Res. Bult., No. (92), Agric. Res. Center, King Saud Univ., pp.

(5-20) 2000

Effective Thermal Properties of Dates

A. I. Hobani* S. R. Al-Askar+

Abstract

The effective thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity, and

specific heat of both Khudary and Sufri date were determined as
functions of moisture at 50 and 70°C. The moisture of dates ranged
from 18.31 to 62.52% and from 16.72 to 71.70% wet basis for
Khudary and Sufri date, respectively. In the tested ranges of moisture
and temperature, all thermal properties investigated were linearly
dependent on moisture content. The effective thermal conductivity
varied from 422 to 622 mW/m.K at 50°C and from 462 to 676
mW/m.K at 70°C for the Khudary date, whereas that of Sufri date
varied from 446 to 638 mW/m.K at 50°C and from 449 to 793
mW/m.K at 70°C. The effective thermal diffusivity for Khudary
varied from 1.26  10-7 to 1.55  10-7 m2/s and from 1.47  10-7 to
1.84  10-7 m2/s at 50 and 70°C, respectively, whereas that of Sufri
date varied from 1.30  10-7 to 1.93  10-7 m2/s and from 1.47  10-7
to 2.27  10-7 m2/s at 50 and 70°C, respectively. The specific heat for
Khudary varied from 2.48 to 4.41 kJ/kg.K and from 2.42 to 3.99
kJ/kg.K at 50 and 70°C, respectively, whereas that of Sufri varied
from 2.69 to 3.22 kJ/kg.K and from 2.40 to 3.41 kJ/kg.K at 50 and
70°C, respectively. Equations for the prediction of thermal properties
of both date varieties as a function of moisture content were
developed.

________________________________________________________
*
Department of Agricultural Engineering Department, College of Agriculture,
King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.
+
Graduate Student, Department of Agricultural Engineering, College of
Agriculture, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.

-5-
 Introduction

Information on the thermal properties of foods, such as thermal

conductivity, thermal diffusivity, and specific heat, are highly needed
by food researchers and engineers for optimizing the design and
operation of various thermal processes, during which foods are
exposed to heating, cooling, drying or freezing. Moisture content is an
important factor affecting thermal properties of biological materials
(Mohsenin, 1980). Lamb (1976) reported the importance of moisture
content for correct assessment of thermal properties in obtaining
optimum food processing conditions. The effect in this case
designated to the changing moisture content during many processing
operations as well as to the substantial difference between the thermal
property of the water and the other components. Sweat (1974) has
reported the thermal conductivities of different fruits and vegetables.
He found a strong relationship between moisture content and thermal
conductivity of fruits and vegetables.
In general, thermal properties of selected fruits and vegetables
have been thoroughly investigated by a number of researchers (Sweat,
1974; Lozano et al., 1979; Vagenas and Marinos-Kouris, 1990;
Kamaruddin and Sagara, 1992; López-Ramos et al., 1993; Denys and
Hendrickx, 1999). However, data for thermal properties of dates are
often not available.
Objectives of this study were to determine the effective thermal
conductivity, thermal diffusivity, and specific heat of date varieties
Khudary and Sufri over a wide range of moisture contents at two
different temperatures, and to develop equations for the prediction of
these thermal properties as a function of moisture content. The
temperatures reported in this study are those commonly used in
cooking and heat processing of foods.

Materials and Methods

Two varieties of dates, Khudary and Sufri, were obtained fresh

from local farms at Al-Kharj area. Date fruit samples were hand

-6-
picked at different times during harvest season to represent the
varying moisture content of fresh date samples. Representative date
fruit samples were first pitted to prepare them for pasting. An ordinary
household mincer/mixer was used for mincing and mixing when
required. Mincing and mixing helped to render a homogeneous sticky
paste with the least voids when filling into the test cylinders.

Moisture content
Moisture content of dates was determined by the vacuum oven
method described by Shukur (1983). The method is based on the
AOAC standard method for sugary fruits (AOAC, 1980). In this
method, a known weight of paste (minced date) was dried in a vacuum
oven at 70°C, ≤ 50mm Hg for 6 hr. Moisture contents of minced date
samples ranged between 62.52 and 18.31% wet basis, and between
71.70 and 16.72% wet basis for Khudary and Sufri date varieties,
respectively.

Thermal conductivity
The line source method of Hooper and Lepper (1950) was used
to measure the effective thermal conductivity (k) of dates. This
method was also used to measure bulk thermal conductivity of barley
by Hobani and Tolba (1995). It is the most widely used method
because of its simplicity, rapid measurement, and suitability for small
food samples (Gratzek and Toledo, 1993; Rahman, 1995). The
apparatus used in the study is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of thermal conductivity apparatus.

-7-
 The cylinder made of stainless steel (with 4.9 cm internal
diameter and a height of 26 cm) containing the date sample with the
line heat source (a 31-gauge chromel resistance heating wire, 0.2
ohm/cm) was placed in a constant temperature water bath set at one
temperature (50°C or 70°C) and held at least for 2 hr for equilibration.
When the temperature of the sample was steady, electrical energy
(580 mA at 50°C and 600 mA at 70°C)) was applied to the line heat
source inserted in the sample. The temperature rise of the heating wire
was measured by a 20-gauge copper-constantan thermocouple placed
contiguous to the heating wire midway between the cylinder two ends.
The rate of change of temperature with time was used to calculate
thermal conductivity of the sample. The effective thermal conductivity
was calculated using equation in the following form:

Q t
k ln 2 (1)
4 (T2  T1 ) t 1

where k is the thermal conductivity of the sample, W/m K; Q is line

source strength, W/m; T1 is temperature at initial time t 1 , K; T2 is
temperature at final time t 2 , K. The experiments were conducted in
three replicates.
Linear regression was performed on the (ln-time)-temperature
data to describe their linearity and thermal conductivity was calculated
according to the method described by Sweat (1974); Lozano et al.
(1979); Ramaswamy and Tung (1981):

Q
k (2)
4 (slope)

Thermal diffusivity
The effective thermal diffusivity () was measured using the
Dickerson (1965) method. The experimental apparatus consisted of an
agitated water bath, in which a brass cylinder containing the sample
was immersed. Two thermocouples were used to monitor
temperatures at two points, usually at the outside surface of cylinder

-8-
and in the center of sample. Two caps made of Teflon were put in
place at the bottom and top of the cylinder. The cylinder was filled
with the sample under test and then placed in the agitated water bath
heated at a constant rate to 50 and 70°C. The time-temperature data
was recorded until a constant rate of temperature rise was obtained for
both surface and center thermocouples. The slope of the portion of the
graph representing the relationship between log (Tsurface – Tcenter) vs.
time gives the value of .
The governing partial differential equation describing
temperature as a function of the radius, r, from the heat source of
constant strength is
A d 2 T 1 dT
  (3)
 dr 2 r dr

where A is the constant rate of temperature rise at all points in the

cylinder, °C/s,  is the effective thermal diffusivity of the material,
m2/s, T is the temperature at a distance r from the heat source, C.
When temperature gradient is no longer time dependent, solution
to equation (3) is as follows:

A r2
T  C1 ln (r)  C 2 (4)
4

Letting cylinder surface and sample center temperatures be T R and Tc

for the boundary conditions of,

T  A t  TR for t  0, r  R
dT
0 for t  0, r  0
dr

The solution of equation (4) is:

A
(TR  T)  (R 2  r 2 )
4

-9-
At r  0, T  Tc , the thermal diffusivity equation is as follows:

A R2
 (5)
4 (TR  Tc )

The experimental data were obtained based upon three replications for
each variety.

Specific heat
The procedure developed for the measurement of specific heat
(Cp) was based on the method of mixtures (Mohsenin, 1980).
Basically, the procedure involved heating a known volume of water in
a beaker and immersing the test sample at a lower temperature. The
specific heat of sample was then computed from a heat balance
equation between the heat lost by the water and calorimeter and that
gained by the sample and capsule:

Cw Ww (Twi  Twc  TR )  Cc Wc (Tci  Twc  TR )  CcapWcap (Tws  Tcapi  TR )

Cs  (6)
Ws (Tws  Tsi  TR )

where Cs is specific heat of sample, kJ/kg.K; Cw is specific heat of

water, kJ/kg.K; Ww is weight of water, kg; Twi is initial temperature of
water, °C; Twc is equilibrium water temperature, °C; TR is heat gain or
loss factor and can be calculated as [(T2-T1)/(t2-t1)]t1, °C; Cc is specific
heat of calorimeter (copper container), kJ/kg.K; Wc is weight of
calorimeter, kg; Tci is initial temperature of calorimeter, °C; Ccap is
specific heat of capsule, kJ/kg.K; Wcap is weight of capsule, kg; Tws is
equilibrium temperature of sample, °C; Tcapi is initial temperature of
capsule, °C; Ws is weight of sample, kg; and Tsi is initial temperature
of sample, °C.
The calorimeter described by Al-Askar (1999) was used for the
measurement of specific heat, Figure 2. The apparatus consisted of a
29.88cm29.88cm29.88cm polyurethane foam block having a
central cylindrical well in which a 10cm diameter  0.4cm wall 
11cm copper container is inserted. The block was placed inside a

- 10 -
30cm  30cm  30cm wooden box for better insulation. The test
capsule included a 4cm inner diameter  4cm inner height  0.4cm
wall copper cylinder with a threaded lid. The cylinder was fully
suspended in the copper container using two hangers mounted on the
wooden cover of the container. Temperature measurements of the
water in the container and center of the minced sample under test were
made with copper-constantan thermocouples.
In the experiment, the copper container was inserted into the
polyurethane block and filled with 400 ml of water heated to a
temperature 10°C above the experimental test temperature and
allowed both the container and water to reach thermal equilibrium.
During this time, the copper cylinder was filled with the sample. Next,
the test capsule tightly closed was immersed in the water and the
cover was placed on the container. Temperature readings of the water
in the container and at the center of the sample were recorded at 10 s
intervals using a data logger.

Figure 2. Polyurethane jacketed calorimeter.

- 11 -
 Results and Discussion

Thermal conductivity
The effective thermal conductivity data for date of both Khudary
and Sufri varieties over a wide range of moisture contents at two
different temperatures 50 and 70C are graphically presented in
Figures 3 and 4. The magnitude of the experimental values of the
thermal conductivity ranged between 422 and 622 mW/m.K at 50°C
and between 462 and 676 mW/m.K at 70°C and moisture content
range 18.31 to 62.52% wet basis for the Khudary date. The magnitude
of thermal conductivities of Sufri date ranged between 446 and 638
mW/m.K at 50°C and between 449 and 793 mW/m.K at 70°C and
moisture content range 16.72 to 71.70% wet basis. It can be seen that
increasing the moisture content increased the thermal conductivity at
the tested range of moisture contents reported here. A similar
observation, in the moisture content range 14 to 80% wet basis and at
near room temperature, was reported for raisins (Vagenas and
Marinos-Kouris, 1990), and for apples over wide ranges of moisture
content and temperature (Lozano et al., 1979). For a given moisture
content, increasing the temperature of the sample increases the
thermal conductivity. This effect was less pronounced at lower levels
of moisture contents up to moisture content of 31% for the Sufri
variety.
The experimental thermal conductivity data showed a linear
relationship with moisture content for both Khudary and Sufri date as
illustrated in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. The equation for this linear
relationship is as follows:

k  a 1  b1 M (7)

where k is effective thermal conductivity (mW/m.K), M is moisture

content expressed as percent wet basis, and a1 and b1 are constants.
The regression coefficients for equation 7 for the two date varieties at
50 and 70°C are given in table 1. The regression coefficients show a
good fit of the data.

- 12 -
 900
Thermal conductivity (mW/m.K)
at 50°C
800 at 70°C
Calculated
700

600

500

400

300
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (%, w.b.)
Figure 3. Thermal conductivity of Khudary date versus moisture
content of sample.

900
at 50°C
Thermal conductivity (mW/m.K)

800 at 70°C
Calculated
700

600

500

400

300
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (%, w.b.)

Figure 4. Thermal conductivity of Sufri date versus moisture content

of sample.

- 13 -
Table 1. Regression coefficients for effective thermal conductivity of
Khudary and Sufri dates as a function of moisture content at
two different temperatures.

Date Temperature
Variety a1 b1 r2
Khudary 50 332.99 4.604 0.987
70 385.67 4.778 0.950
Sufri 50 418.03 2.894 0.911
70 370.19 5.554 0.931

Thermal diffusivity
Effective thermal diffusivity of both date varieties was estimated
using the relationship given in Equation (5). The magnitude of the
experimental values of the thermal diffusivity at 50 and 70°C
respectively ranged between 1.26  10-7 and 1.55  10-7 m2/s and
between 1.47  10-7 and 1.84  10-7 m2/s for Khudary at moisture
content range 18.31 to 62.52% wet basis. The magnitude of thermal
diffusivities of Sufri date at 50 and 70°C respectively ranged between
1.30  10-7 and 1.93  10-7 m2/s and between 1.47  10-7 and 2.27 
10-7 m2/s at moisture content range 16.72 to 71.70% wet basis.
Effective thermal diffusivity of Khudary and Sufri dates was
linearly increased with increasing moisture content as shown in
Figures 5 and 6. The following liner model represents good fit of the
data:

  a 2  b2M (8)

where  is effective thermal diffusivity (m2/s), M is moisture content

expressed as percent wet basis, and a2 and b2 are constants. The
regression coefficients for equation 8 for the two date varieties at 50
and 70°C are presented in table 2.

- 14 -
 2.4
Thermal diffusivity (× 10 m /s)

at 50°C
2

2.2 at 70°C
-7

2.0 Calculated

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (% , w.b.)

Figure 5. Thermal diffusivity of Khudary date versus moisture

content of sample.

2.4
Thermal diffusivity (× 10 m /s)

at 50°C
2

2.2 at 70°C
-7

Calculated
2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (% , w.b.)

Figure 6. Thermal diffusivity of Sufri date versus moisture content of

sample.

- 15 -
Table 2. Regression coefficients for effective thermal diffusivity of
Khudary and Sufri dates as a function of moisture content at
two different temperatures.

Date Temperature
Variety a2 b2 r2
Khudary 50 1.18E-07 5.31E-10 0.878
70 1.29E-07 7.95E-10 0.899
Sufri 50 1.12E-07 1.04E-09 0.909
70 1.20E-07 1.37E-09 0.931

Specific heat
The experimental results of specific heat of the two date
varieties are shown in Figures 7 and 8. Values of specific heat ranged
from 2.48 to 4.41 kJ/kg.K and from 2.42 to 3.99 kJ/kg.K at 50 and
70°C respectively for Khudary at moisture content range 18.31 to
62.52% wet basis. The values of specific heat for Sufri at moisture
content range 16.72 to 71.70% wet basis varied from 2.69 to 3.22
kJ/kg.K and from 2.40 to 3.41 kJ/kg.K at 50 and 70°C, respectively.
From the results it was found that as the moisture content increased
the specific heat for both date varieties increased linearly with
correlation coefficients between 0.73 and 0.94. The equation for this
linear relationship is as follows:

Cp  a 3  b 3 M (9)

where Cp is specific heat (kJ/kg.K), M is moisture content expressed

as percent wet basis, and a3 and b3 are constants. The regression
coefficients for equation 9 for the two date varieties at 50 and 70°C
are given in table 3. The regression coefficients show a good fit of the
data.

- 16 -
Table 3. Regression coefficients for specific heat of Khudary and
Sufri dates as a function of moisture content at two different
temperatures.

Date Temperature
Variety a3 b3 r2
Khudary 50 1.387 0.047 0.943
70 1.790 0.034 0.759
Sufri 50 2.675 0.006 0.732
70 2.146 0.018 0.925

5.0
at 50°C
at 70°C
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K)

4.0 Calculated

3.0

2.0

1.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (% , w.b.)

Figure 7. Specific heat of Khudary date versus moisture content of

sample.

- 17 -
 5.0
at 50°C
at 70°C
Specific heat (kJ/kg.K)

4.0 Calculated

3.0

2.0

1.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture content (% , w.b.)

Figure 8. Specific heat of Sufri date versus moisture content of

sample.

Conclusions

The line-source method, the Dickerson (1965) method and the

mixtures method have been used with good success for the
determination of effective thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity
and specific heat, respectively, for Khudary and Sufri dates. The
results of this study indicate that thermal properties of both Khudary
and Sufri date were linearly dependent upon moisture content in the
ranges tested. It was found that the increases in moisture increased the
thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity and specific heat. The results
obtained in this study will be useful in the analysis of drying, freezing,
and packaging processes used in date production.

- 18 -
 References

[1] Al-Askar, S.R. (1999). “Thermal properties of some varieties

of Saudi dates”. M. S. Thesis, Agricultural Engineering
Department, College of Agriculture, King Saud University,
Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia.

[2] AOAC. (1980). “Official Methods of Analysis”. AOAC, 13th

edition, No. 22.013, p. 361. Association of Official Analytical
Chemists, Washington D.C.

[3] Denys, S. and Hendrickx, M.E. (1999). “Measurement of the

thermal conductivity of foods at high pressure”. Journal of
Food Science 64(4): 709-713.

[4] Dickerson, R.W. Jr. (1965). “An apparatus for the

measurement of thermal diffusivity of foods”. Food
Technology 19: 198-204.

[5] Gratzek, J.P. and Toledo, R.T. (1993). “Solid food thermal
conductivity determination at high temperatures”. Journal of
Food Science 58(4): 908-913.

[6] Hobani, Ali I. and Tolba, M.H. (1995). “Bulk thermal

conductivity and diffusivity of barley”. King Saud University,
Agricultural Research Center, Research Bulletin No. 53, pp 5-
17.

[7] Hooper, F.C and Lepper, F.R. (1950). “Transient heat-flow

apparatus for determination of thermal conductivities”.
Transactions of ASHVE 56: 309-322.

[8] Kamaruddin, A. and Sagara, Y. (1992). “Thermophysical

properties of tropical agricultural products”. ASAE Paper No.
92-6066, 18 pp. St. Joseph, MI: ASAE.

[9] Lamb, J. (1976). “Influence of water on the thermal properties

of foods”. Chemistry and Industry Dec.:1046-1048.

- 19 -
[10] López-Ramos, A., Palmisano, E., Dombey, A., Pimentel, J.A.,
Fayés, D. and González- Mendizábal, D. (1993). “Thermal
properties of tropical fruits and vegetables”. Rev. Esp. Cienc.
Tecnol. Aliment. 33(3): 271-283.

[11] Lozano, Jorge E., Urbicain, Martin J. and Rotstein, Enrique

(1979). “Thermal conductivity of apples as a function of
moisture content”. Journal of Food Science 44(1): 198-199.

[12] Mohsenin, N.N. (1980). “Thermal properties of foods and

agricultural materials”. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers,
Inc. New York.

[13] Rahman, Shafiur. (1995). “Food properties handbook”. CRC

Press, Inc. USA.

[14] Ramaswamy, H.S. and Tung, M.A. (1981). “Thermophysical

properties of apples in relation to freezing”. Journal of Food
Science 46: 724-728.

[15] Shukur, M.M. (1983). “Determination of date moisture

content: a review”. Date Palm J. 2(2): 147-162.

[16] Sweat, V.E. (1974). “Experimental values of thermal

conductivity of selected fruits and vegetables”. Journal of
Food Science 39: 1080-1083.

[17] Vagenas, G.K., Marinos-Kouris, D. and Saravacos, G.D.

(1990). “Thermal properties of raisins”. Journal of Food
Engineering 11: 147-158.

- 20 -
 1421 20 5 92

71.70 16.72 62.52 18.31

70 50

622 422
70 676 462 50
638 446
793 449 50
7
10 1.26 70
2 7 7 2 7
10 1.84 10 1.47 10 1.55
7
10 1.30 70 50
2 7 7 2 7
10 2.27 10 1.47 10 1.93
70 50
3.99 2.42 4.41 2.48
70 50
3.41 2.40 3.22 2.69
70 50