Recently, the quality of food solar dried has been associated to solar irradiance, irradiation and UV-light. Different materials used as covering materials in direct solar dryers had different optical properties, thus, different quality should be expected in solar food drying. The objective of this study was to compare two direct solar dryers builder with different covering materials: Direct Solar Drying with Poly (methyl methacrylate) (DSD), and Greenhouse Solar Drying with polyethylene (SGD), based on their three aspects: chemical composition, heat-mass transference, economic-environmental effect. Chemical composition was evaluated as the total phenolic compounds (TPC), flavonoids (TF) anthocyanins (TA) and antioxidant activity (AA) of blackberry pulp (Rubus spp). Dehydrated blackberry pulp contains lower TA than raw samples because TA is sensitive to solar irradiation and UV solar irradiation. TPC, TF and AA averages do not show significant differences among all the drying processes. Evaluation of energy and heat transfer in the evaporative and diffusive periods of the drying technologies led to an assessment of the return of investment period for DSD and SGD technologies for different power sources. The results suggest payback periods between 39 and 121 months, considering only the 6 months of harvest duration without using the solar dryers the rest of the year.

最近，太阳能干燥食品的质量与日照度，辐照度和紫外线有关。用作直接太阳能干燥机的覆盖材料的不同材料具有不同的光学特性，因此，在太阳能食品干燥中应预期会有不同的质量。这项研究的目的是比较两种具有不同覆盖材料的直接太阳能干燥机制造商：采用聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯（DSD）的直接太阳能干燥和采用聚乙烯的温室太阳能干燥（SGD），基于它们的三个方面：化学成分，热质传递，经济环境效应。以黑莓果肉（Rubus spp）的总酚化合物（TPC），类黄酮（TF）花青素（TA）和抗氧化活性（AA）评估化学成分。脱水的黑莓果浆比原始样品的TA含量低，因为TA对太阳辐射和UV太阳辐射敏感。TPC，TF和AA平均值在所有干燥过程中均未显示明显差异。对干燥技术的蒸发和扩散期间的能量和热传递的评估，导致对不同电源的DSD和SGD技术的投资时期回报的评估。结果表明投资回收期在39到121个月之间，