and out flux for lower glass cover is given below

Fig. 4. Pictorial view of ISCCD with (a) cooking

vessels and (b) shaded drying trays.

625
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

2.5.2.5. Cooking vessel. As the parallelepiped shaped cooking vessel n

∑i = 1 (MR exp,i−MRpre,i )2
was placed horizontally inside the ISCCD and the solar radiation SEE =
N −ni (14)
directly incident on long south wall of three vessels after transmitted
by two glass covers. The energy balance equation of cooking vessel where MR exp,i and MRpre,i are experimental and predicted dimensionless
including heat influx and out flux is described in Eq. (7). moisture ratios respectively, N is number of observations and ni is
number of constants.
dTv
mv cv = Q15 + Q12−Q14−Q9−Q6
dt (7)
2.7. Techno-economic and environmental impact analysis
where
Net present value is used to examine the investment and it takes
Q15 is solar radiation capture by vessel = Av It τg2 α v every acknowledged cash flow in an interval, negative and positive, and
discounts back at present to check if the project is worthy, otherwise
Av = ∑ Aew + Asw + Aww + ATw should not be recommended. If NPV is minus and null it means cooker
has no economical consideration. If NPV is positive it is considered as
. economically feasible.

Np−C0 α ⎤ ⎡ (1 + D)t −1 ⎤
2.5.2.6. Vessel water. The parallelepiped cooking vessel transfers the NPV = ⎡ −C0
maximum amount of heat to the water because of the longest inclined ⎣ D ⎦⎢⎣ (1 + D) t ⎥ ⎦ (15)
south wall (parallel to the inclination of the ISCCD for maximum solar where N is number of meals to be cooked in a year, p is money value of
radiation capture) and temperature of water rises with rise in the vessel fuel saved per cooked meal, C0 is price of solar cooker, α is fraction of
temperature. The energy balance equation is given as initial investment spent on yearly maintenance, D is discount rate and t
dTw is useful lifetime of solar cooker as presented by Khandpal and Mathur
mw cw = Q13 + Q14 (1986).
dt (8)
The pay-back period to regain the primary investment cost in
where months was evaluated by replacing the conventional methods of
cooking with solar cooking for different biomass fuels. Number of meals
Q13 is heat flow by radiation from vessel to water = Av ε v σ (Tv4−Tw4 ) cooked till the break-even point was attained if the ISCCD is used as
Q14 is heat flow by convection from vessel to water replacement of traditional biomass fuels.
= Av h v − w (Tv−Tw ) .
C0 ⎡ d (1 + d ) t ⎤
nm = α+
p ⎣⎢ (1 + d )t −1 ⎦
⎥ (16)
2.6. Drying performance of ISCCD
The use of ISCCD as clean source of energy by replacing the burning
Drying performance parameters used are given below of various biomass fuels along with CO2 mitigation has been discussed
Moisture content (%) on wet basis and compared with conventional HPSC cooker and discussed in detail
wi−wf in results and discussion.
m wb = × 100
wf (9)
3. Results and discussion
Moisture content (%) on dry basis
3.1. Solar radiation capture ratio
m wb
mdb = × 100
100−m wb (10)
Using the global solar radiation model, the solar radiation capture
Drying rate ratio at inclined surface (ϕ + 15°) to the horizontal surface was com-
puted for 30°N latitude without and with booster mirror as shown in
mp
k= Table 2. The ratio of solar radiation captured by inclined surface of
t (11)
ISCCD (It) (Eq. (1)) to the solar radiation captured by horizontally
The drying data obtained from experiments was fitted in four well- placed solar cooker (Ih) (Eq. (2a)) without the effect of booster mirror is
known drying models as shown in Table 1 to predict the drying beha- 16 to 54% more in winter season (October to March). Solar radiation
viour of amla (gooseberry) in distinctive drying modes. Moisture con- capture ratio without the effect of booster mirror increased slightly in
tent data was transformed to moisture ratio (MR) using following ex- the month of September i.e. 8%, it further raised to 16% in October
pression, month and reached maximum of 54% in month of January. However in
this case, gradual decrease in capture ratio was observed in the months
Mt −Me
MR = of February and March from 35% to 16% respectively. Similarly, using
Mi−Me (12) the effect of reflected component of solar radiation from booster mirror
where Mt , Me and Mi are the moisture content at particular time, fixed at optimum inclination angle for ISCCD and HPSC shows 6% and
equilibrium moisture content and initial moisture content (% db) re- 10% more radiation capture on the aperture of ISCCD during the
spectively. months of October and November respectively. Moreover, in December
For the examination of models, two statistical parameters were
chosen namely coefficient of determination (R2) and standard error Table 1
Drying models used to predict the drying behaviour of gooseberry.
estimate (SEE). The low value SEE and high value of R2 were selected
for the goodness of fit as suggested by Basuma and Abe (1999). The Model Name Equation Reference
parameters were estimated by using SPSS software (11.5 version) in a
non-linear regression way. These parameters were computed. Lewis MR = exp(−kt ) Lewis (1921)
Modified Page MR = exp[−(kt )n] White (1981)
n
∑i = 1 (MR exp,i−MR expmean,i )2 −(MRpre,i−MR premean ,i )2 Henderson and Pabis MR = aexp(−kt ) Chinnam (1984)
R2 = n Logarithmic MR = aexp(−kt ) + c Sacilik et al. (2006)
∑i = 1 (MR exp,i−MR expmean,i )2 (13)

626
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Table 2 Table 4
Solar radiation capture ratio of inclined solar cooker-cum-dryer (ISCCD) to horizontally Effect of north facing booster mirror of ISCCD on the percentage (%) increase in daily
placed solar cooker (HPSC) without (Wibm) and with the effect of booster mirror (Wbm). solar insolation collection (MJ/m2) on ISCCD aperture during winter months at selected
latitudes.
Representative day of each month Solar radiation capture ratio of ISCCD and HPSC
at 30°N (It/Ih) Latitude Month
Oct15 Nov15 Dec15 Jan15 Feb15 Mar15
Wibm Wbm
φ = 30° 25.5 23.3 21.8 23.4 25.5 28.65
Jan-15 1.54 1.11 φ = 45° 23.1 21.8 21.5 21.6 22.7 25.8
Feb-15 1.35 1.08 φ = 55° 22.4 21.4 21.8 21.3 22.0 24.6
Mar-15 1.16 1.05
Apr-15 1.00 1.00
May-15 1.00 0.93 months particularly at higher latitudes due to smaller availability of
Jun-15 1.00 1.16
Jul-15 1.00 1.00
solar radiation.
Aug-15 1.00 1.00
Sep-15 1.08 1.02 3.3. Thermal analysis of ISCCD
Oct-15 1.25 1.06
Nov-15 1.45 1.10
Dec-15 1.52 1.11 Thermal analysis of ISCCD was performed by solving energy balance
equations of various interactive components using fourth order Runge
Kutta (RK) method and the program was developed using FREEMAT
and January months, about 11% more solar radiation capture was ob- software. The RK method provides the values of temperature of dif-
served (Table 2). On the other hand solar radiation capture ratio re- ferent components on hourly variation (10am–4 pm) and predicted
mained same in both the cases due to higher altitude angle of the sun in values were validated with experimental data recorded on 7th
summer months. It shows that, increase in sum of direct and booster September 2016 at PAU, Ludhiana. The total solar radiation incident on
reflected solar radiation availability due to optimum inclination tends inclined surface of ISCCD used as input which was obtained from de-
to increase the performance of ISCCD particularly in winter months as veloped global solar radiation model as presented by Sethi et al. (2014).
compared to HPSC which clearly proves the advantage of using north
facing booster mirror on the ISCCD in cooking mode over HPSC. 3.3.1. Absorber plate
The peak predicted value of absorber plate temperature was 106 °C
against the peak experimental temperature values of 101 °C. During the
3.2. Effect of north facing booster mirror on solar radiation enhancement of
whole day from 10 am to 4 pm a small difference of about 5 °C to 1 °C
ISCCD
was observed between the predicted and measured values (Fig. 5). The
validation of whole day was found in close agreement with RMSE value
North facing booster mirror plays significant role in enhancement of
of 5.6.
solar insolation availability on aperture of ISCCD. Factor (ρmIbRb′) in
Eq. (1) represents the part of solar radiation reflected by north facing
booster mirror and incident on the aperture of ISCCD. It computed at 3.3.2. Water temperature
the middle of each hour, averaged over one hour and converted to solar At the beginning of day (10 am) predicted and experimental water
insolation collection, G (MJ/m2) using Eq. (2b). Effect of north facing temperature values were 47.14 °C and 42 °C with a small difference of
booster mirror on daily collection of G on ISCCD aperture during each 5 °C and during next two hours (11 am and 12 pm) difference decreased
month at selected latitudes of 5, 15, 30, 45 and 55°N is shown in to 1 °C (Fig. 6). The peak (2 pm) predicted and observed values of water
Table 3. was 103 °C and 99 °C respectively (difference of 4 °C) and at end of the
The percent enhancement of G at 30, 45 and 55°N latitudes is more day (4 pm) temperature difference remains almost same. The validation
important due to lower solar radiation availability in winter months. of whole day was found in close agreement with RMSE value of 3.7.
Computations show that the booster mirror enhances the solar radiation
collection on ISCCD from 21% to 25% during the winter months 3.4. Cooking performance parameters
at > 30°N latitudes (Table 4). This effect is more prominent in enhan-
cing the solar radiation collection during drying operation as compared 3.4.1. No load test (F1)
to conventional multi-shelf dryer where no booster mirror is used at all Comparative testing of ISCCD and HPSC by covering the booster
due to which its drying performance lowers significantly during winter mirrors with black sheet on a bright sunny day for computing F1.

Table 3
Daily average solar insolation collection (MJ/m2) on ISCCD aperture with and without north facing booster mirror during each month at selected latitudes.

Month-Day φ = 5° φ = 15° φ = 30° φ = 45° φ = 55°

Wbm Wibm Wbm Wibm Wbm Wibm Wbm Wibm Wbm Wibm

Jan-15 27.65 20.73 31.86 23.82 31.60 24.19 21.17 16.6 11.93 9.392
Feb-15 30.37 21.65 20.8 16.26 34.23 25.5 24.77 19.15 21.4 16.68
Mar-15 32 21 22.02 16.48 35.35 25.22 31.84 23.61 29.56 22.28
Apr-15 32.49 18.36 25.94 17.17 36.76 24.39 33.67 23.82 35.66 25.58
May-15 23.78 13.24 21.14 13.96 33.62 21.25 35.88 24.5 37.24 25.71
Jun-15 29.55 12.86 20.42 13.04 27.29 17.72 37.38 25.5 36.64 24.91
Jul-15 29.85 13.58 20.64 13.36 33.59 20.72 37.06 25 35.68 24.52
Aug-15 32.25 16.88 21.51 14.69 35.62 23.03 34.87 24 33.97 24.14
Sep-15 34.61 21.06 27.8 18.98 31.69 22.41 32.53 23.5 28 21
Oct-15 35.2 23.82 27.39 20.01 29.87 22.26 24.59 18.91 21.61 16.78
Nov-15 33.96 24.47 31.78 23.58 28.52 21.87 22.37 17.49 15.61 12.26
Dec-15 34.11 25.04 33.43 25.04 23.72 18.55 21.28 16.69 11.86 9.28

627
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Measured Predicted compared to HPSC (74 W and 42 W respectively at temperature dif-

120
ference (T2-T1) of 30 °C). With increase in the temperature difference of
100 60 °C, the cooking power further enhanced to 145 W and 90 W for
ISCCD and HPSCrespectively.
Temperature (°C)

80

60 3.4.5. Actual cooking performance

Cooking performance of ISCCD was evaluated by cooking rice and
40 pulses on sunny day (23rd March, 2017). The experiment was started in
20 the morning and two vessels containing rice (450 gm in each paralle-
lepiped shaped vessel (PSV) and 150 gm each in circular vessel (CV))
0 and third vessel containing mixture of split green gram and red lentil
10:00 11:00 12:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00
(pulses, 200 gm in CV and 400 gm in PSV) were placed inside the ISCCD
Time of day
and HPSC. Both the cookers were properly sealed. Thermocouples were
Fig. 5. Predicted and measured absorber plate temperature (10 am to 4 pm). brazed with outside surface of both types of vessels to record the
temperature rise. It was observed that initially the temperature of CV
Measured Predicted was higher than the temperature of PSV by about 6–1 °C up to about
120
90 min of cooking (Fig. 11), thereafter the temperature of PSV re-
100 mained higher by about 1–5 °C for rest of the cooking period.
The temperature rise of the food material (Tv) in CV and (Tv1) in
Temperature (°C)

80
PSV gradually increased from 46 °C and 43 °C at 10 am to 118 °C and
60 120 °C in CV and PSV. It was observed that the food in CV was cooked
just 15 min earlier than the PSV. It is pertinent to note that the PSV of
40 ISCCD was loaded with three times more food material as compared to
CV of HPSC which clearly indicates that due to higher solar radiation
20
capture by ISCCD (between 700 and 850 Wm−2 range) as compared to
0 HPSC (600 to 750 Wm−2 range) and parallelepiped shape, three times
10:00 11:00 12:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 more food can be cooked within almost same time as compared to HPSC
Time of day as shown in Fig. 12. Due to optimum inclination for winter max-
Fig. 6. Predicted and measured water temperature (10 am to 4 pm).
imization, the results obtained for ISCCD were much better as com-
pared to HPSC.

During the experiment, the maximum absorber plate temperature of

3.5. Drying performance of ISCCD
ISCCD was 126 °C with solar radiation intensity of 700 Wm−2 at
1:30 pm (Fig. 7). On the other hand absorber plate temperature of
Testing of ISCCD as solar dryer was carried out on clear sunny days
horizontal cooker was reached maximum to 120 °C with solar radiation
during winter season to ascertain its performance during the period
intensity of 675 Wm−2 at same time. It was observed that absorber
when most of the vegetables are available for pickle making but solar
plate of ISCCD had attained 6 °C more temperature as compared to
radiation availability is low. The experiments were conducted over
horizontal cooker which tend to increase the performance of ISCCD. F1
consecutive two days period till equilibrium moisture was attained.
for ISCCD was 0.13 and for conventional HPSC, it was 0.12, which
Experiments on ISCCD in drying mode were conducted in two modes (i)
proves that ISCCD is in grade-A cooker category as per BIS testing
without the effect of booster mirror and (ii) with the effect of booster
standards.
mirror under natural as well as forced convection mode (at 1.8 ms−1
and 3.6 ms−1).
3.4.2. Full load test (F2)
Experiment with full loading of ISCCD and HPSC were started by
3.5.1. Drying without the effect of booster mirror
filling the vessels with water as per standard loading of 7 kg per m2
ISCCD as solar dryer was used to dry amla (gooseberry) on 21st and
aperture area as suggested by Mahavar et al. (2015). Due to parallele-
22nd Dec 2016 (clear sunny days in winter) in natural convection
piped vessel design, ISCCD was loaded with almost 3 times more mass
of water as compared to conventional HPSC (Fig. 8). The recorded data Ta Tp Tp1 It Ih
shown in Fig. 9 was used for computing F2. Time taken for temperature 140 800
rise from 60 °C to 95 °C was recorded and used for calculations. Max-
Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

imum solar radiation intensity at the aperture of ISCCD was 800 Wm−2 120 700
during solar noon as compared to 740 Wm−2 for HPSC during solar 600
100
noon. Second figure of merit (F2) calculated from this data was 0.45 for
Temperature (°C)

500
ISCCD and 0.43 for horizontal cooker which shows that ISCCD is more 80
efficient in cooking as compared to HPSC. 400
60
300
3.4.3. Standard boiling time (tboil) 40
200
F1 and F2 were used to compute the standard boiling time (tboil) for
20 100
ISCCD and HPSC which were 194 min and 210 min respectively.
Standard boiling time was calculated for different values of X at average 0 0
solar radiation intensity of 650 Wm−2 and plot of tboil versus X is given
in Fig. 10.
Time of day

3.4.4. Cooking power (P) Fig. 7. Variation of ambient air (Ta), Absorber plate temperature (Tp) and solar radiation
Standard cooking power of ISCCD was calculated and result ob- intensity at aperture of ISCCD and horizontal cooker on 20th March 2017 at 30°N lati-
tude.
tained showed that the cooking power of ISCCD was much higher as

628
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

mode. Variation of chamber air temperature (Tch), ambient air tem-

perature (Ta) and solar radiation intensity (It) on the aperture without
the use of booster mirror is shown in Fig. 13. Measured global solar
radiation intensity on the aperture of ISCCD varied from 660 Wm−2 at
10 am to 875 Wm−2 at solar noon and then gradually declined to
300 Wm−2 by 4 pm i.e. during the end of sunshine hours of first day.
During the start of second drying day, solar radiation intensity varied in
similar way and was 675 Wm−2, 900 Wm−2 and 300 Wm−2 at 10 am,
12 noon and 4 pm respectively. Ambient air temperature on both days
varied from 17 °C to 24 °C. Maximum chamber air temperature (Tch)
was observed as 88 °C and 90 °C at 1 pm during the first and second
drying day respectively, which was fully optimum for drying of goo-
seberry. It is pertinent to note that this temperature rise was about
8–10 °C higher as compared to the conventional solar dryers being
currently used for domestic drying purpose as discussed by Kumar et al.
Fig. 8. ISCCD and conventional HPSC during testing for computing F2. (2016a,b). It was due to the fact that ISCCD had double glass covers
fixed at the top surface which minimises the convective heat loss
Tw Two Ta It Ih
coefficient from top as compared to conventional solar dryer which had
120 900 only single glass cover. It clearly shows that the designed ISCCD can be

Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

800 successfully used as a domestic dryer under natural convection mode
100 even during the winter months at 30°N latitude.
700
Drying performance of ISCCD was also tested in forced convection
Temperature (°C)

80 600
mode at two different air velocities (3.6 ms−1 and 1.8 ms−1) through
500 the sample on four different days (23rd and 24th Dec 2016 & 29th and
60
400 30th Dec 2016). It was observed that at fan speed of 3.6 ms−1, the
chamber air temperature did not exceed 64 °C (Fig. 14) due to lesser
40 300
retention time of hot air inside the drying chamber which was not
200
20 sufficient for drying of gooseberry.
100 Hence, the optimum air speed through the drying tray was adjusted
0 0 as 1.8 ms−1 resulting in desired inside chamber air temperature and
lesser drying time. The pictorial views of drying experiments conducted
in ISCCD are shown in Figs. 15a and 15b.
Time of day (am to pm) Variation of chamber air temperature (Tch), ambient temperature
Fig. 9. Variation of solar radiation intensity, ambient air and water temperature in ISCCD (Ta) and solar radiation intensity (It) on the aperture without booster
and HPSC on 21th March 2017 at 30°N latitude. mirror under forced convection mode (at 1.8 ms−1) is shown in Fig. 16.
Global solar radiation intensity gradually increased from 600 Wm−2 at
ISCCD Horizontal cooker 10 am to 800 Wm−2 at 12 noon and decreasing to just 280 Wm−2 by
600 4 pm on the first drying day. Almost same pattern was observed during
Standard boiling time (tboil)

500 the second drying day and the solar radiation intensity increased from
590 Wm−2 to 825 Wm−2 ta solar noon and again decreasing to just 330
400
Wm−2 by 4 pm. Maximum chamber air temperature was recorded as
300 74 °C during both the days (optimum for amla drying) at 1pmwhen the
200 ambient air temperature was around 26 °C.
The variation in moisture content and drying rate under natural
100
convection and forced convection modes at air speeds of 1.8 ms−1 and
0 3.6 ms−1 without using the booster mirror effect is shown in Fig. 17.
0.086 0.092 0.098 0.104 0.11 0.116 Under forced convection mode maximum drying rate (72 gm h−1)
X and fastest moisture content removal (359.98%) was observed during
Fig. 10. Characteristic curve for ISCCD and horizontal cooker at 30°N latitude. first hour of drying at 3.6 ms−1 fan speed followed by medium fan
speed of 1.8 ms−1 followed by slowest drying under natural convection
Tv Tv1 It Ih mode. It was due to faster initial evaporation of moisture present at the
surface of the samples with highest air velocity. After 5 h of experi-
Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

140 900
800 mental run the drying rate gradually reduced (87 gm h−1) in forced
120
700 convection mode (Fig. 17). At the end of the first day, remaining
Temperature (°C)

100 moisture content in three respective modes i.e. natural convection,

600
80 500 forced convection at 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1 was 153.33%, 146.56%,
400 and 161.64% respectively. On the second drying day, it was observed
60
300
that the overall drying rate for all the cases was lower than that of the
40 first drying day. The equilibrium moisture content (1.66% db) was first
200
20 obtained under medium air speed forced convection mode (1.8 ms−1)
100
was 11.5 h, followed by natural convection mode (12 h) and the max-
0 0
10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 01:00 imum time taken was under forced convection at 3.6 ms−1 (12.5 h).
Time of day Optimum temperature due to hot air retention and moderate air velo-
Fig. 11. Variation of solar radiation intensity and vessel temperature on ISCCD and HPSC city are the main factors for attaining the equilibrium moisture content
on 23rd March 2017 at 30°N latitude. at 1.8 ms−1 air speed as compared to 3.6 ms−1 fan speed ms−1 and
natural convection mode when moist air removal was comparatively

629
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Fig. 12. (a) Cooking of rice and pulses in ISCCD

and HPSC (b) cooked food in vessels of ISCCD and
HPSC.

Tch Ta It Fig. 13. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity of
100 1000

Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

ISCCD in natural convection mode without booster
90 900 mirror effect.
80 800
70 700
Temperature ( C)

60 600
50 500
40 400
30 300
20 200
10 100
0 0
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00

Time of day
(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

slower. using booster mirror effect on 9th and 10th Feb. 2017 as shown in
Fig. 18. The global solar radiation intensity (beam + diffuse + re-
3.5.2. Drying with the effect of booster mirror flected) varied from 875 Wm−2 at 10 am to 1150 Wm−2 at solar noon
Experiments were conducted under natural convection mode by and then steadily dropped to 400 Wm−2 at 4 pm during both the drying

Tch Ta It Fig. 14. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity on
70 900 aperture of ISCCD in forced convection mode (at
3.6 ms−1) without booster mirror on 23th and 24th
800
Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

Dec. 2016.
60
700
50
Temperature, °C

600

40 500

30 400

300
20
200
10
100

0 0
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30

01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
12:00
12:30

Time of day

(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

630
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Fig. 15a. Pictorial view of Goose berry drying in

shaded trays of ISCCD (a) without and (b) with
booster mirror effect.

Fig. 15b. Amla samples before (a) and after (b)

drying in ISCCD.

Tch Ta It Fig. 16. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity on
80 900
aperture of ISCCD in forced convection mode (at
Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

800 1.8 ms−1) without booster mirror on 29th and 30th

70
Dec. 2016.
60 700
Temperature (°C)

600
50
500
40
400
30
300
20 200
10 100
0 0
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00

Time of day
(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

days. On the other hand during peak hours (11 am to 3 pm) chamber air
temperature remained significantly higher (highest as 100 °C). It was
due to the fact that booster mirror of ISCCD contributed in increase in
much higher chamber temperature as compared to the conventional
solar dryers where booster mirror is not attached. It can thus be con-
cluded that ISCCD as a dryer can perform well at higher latitudes
(> 30°N) in winter month of January (40°N and 50°N) as shown in
Table 5 where solar radiation availability can be maximised with
booster mirror and optimal chamber air temperature can be attained for
drying different vegetables.
Experiments under forced convection mode (3.6 ms−1) were per-
formed on 11th and 12th Feb. 2017 using the effect of booster mirror on

631
 M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

NC moisture content FC moisture content (1.8 m/s) Fig. 17. Variation in moisture content and drying rate
during natural and forced convection mode (at
FC mosture content (3.6 m/s) NC drying rate 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) without booster mirror effect.
FC drying rate (1.8 m/s) FC drying rate (3.6 m/s)
450 100
400 90
Moisture content (% db)

Drying rate (gm hr-1)

350 80
70
300
60
250
50
200
40
150
30
100 20
50 10
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5
Drying time (hours)

(1st drying) (2nd drying day)

Tch Ta It Fig. 18. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity of
120 1400
ISCCD in natural convection mode with booster mirror

Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

effect (9th and 10th Feb. 2017).
100 1200

1000
Temperature, °C

80
800
60
600
40
400

20 200

0 0
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00

Time of day

(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

Table 5 intensity (beam + diffuse + reflected) on inclined surface of ISCCD

Availability of solar radiation intensity (It in Wm−2) at solar noon on the aperture of
ISCCD at different latitudes during extreme winter months.
Representative day 30°N
Wibm Wbm
Dec-15 858 1118
Jan-15 1080 1405
ISSCD (Fig. 19). Total solar radiation intensity (beam + diffuse + re-
flected) on the aperture of ISCCD during different drying hours of the
first drying day was recorded as 800 W m−2 at 10 am which further
increased to 1120 W m−2 at solar noon and gradually dropped down to
300 W m−2 by 4 pm. The variation was almost same for the second
drying day. Maximum ambient temperature hovered around 27 °C
during both the drying days. The maximum chamber air temperature at
1 pm was 76 °C and 78 °C on both the drying days respectively which
was somehow lower than optimum for drying of gooseberry.
At medium speed forced drying of 1.8 ms−1, global solar radiation
varied from 300 to 1100 Wm−2 during first drying day and 350 to 1125
Wm−2 on second drying day (Fig. 20). The peak ambient air tem-
40°N 50°N
perature was 26 °C on both days. The maximum chamber air tem-
perature (Tch) was around 88 °C at 1 pm on both the drying days which
Wibm Wbm Wibm Wbm was optimum for gooseberry drying. The optimum drying conditions
were attained due to booster mirror effect and gradual removal of moist
837 1163 734 962
900 1197 753 989
hot air from the chamber. Peak chamber air temperature occurred from
11 am to 3 pm during both the drying days when the effect of booster
mirror was also maximum which proves the effectiveness of booster
mirror for ISCCD to be used a dryer in winter conditions.
Hourly variation of moisture content and drying rate during natural
convection and forced convection mode (at 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1)
using booster mirror effect with respect to time is shown in Fig. 21.
Reduction in moisture content (356.62%) and drying rate
(78 gm hr−1) was observed slightly better as compared to without
booster mirror effect (Fig. 17) at 3.6 ms−1 during the first hour of
drying. At the end of first drying day (4 pm) at 1.8 ms−1 fastest
moisture content reduction was achieved (133.31% db) as compared to
3.6 ms−1 and natural convection mode. Equilibrium moisture content

632
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Tca Ta It Fig. 19. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity on
90 1200 aperture of ISCCD in forced convection mode at
3.6 ms−1 with booster mirror on 11th and 12th Feb.

Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

80 2017.
1000
70

60 800
Temperature (°C)

50
600
40

30 400

20
200
10

0 0
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
Time of day

(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

Tch Ta It Fig. 20. Variation in chamber air temperature, am-

bient temperature and solar radiation intensity on
100 1200 aperture of ISCCD in forced convection mode at

Solar radiation intensity (W m-2)

90 1.8 m s−1 with booster mirror on 14th and 15th Feb.
1000 2017.
80
70
800
Temperature (°C)

60
50 600
40
400
30
20
200
10
0 0
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00
10:00
10:30
11:00
11:30
12:00
12:30
01:00
01:30
02:00
02:30
03:00
03:30
04:00

Timeof day

(1st drying day) (2nd drying day)

(1.66% db) was obtained at 1.8 ms−1 within 10.5 h, followed by natural The statistical analysis of natural and forced convection modes (at
convection mode (11 h) and at 3.6 ms−1 (11.5 h). The results clearly 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) with booster mirror for selected drying models
showed the effect of using the booster mirror in drying mode of ISCCD is shown in Table 7. It was observed that ‘k’ varied from 0.074 to 0.210
as it can save the about 10–12% of drying time as compared to dryer for all the selected models. The value of ‘a’ observed for Henderson and
without booster mirror effect. Pabis model for natural and forced convection (at 3.6 ms−1 and
1.8 ms−1) was 1.112, 1.091 and 1.0931whereas for Logarithmic model
3.5.3. Validation of various drying models it was 1.785, 1.714, and 1.679 respectively. Further the values of ‘n’
Various estimated parameters (k, a, n and c) computed to obtain R2 examined for Modified Page model for natural and forced convection
and SEE under natural convection and forced convection mode (at (at 3.6 ms−1 and 1.8 ms−1) were 1.571, 1.504 and 1.481 respectively.
1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) without using booster mirror are shown in On the other hand the values of ‘c’ for Logarithmic model varied be-
Table 6. The value of ‘k’ varied from 0.083 to 0.212 for all the cases of tween −0.759 and −0.651 under forced convection modes of 3.6 ms−1
selected models. The value of ‘a’ evaluated for Henderson and Pabis and 1.8 ms−1 air velocity. The maximum value of R2 (0.999) was ob-
model was 1.121, 1.103 and 1.104 whereas for Logarithmic model it tained in Logarithmic model under forced convection at 3.6 ms−1mode
was 1.656, 1.616 and 1.617, in natural and forced convection at and minimum value of SEE (0.0017) observed in natural convection
1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1 respectively. Further the values of ‘n’ for mode in Lewis model. In all of above discussed cases, the value of R2
Modified Page model were 1.592, 1.536 and 1.522 whereas for Loga- was greater than 0.93 indicating a good fit as discussed by Erenturk
rithmic model ‘c’ values observed were −0.613, −0.590 and 0.586 et al. (2005). The R2 value for Logarithmic model in all cases was higher
respectively for natural and forced convection at 1.8 ms−1 and as compared to other models which indicate that Logarithmic model is
3.6 ms−1. The maximum value of R2 (0.998) and minimum value of SEE the best fit drying model for predicting the moisture ratio and drying
(0.0001) was found in Logarithmic model of forced convection mode at time for gooseberry drying.
3.6 ms−1 and 1.8 ms−1 respectively.

633
 M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

NC moisture content FC moisture content (1.8 m/s) Fig. 21. Hourly variation of moisture content and
drying rate during natural and forced convection
FC mosture content (3.6 m/s) NC drying rate modes (at 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) using booster
mirror effect.
FC drying rate (1.8 m/s) FC drying rate (3.6 m/s)
450 100
400 90
Moisture content (% db)

350 80

Drying rate (gm hr-1)

70
300
60
250
50
200
40
150
30
100 20
50 10
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10.5 11 11.5
Drying time (hours)

(1st drying) (2nd drying day)

Table 6 Table 7
Statistical results of mathematical modelling for gooseberry drying under natural con- Statistical results of mathematical modelling for gooseberry drying under natural con-
vection (NC) and forced convection (FC) modes (at 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) without using vection and forced convection modes (at 1.8 ms−1 and 3.6 ms−1) using booster mirror
booster mirror effect. effect.

Model Name Without Estimated Parameters R2 SEE Model Name Without Estimated Parameters R2 SEE
booster booster
mirror effect k a n c mirror effect k a n c

Lewis NC 0.185 – – – 0.940 0.0039 Lewis NC 0.190 – – – 0.939 0.0017

FC at 0.183 0.949 0.0139 FC at 0.180 0.948 0.0047
3.6 ms−1 3.6 ms−1
FC at 0.193 0.946 0.0106 FC at 0.199 0.950 0.0038
1.8 ms−1 1.8 ms−1

Modified Page NC 0.174 – 1.592 – 0.994 0.0217 Modified Page NC 0.182 – 1.571 – 0.991 0.0252
FC at 0.169 1.536 0.994 0.0289 FC at 0.174 1.504 0.992 0.0329
3.6 ms−1 3.6 ms−1
FC at 0.183 1.522 0.991 0.0292 FC at 0.193 1.481 0.990 0.0177
1.8 ms−1 1.8 ms−1

Henderson NC 0.205 1.121 – – 0.957 0.0636 Henderson NC 0.210 1.112 – – 0.955 0.0576
and Pabis FC at 0.196 1.103 0.960 0.0667 and Pabis FC at 0.198 1.091 0.960 0.0516
3.6 ms−1 3.6 ms−1
FC at 0.212 1.104 0.959 0.0586 FC at 0.217 1.093 0.962 0.0451
1.8 ms−1 1.8 ms−1

Logarithmic NC 0.086 1.656 ‘ −0.613 0.996 0.0046 Logarithmic NC 0.081 1.785 – −0.747 0.995 0.0050
FC at 0.083 1.616 −0.590 0.998 0.0023 FC at 0.074 1.714 −0.759 0.999 0.0055
3.6 ms−1 3.6 ms−1
FC at 0.091 1.617 −0.586 0.996 0.0001 FC at 0.091 1.679 −0.651 0.995 0.0049
1.8 ms−1 1.8 ms−1

3.6. Environmental impact analysis and techno-economic analysis
The burning of agricultural waste (biomass) in cook stoves for
preparing meals cause serious impact on the environmental pollution
levels besides endangering human health. Solar cooking is the best al-
ternative for household cooking purposes. In northern India climatic
situations, about 280 clear sky days are perceived in a year. Thus, the
designed ISCCD can easily cook at least one meal for a large family of
10 persons in a day (due to three times more cooking capacity) or 2800
meals in a year. However, a conventional horizontal solar cooker is able
to cook food for a family of 5 members only or about 1400 meals in a
year, thus the huge amount i.e. 4200 MJ of non-renewable energy can
be conserved by using the recommended design of ISCCD as compared
to a conventional HPSC. The total cost saved, payback period, amount
of CO2 emission prevented in a year are compared for ISCCD and HPSC
in Table 8. Using ISCCD as replacement of wood can prevent 560 kg of
CO2emissions as compared to HPSC (306 kg of CO2) per year with
payback period of 65 months as compared to HPSC (69 months).
Net Present Value (NPV) of ISCCD and HPSC was evaluated as Rs.
1120 and 514 for replacement of wood biomass with break-even point
achieved after 8060 and 4164 meals respectively (Table 9). NPV and
breakeven point for ISCCD and HPS cookers as replacement of other
biomass is shown in Table 9.
3.6.1. Energy saving by ISCCD as solar dryer
In India, open sun drying is a common practice at village level to dry
the vegetables and about 60–70% people make pickles by this method
which has certain drawbacks like longer drying time and no safeguard
against dirt and other environmental adversaries. People in urban areas
use electrical/mechanical dryers or biomass based dryers for drying

634
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636

Table 8
Environmental impact analysis and payback period for ISCCD and conventional HPSC.

Replacement Fuel Fuel saved Total annual cost Payback period CO2 emission Fuel saved Total annual cost Payback period CO2emission prevented
(Biomass) (kg) saved (Rs.) (months) prevented (kg) (kg) saved (Rs.) (months) (kg)

ISCCD HPSC
Cow dung cake 319 1598 44 799 175 875 48 437.5
Rice husk 330 992 72 165 181 543 77 90.5
Wheat straw 264 1587 45 370 145 870 48 203
Wood 280 1120 65 560 153 612 69 306

Table 9 consumption (kWh) can be achieved by using ISSCD as a dryer for year
Net present value and breakeven point for ISCCD and horizontal cooker. round drying applications besides cooking.
It can thus be summarized that the proposed ISCCD design is most
Replacement Calorific Cost kg CO2 Net present Breakeven point
Fuel value per emitted per value (Rs.) (Meals) suitable for large sized family of 10 people and is capable of performing
(Biomass) (MJ/kg) unit kg fuel cooking as well as drying operations with booster mirror effect for year
(Rs.) combustion ISCCD HPSC ISCCD HPSC round applications (particularly in winter months) at a very nominal
initial cost by conserving significant time and energy besides mitigating
Cow dung 13.14 5 2.5 802 294 11,418 5899
cake
huge amounts of CO2 as compared to conventional HPSC design.
Rice husk 12.7 3 0.5 582 183 10,817 5589
Wheat straw 15.9 6 1.4 1022 403 11,387 5883 Acknowledgements
Wood 15 8 2 1120 514 8060 4164
The authors are greatly thankful to the Vice Chancellor of Punjab
Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India for taking special in-
operations which incur higher initial and operating costs. Experiments
terest in this innovative project useful for the rural population in India
of this study have shown that in order to dry 1 kg of gooseberry under
and even other countries and provided the necessary funds for timely
natural convection mode, the average drying time using ISCCD was 12
completion of this study. The service provided by M/S Vishvakarma
h. However, if active mode dryer would have been used to dry the same
Solar Energy Corporation, Phillaur, Punjab is appreciated to fabricate
amount of sample then estimated energy consumption will be 1.26 kWh
the new design of ISCCD and parallelepiped shaped vessels as per
as suggested by Sajith and Muraleedharan (2014). During regular
drawing details provided by the authors. Lastly, the technical support of
drying operations on annual basis the saved energy would be suffi-
all the staff, research fellow and other students for data recording and
ciently higher which again signifies the energy saving of ISCCD in
sample preparation for the conduct of experiments during different
drying process. On the other hand, biomass based dryers emit CO2 and
seasons is also acknowledged.
even CO which causing air pollution. Therefore, ISCCD is capable of
performing drying as well as cooking operations at a very nominal in-
References
itial cost and also conserves energy besides mitigating CO2 in the en-
vironment.
Al-Soud, M.S., Abdallah, E., Akayleh, A., Abdallah, S., Hrayshat, E.S., 2010. A parabolic
solar cooker with automatic two axes sun tracking system. Appl. Energy 87 (2),
463–470.
4. Conclusions Amer, E.H., 2003. Theoretical and experimental assessment of a double exposure solar
cooker. Energ. Convers. Manage. 44, 2651–2663.
AOAC, 2000. Official Method of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists
It can thus be concluded that the ratio of solar radiation capture by
International, Maryland, USA.
ISCCD is 16 to 54% higher in winter months (October to March) as Baniasadi, E., Ranjbar, S., Boostani, O., 2017. Experimental investigation of the perfor-
compared to conventional HPSC. Effect of north facing booster mirror mance of a mixed-mode solar dryer with thermal energy storage. Renew. Energ.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.043.
of ISCCD design on daily solar insolation collection (MJ/m2) during
Basunia, M.A., Abe, T., 1999. Moisture adsorption isotherms of rough rice. J. Food Eng.
winter months is 11%, 21% and 25% higher at 30, 45 and 55°N lati- 42, 235–242.
tudes. Experimental validation of the developed thermal model for BadranIbrahim, A.A., Yousef, N.A., Joudeh, Rami K., AlHamad, H.H.H., Hassouneh, K.,
absorber plate and water temperature in vessel was in close agreement 2010. Portable solar cooker and water heater. Energy Convers. Manage. 51 (8),
1605–1609.
with RMSE value of 5.6 and 3.7 respectively. Coccia, G., Nicola, G.D., Pierantozzi, M., Tomassetti, S., Aquilanti, A., 2017. Design,
ISCCD is an A-grade category cooker having first figure of merit manufacturing, and test of a high concentration ratio solar box cooker with multiple
(F1) = 0.13, second figure of merit (F2) = 0.45, standard boiling time of reflectors. Sol. Energy 155, 781–792.
Channiwala, S.A., Doshi, N.I., 1989. Heat loss coefficients for box-type solar cookers. Sol.
194 min and cooking power of 145 W which are even better than Energy 42, 495–501.
conventional HPSC. Actual cooking performance shows the great sig- Chauhan, S.P., Kumar, A., 2016. Performance analysis of greenhouse dryer by using in-
nificance of ISCCD with three times more cooking capacity as compared sulated north-wall under natural convection mode. Energ. Rep. 2, 107–116.
Chinnan, M.S., 1984. Evaluation of selected mathematical models for describing thin
to conventional HPSC at almost same cooking time. It is shown that layer of in-shell pecans. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 27, 610–615.
ISCCD can also be effectively used as a dryer under natural as well as Cuce, E., Cuce, P.M., 2013. A comprehensive review on solar cookers. Appl. Energy 2,
forced convection mode at medium fan speed of 1.8 ms−1 and can save 1399–1421.
Doraswami, A., 1994. A significant advance in solar cooking. Energy Sustain. Dev. 4,
about 10–12% of drying time as compared to dryer without booster
15–26.
mirror effect for gooseberry drying. The Logarithmic model showed the El-Sebaii, A.A., 1994. Experimental and theoretical investigation of a box-type solar
higher adequacy of fit between experimental and predicted data for all cooker with multi-step inner reflectors. Energy 19, 1011–1021.
Erenturk, S., Gulaboglu, S.M., Gultekin, 2005. The thin layer drying characteristics of
selected models for gooseberry drying. The environmental and eco-
rosehip. J. Biosyst. Eng. 89 (2), 159–166.
nomical factors showed the significant advantage of using ISCCD over Esen, M., 2004. Thermal performance of a solar cooker integrated vacuum-tube collector
HPSC as whopping 4200 MJ of non-renewable energy can be conserved with heat pipes containing different refrigerants. Sol. Energy 76 (6), 751–757.
annually by using the recommended design of ISCCD as compared to a Funk, P.A., Larson, D.L., 1991. Parametric model of solar cooker performance. Sol. Energy
62, 63–68.
conventional HPSC. ISCCD as a replacement of wood biomass based Grupp, M., Montagne, P., Wackennagel, M., 1991. A novel advanced box type solar
cooking can prevent about 80% more CO2emissions at lesser payback cooker. Sol. Energy 47, 107–113.
period time as compared to HPSC. Significant savings in energy Guidara, Z., Souissi, M., Morgenstern, A., Maale, A., 2017. Thermal performance of a solar

635
M. Singh, V.P. Sethi
box cooker with outer reflectors: Numerical study and experimental investigation.
Sol. Energy 158, 347–359.
Harmim, A., Merzouk, M., Boukar, M., Amar, M., 2013. Design and experimental testing
of an innovative building-integrated box type solar cooker. Sol. Energy 98, 422–433.
Harmim, A., Merzouk, M., Boukar, M., Amar, M., 2014. Solar cooking development in
Algerian Sahara: Towards a socially suitable solar cooker. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 37, 207–214.
Hereza, A., Ramadan, M., Khaled, M., 2017. Review on solar cooker systems: Economic
and environmental study for different Lebanese scenarios. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 81, 421–432.
Jubran, B.A., Alsaad, M.A., 1991. Parametric study of box-type solar cooker. Energ.
Convers. Manage. 32, 223–234.
Kandpal, T.C., Mathur, S.S., 1986. The economics of box-type solar cookers. Energ.
Convers. Manage. 26 (2), 223–235.
Kumar, N., Agravat, S., Chavda, T., Mistry, H.N., 2008. Design and development of effi-
cient multipurpose domestic solar cookers/dryers. Renew. Energ. 33 (10),
2207–2211.
Kumar, N., Chavda, T., Mistry, H.N., 2010. A truncated pyramid non-tracking type
multipurpose domestic solar cooker/hot water system. Appl. Energy 87 (2), 471–477.
Kumar, N., Vishwanath, G., Gupta, A., 2011. An exergy based test protocol for truncated
pyramid type solar box cooker. Energy 36, 5710–5715.
Kumar, M., Sansaniwal, K.S., Khatak, P., 2016a. Progress in solar dryers for drying var-
ious commodities. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 55, 346–360.
Kurt, H., Atik, K., Özkaymak, M., Recebli, Z., 2008. Thermal performance parameters
estimation of hot box type solar cooker by using artificial neural network. Int. J.
Therm. Sci. 47, 192–200.
Lahkar, P.J., Samdarshi, S.K., 2010. A review of the thermal performance parameters of
box type solar cookers and identification of their correlations. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 14 (6), 1615–1621.
Lewis, W.K., 1921. The drying of solid materials. J. Indian Eng. 5, 427–433.
Mahavar, S., Sengar, N., Verma, M., Dashora, P., 2011. Extensive experimental studies of
a single family solar cooker. Int. J. Energy, Inf. Commun. 2 (4), 169–179.
Mahavar, S., Verma, M., Rajawat, P., Sengar, N., Dashora, P., 2013. Novel solar cookers:
suitable for single families. Int. J. Sustain. Energy 32 (6), 574–586.
Mahavar, S., Rajawat, P., Punia, R.C., Sengar, N., Dashora, P., 2015. Evaluating the op-
timum load range for box-type solar cookers. Renewable Energy 74, 187–194.
Kumar, M., Kumar, S., Khatak, P., 2016b. Progress in solar dryers for drying various
commodities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55, 346–360.
Mirdha, U.S., Dhariwal, S.R., 2008. Design optimization of solar cooker. Renew Energy
33, 530–544.
Mullick, S.C., Khandpal, T.C., Saxena, A.K., 1997. Thermal test procedures for box type
solar cooker. Sol. Energy 39, 353–360.
Muthusivagami, R.M., Velraj, R., Sethumadhavan, R., 2010. Solar cookers with and
without thermal storage: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, 691–701.
Nandwani, S.S., Gomez, F.O., 1993. Comparative study of conventional and SBCI card-
board solar ovens. Renew. Energy 3, 607–620.
Nandwani, S.S., 2007. Design, construction and study of a hybrid solar food processor in
the climate of Costa Rica. Renew. Energy 32, 427–441.
Nwosu, C., Anusionwu, B.C., Chineke, T.C., Mejeha, I.M., Okeoma, K.B., 2014. Design,
fabrication and characterization of an automated inclined box-type solar cooker
employing tracking reflectors. Adv. Phys. 5, 726–736.
Otte, P.P., 2014. Solar cooking in Mozambique—an investigation of end-user's needs for
the design of solar cookers. Energy Policy 74, 366–375.
Padmanaban, G., Palani, P.K., Dharmalingam, S., 2016. Reaction of developed solar dryer
636
Solar Energy 162 (2018) 620–636
on amla. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Tech. 7, 326–328.
Pande, P.C., Thanvi, K.P., 1988. Design and development of a solar cooker cum drier. Int.
J. Energy Res. 12, 539–545.
Panwara, N.L., Kaushika, S.C., Kotharib, S., 2012. State of the art of solar cooking: an
overview. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16, 3776–3785.
Rao, A.V.N., Subramanyam, S., 2003. Solar cookers–Part I: cooking vessel on lugs. Sol.
Energy 75, 181–185.
Sacilik, K., Elicin, K.A., Unal, G., 2006. Drying kinetics of Uryani plum in a convective
hot-air dryer. J. Food Eng. 76, 362–368.
Sahin, A.D., Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., 2007. Thermodynamic analysis of solar photovoltaic
cell systems. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 91, 153–159.
Sajith, K.G., Muraleedharan, C., 2014. Economic analysis of a hybrid photovoltaic/
thermal solar dryer for drying amla. Int. J. Eng. Res. Tech. 3, 907–910.
Saxena, A., Varun, S.P., Srivastav, G., 2011. A thermodynamic review on solar box type
cookers. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 15, 3001–3018.
Sayyad, F.G., Sardar, N.R., Rathod, J.P., Baria, U.A., Yaduvanshi, B.K., Solanki, B.P.,
Chavda, J.J., 2015. Design and development of solar cooker-cum-dryer. Curr. World
Environ. 10, 985–993.
Sethi, V.P., Arora, S., 2009. Improvement in greenhouse solar drying using inclined north
wall reflection. Sol. Energy 83, 1472–1484.
Sethi, V.P., Pal, D.S., Sumathy, K., 2014. Performance evaluation and solar radiation
capture of optimally inclined box type solar cooker with parallelepiped cooking
vessel design. Energy Convers. Manage. 81, 231–241.
Sengar, S.H., Kurchania, A.K., 2005. Experimental performance analysis of composite
solar dryer cum cooker. J. Dairying, Foods H.S. 24, 123–129.
Sengar, N., Dashora, P., Mahavar, S., 2010. Low cost solar cooker: promising solution
towards reducing indoor air pollution from solid fuel use. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 3
(10), 1038–1042.
Sengar, N., Dashora, P., Gupta, M., Mahavar, S., 2011. Experimental studies, energy
savings and payback periods of a cylindrical building-material-housing solar cooker.
Int. J. Energy Inf. Commun. 2 (3), 75–84.
Sengar, N., Dashora, P., Mahavar, S., Punia, R.C., 2014. Mathematical formalism to study
energy, distribution pattern in solar hot boxes for global solar radiation. Int. J.
Innovative Res. Sci., Eng. Technol. 3 (12), 18147–18156.
Srivasuki, K.P., 2012. Nutritional and health care benefits of amla. J. Pharmacogn. 3,
147–151.
Subodh, K., 2004. Thermal performance study of box type solar cooker from heating
characteristic curves. Energy Convers. Manage. 45, 127–139.
Terres, H., Lizardi, A., López, R., Vaca, M., Chávez, S., 2014. Mathematical model to study
solar cookers box-type with internal reflectors. Energ. Proc. 57, 1583–1592.
Tomar, V., Tiwari, G.N., Norton, B., 2017. Solar dryers for tropical food preservation:
Thermophysics of crops, systems and components. Sol. Energy 58, 144–149.
Verdugo, S.A., 2015. Experimental analysis and simulation of performance of a box-type
solar cooker. Energy Sustain. Dev. 29, 65–71.
White, G.M., 1981. Fully exposed drying of popcorn. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 24,
466–468.
Yahya, M., Fudholi, A., Hafizh, H., Sopian, K., 2016. Comparison of solar dryer and solar-
assisted heat pump dryer for cassava. Sol. Energy 136, 606–613.
Yettou, F., Azoui, B., Malek, A., Gama, A., 2012. Study and simulation of concentrating
irradiance in box solar cooker with tracking reflectors. Rev. Renew. Energy 15,
661–670.
Zarezade, M., Mostafaeipour, A., 2016. Identifying the effective factors on implementing
the solar dryers for Yazd province, Iran. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 57, 765–775.