+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Date post: 08-Apr-2015
Category:
Upload: lavanya-kumar-jain
View: 803 times
Download: 19 times
Share this document with a friend
109
CHC410 Internship Project Report Submitted by Lavanya Kumar Jain 2007CH10069, Student Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Delhi, New Delhi, India Phone: +91 9953181003; Email: [email protected] Faculty Supervisor Anurag S. Rathore Associate Professor Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Delhi, New Delhi, India Phone: +91-9650770650; Email: [email protected] Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Trident Complex, Raikot Road, Hauz Khas, New Delhi Barnala, Punjab, India-110016 India-148101 http://www.iitd.ac.in Tel: +91-161-5039999, Fax: +91-161-5038800 http://www.tridentindia.com
Transcript
Page 1: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

CHC410

Internship Project Report

Submitted by

Lavanya Kumar Jain

2007CH10069, Student

Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Delhi, New Delhi, India

Phone: +91 9953181003; Email: [email protected]

Faculty Supervisor

Anurag S. Rathore

Associate Professor

Chemical Engineering Department, IIT Delhi, New Delhi, India

Phone: +91-9650770650; Email: [email protected]

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Trident Complex, Raikot Road, Hauz Khas, New Delhi Barnala, Punjab,

India-110016 India-148101 http://www.iitd.ac.in Tel: +91-161-5039999, Fax: +91-161-5038800

http://www.tridentindia.com

Page 2: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

2 | P a g e

INTERNSHIP SUMMARY

Name of the Company: Abhishek Industries Ltd (Trident Group)

Internship period: 17th

May – 16th

July 2010

No. of days: 52

Location: Dhaula complex, Barnala, Punjab

Department: Production

Unit: Paper (PPR)

Project Supervisor: Mr. Sumit Jindal, FLE, Recovery 2, PPR

Abhishek Industries Limited

Phone: +91 9878997774; Email: [email protected]

Project Title: Reduction of chemical losses in Recovery

ABSTRACT

The project at Abhishek Industries is concerned to analysing ORE and identifying sources of soda loss

in the whole process and suggesting measures to reduce soda loss. The streams carrying alkali are

studied and all the possible exit points for alkali are identified. The major sources of loss are

individually studied and various measures are suggested to increase their performance and reduce

soda loss. Experiments are conducted at several occasions to analyze the affects of suggested

measure.

The method of ORE calculation is also corrected and automation is suggested at several points for

better control of process. ORE is calculated based on individual losses from soda loss sources.

Summary of the Report:

1. IDENTIFICATION OF ALKALI EXIT POINTS: Recovery 2 plant and Pulp mill are rigorously

analyzed and all the possible exit points of alkali from the system are identified. Process flow

diagram for each unit is provided.

2. FMEA ON ALKALI EXIT POINTS: Results are derived from FMEA and a final list of prominent

alkali loss points is made based on Perito hypothesis.

3. WBL SAMPLING TO STUDY VARIATION IN COMPOSITION: WBL samples are analysed at

frequent intervals to study variation in actual WBL composition to value used for ORE

calculation. Error in SRE and ORE values due to above variation is calculated.

4. COMPOSITE SAMPLING AND AUTOMATION: Collection tank design for composite sampling is

proposed. Advantages of Automation and suppliers of online analyzers are provided.

5. MUD FILTER ORE LOSS: ORE loss from mud filter is calculated from lime consumption and %

composition data of mud cake. Loss from Grifts and stones is also calculated.

Page 3: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

3 | P a g e

6. MUD FILTER PROCESS PARAMETER ANALYSIS: Process parameters that affect performance of

mud filter are identified and analyzed. Experiments are done to test vat solid composition,

homogeneity in vat mixture. Impact of displacement washing on alkali content in mud cake is

discussed.

7. CAUSTICIZING CONTROL MODELS: 3 causticizing control models, including Advanced control

are discussed to maintain consistent causticizing efficiency and avoid excess lime addition.

8. PULP MILL SODA CARRYOVER ORE LOSS: From production data and Soda as kg/MT TTA as

Na2O, total soda loss and loss in ORE is calculated.

9. PULP MILL PRODUCTION VERSUS SODA CARRYOVER LOSSES: Soda carryover with production

for SFL and WFL are plotted and the trend is analysed.

10. WASHER EFFICIENCY FOR SFL AND WFL: Project in SFL and WFL to reduce soda loss are

discussed.

11. TOTAL WASHABLE ALKALI AS SODA CARRYOVER IN WFL: Elemental analysis of filtrate of

thoroughly washed pulp is done to calculate total washable alkali of total alkali as soda

carryover in WFL.

12. PULP MILL REJECT ORE LOSSES: Total soda loss and total washable soda loss calculations are

done for reject streams in SFL and WFL. ORE loss through reject stream is calculated using

these data.

13. REJECT STREAM WASHING SOLUTIONS: Reject streams in SFL and WFL are thoroughly studied

with sufficient flow diagrams. Solutions are suggested to reduce soda loss through reject.

14. ESP PROCESS PARAMETER ANALYSIS: Various process parameters are identified and analysed

that affect the performance of ESP.

15. COLLECTION EFFICIENCY CALCULATION: Ash collection rate from ESP is calculated from AMT

density sampling at specific intervals of time. Inlet gas flowrates are noted during the sampling

period. With other parameters constant collection efficiency is calculated for the ESP.

16. DUST COMPOSTION: ESP dust composition and Chlorine Enrichment Factor (CEF) and

Potassium Enrichment Factor (PEF) are calculated.

17. POTASSIUM AND CHLORIDE PURGING: The problem of high content of chlorides and

potassium in the system is discussed. Methods for their removal and systems based on Ash

Leaching are provided.

18. ORE LOSS DATA: Tentative % Loss in ORE from all the loss points is presented. ORE based on

individual losses is calculated.

Page 4: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

4 | P a g e

INDEX

Contents Page Number

Internship Summary 2

Abstract 2

Abhishek Industries 6

1. Introduction 11

1.1. Paper making process 11

1.2. Paper plant at Abhishek Industries 11

1.3. Recovery units 12

1.4. ORE 16

2. Objective 17

3. Project Plan 17

4. Alkali Exit Points 18

4.1. Recovery 2 17

4.2. SFL 24

4.3. WFL 26

4.4. Significant permanent loss points 26

5. WBL Sampling 30

5.1. ORE fluctuations 30

5.2. WBL sampling 32

5.3. Composite sampling 36

5.4. Automation 38

6. Mud Filter 39

6.1. Lime Mud ClariDisc system 39

6.2. Mud Filter ORE loss 40

6.3. Process parameter testing 41

6.4. Causticizing control models 48

7. Pulp mill soda carryover 49

7.1. Pulp mill soda carryover ORE loss 49

7.2. Pulp mill production versus soda carryover losses 50

7.3. Washer efficiency for SFL and WFL 54

8. Pulp mill Reject 56

8.1. Pulp mill Reject ORE losses 56

8.2. Reject stream washing 59

9. ESP 63

9.1. BHEL ESP system 64

9.2. Process parameters 65

9.3. Collection Efficiency 70

9.4. Dust Composition 74

9.5. Potassium and Chloride Purging 75

9.6. ESP ORE Loss 77

10. ORE Loss data 78

Page 5: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

5 | P a g e

11. Future Work 79

12. References 80

List of Experiments 81

List of Tables 81

List of Figures 82

Appendix A (Data Tables) 84

Page 6: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

6 | P a g e

ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES

Trident Group commenced its operations in 1985 with Single Super Phosphate (capacity 66000

tonnes per annum) & Sulphuric Acid (capacity 33000 tonnes per annum). Since then, the business of

the group witnessed a wide range of diversification and expansions and today, Trident Group is a Rs.

25 billion global conglomerate with an employee headcount of more than 10,000, and providing

indirect employment to 20,000 people. Therefore, Trident is a pioneer at implementing sound

Corporate Governance as the basic management principle.

Abhishek Industries Limited (AIL) is the flagship company of the Trident Group and deals in Yarns,

Towels, Papers, and Chemicals & Energy. The company is among the top 5 global terry towel giants

of the world. It is one of the world's largest agro-based paper manufacturers and one of the largest

yarn producers in India. Abhishek Industries has 3 plants located at Dhaula (Punjab), Sangheda

(Punjab) and Budhni (Madhya Pradesh).

At present the company is having following manufacturing facilities:

• Yarns 12592 spindles

• Yarn Processing 6825 tonnes/ day

• Open end Yarn 1920 rotors

• Terry Towels 268 looms

• Writing & Printing Papers 400 tonnes/ day

• Sulfuric Acid 100000 tonnes/ annum

In brief,

Leadership: Mr. Rajinder Gupta, CEO and MD

Ownership: Public limited company with Public shareholding 36.52 %, and Foreign shareholding

6.32 %.

Total Assets: Rs. 25 billion

CAGR: 30%

Employees: Over 10,00 (Indirect employment to 20000 people)

Exports: 47% of Net Sales across 65 countries

Financial Performance, (Rs. millions)

PERIOD ENDED MAR 2009 MAR 2010

NO. OF MONTHS 12 12

GROSS TURNOVER 15456 19768

NET SALES 13981 18034

EXPORTS 6862 8392

GROSS PROFIT (PBIDT) 2605 3560

NET PROFIT AFTER TAX (530) 565

NET WORTH 4463 5028

FIXED ASSETS (GROSS BLOCK) 21032 23388

CURRENT ASSETS (NET) 2365 5285

Page 7: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

7 | P a g e

MUSKAAN, SHAAN, SGA

Several employee engagement initiatives including Total Quality Assurance (TQA), Kaizen

(MUSKAAN), SHAAN, Small Group Activity (SGA) etc have been taken up for creating a quality driven

culture through the involvement of ground level employees. These initiatives focused on building

awareness and developing skills in Kaizen, 5 S, etc.

MUSKAAN

MUSKAAN is company’s own nomenclature for KAIZEN. This initiative has been undertaken so as to

ensure that members in the Organization undertake small improvements of permanent nature in

their own work area and department. The focus of the initiative is to help reduce strain and extra

effort, improve quality and reduce inconsistencies and any wasteful activity. The Organization is now

moving towards Phase II and the focus is towards facilitating innovation, creativity and process

improvements.

SHAAN

Like Muskaan, SHAAN is company’s own nomenclature for 5 S. The program has been initiated to

harness the benefits of increased efficiency due to reduced time in looking for tools and equipment,

improved quality, work standardization, reduced changeover time, and improved safety, reduced

space requirements & storage costs, reduced machine down time and simplified work environment,

etc. Regular trainings are being imparted to our members on the same.

SGA

Small Group Activities have been undertaken by members for improving the process capability in all

the production and support processes and to make the processes more efficient.

ABHISHEK YARN, TEXTILES, PAPER, SAP, COGEN, UTILITY

ABHISHEK YARNS

The Yarn Division of the company manufactures both Combed and Carded yarn in addition to

polyester cotton and PVA yarn. Besides catering to the captive consumption by Home Textiles

Division, the Yarn Division has developed a significant presence in the export market with its quality

products.

Currently, AIL has 125,952 spindles operating at almost 100% capacity producing value added yarns

such as yarn made from Egyptian cotton, PVA fiber and Bamboo fiber. Also, AIL has upgraded its

existing spinning facilities through automation and increasing the value adding processes.

Abhishek Yarns supplies the processed yarns to the following mills: Arvind Mills; Elegant Overseas;

Kapoor Industries; Abhitex Industry; Chemitax, Belgium; SPL Industries; Aashima Industries and Alok

Industries.

ABHISHEK TEXTILES

The Home Textiles Business of the company is the prime source of Export Earnings and International

Recognition to the company. AIL supplies its Toweling products to world’s biggest and most reputed

companies and retail chain stores like Wal*Mart, Luxury Linens, JC Penney, Target, BBB, Chris

Page 8: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

8 | P a g e

Madden, TJ Maxx, Franco and Sears. Among the top 20 retailers of the world, AIL has business

relationship with at least 11 of them. The company has a significant presence in the mid and high

segment of the Terry Towel market, with an impressive product profile. Currently, the division

operates with an installed capacity of 268 looms of towels and 6825 TPA of processed yarn. Ultra-

modern German, Swiss and Italian technology has been adopted in order to provide consumers the

products that they cherish.

ABHISHEK PAPER

The Paper Division of Trident was commissioned in 1992 and presently the production capacity is

400 TPD. The focus is on manufacturing Writing and Printing grades of paper for different segments.

The unit specializes in using Wheat Straw, an Agro residue as its prime raw material, thus facilitating

an eco-friendly environment and maintaining the ecology of the place.

Applications:

a. Calendar & Diary Printing

b. Business & Computer Stationery

c. Multicolor High End Printing & Publishing

d. Base paper for coated papers

e. Novels publication

f. High Speed Photocopying

g. Laser & Inkjet Printing

h. Multipurpose Office Use Paper

At Abhishek Industries there are two pulp units, Pulp 1 for producing pulp from wood i.e. wood fiber

line (WFL) and Pulp 2 for producing pulp using wheat straw i.e. straw fiber line(SFL). The SFL unit is

the biggest pulp producing unit in the world that utilizes wheat straw as a raw material.

SAP (SULFURIC ACID PLANT)

Sulfuric acid is produced from sulfur, oxygen and water via the conventional contact process (DCDA)

In the first step, sulfur is burned to produce sulfur dioxide.

S (s) + O2 (g) → SO2 (g)

This is then oxidized to sulfur trioxide using oxygen in the presence of a vanadium (V) oxide catalyst.

2 SO2 (g) + O2 (g) → 2 SO3 (g) (in presence of V2O5)

The sulfur trioxide is absorbed into 97-98% H2SO4 to form oleum (H2S2O7), also known as fuming

sulfuric acid. The oleum is then diluted with water to form concentrated sulfuric acid.

H2SO4 (l) + SO3 → H2S2O7 (l)

H2S2O7 (l) + H2O (l) → 2 H2SO4 (l)

Page 9: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

9 | P a g e

The production of SAP is 100000 tonnes/ annum

Figure 1. Sulfuric Acid Plant (SAP) at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex

COGEN

The units of Abhisehk Industries meet their own energy demands. There are 5 COGEN units with 2

large units of 20 MW each and 3 units of combined capacity of 9.34 MW. The total power generation

capacity is 49.34 MW. The requirement is 40 MW. Steam is the main product of these units and is

converted to different temperature and pressure conditions depending on requirements.

Figure 2. COGEN-1, a 20 MW unit at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex

Page 10: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

10 | P a g e

UTILITY

There is waste water treatment plant and effluent treatment plant in the Dhaula industrial campus.

It reduces BOD and COD of streams and protects environment. Also, a demineralised water plant

supplies demineralised water to all the units.

Figure 3. Demineralised water plant at Abhishek Industries at Dhaula complex

In brief,

BUSINESS UNIT CAPACITY PRODUCTION

(2010)

REVENUE

(Rs. millions)

Abhishek Home Textiles (AHT)

1998 374 looms 29,152 tonnes 8,482.5

Abhishek Yarn

1992

224,448 spindles and

1,920 rotors 48,115 tonnes 6,187.0

Abhishek Paper

2002 175,000 tpa 123,629 tonnes

4,951.8 Abhishek Chemicals

1985 1,00,000 tpa 84,038 tonnes

COGEN Power 50 MW 328,534 Mwh units

Page 11: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

11 | P a g e

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. PAPER MAKING PROCESS

Paper making process involves pulping of the raw material. Pulping can be carried out through

chemical pulping or mechanical pulping. For chemical pulping there could be various processes, viz.

Kraft process, sulphite process and soda pulping. Sulfite pulping is carried out between pH 1.5 and 5,

depending on the counterion to sulfite (bisulfite) and the ratio of base to sulfurous acid. The pulp is

in contact with the pulping chemicals for 4 to 14 hours and at temperatures ranging from 130 to 160

°C.1 In the Soda-AQ process, anthraquinone (AQ) may be used as a pulping additive to decrease the

carbohydrate degradation. The soda process gives pulp with lower tear strength than other chemical

pulping processes.2

Kraft process is the most common applied process and entails treatment of raw fiber with a mixture

of sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide, known as white liquor, that break the bonds that link lignin

to the cellulose. Cooking produces black liquor that contains lignin fragments, carbohydrates from

the breakdown of hemicellulose, sodium carbonate, sodium sulfate and other inorganic salts. A

Recovery plant process black liquor and produces White liquor to be reused in the digester for

cooking.

Figure 1.1. Paper making process

1.2. PAPER PLANT AT ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES

The paper plant at Abhishek Industries is based on Kraft Process. The capacity of paper plant is 400

MT/day. However, current production is 420 MT/day. The raw material used for making paper is a

mixture of wheat straw and wood chips in ratio of approximately 70:30. By using the wheat straw as

1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfite_process

2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soda_pulping

Page 12: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

12 | P a g e

raw material, Abhishek industries has saved thousands of trees for being used to make paper, but

using wheat straw has its own disadvantages in purity and paper quality. It also faces problem of

limited research on plant processes.

A paper plant basically consists of a Pulp Mill, Paper Machine and Finishing section and utility as

Recovery. At Abhishek Industries there are 2 pulp mills, SFL and WFL. Straw Fiber Line (SFL)

processes wheat straw and produces pulp, with present production around 230 tonnes of bleached

pulp per day. Wood Fiber Line (WFL) processes wood chips and produces pulp, with present

production around 100 tonnes of bleached pulp per day. There are 2 paper machines, Paper

Machine 1 and Paper Machine 2. There are 2 Recovery Units, Recovery 1 and Recovery 2.

Figure 1.2. Paper making flowchart3

1.3. RECOVERY UNITS

The first step of chemical recovery is the evaporation process, which increases the concentration of

solids from approximately 15 percent to more than 60 percent. The concentrated slurry contains

approximately 50 percent organic solids and 6 percent total sulfur in the form of sodium sulfate

3 Mckean W. and Jacobs R. S. (1997) Wheat Straw as a Paper Fiber Source

Page 13: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

13 | P a g e

(Na2SO4) and sodium thiosulfate (Na2S2O3) and is placed into a recovery boiler. The organic solids are

burned for energy while the inorganic process chemicals, also known as smelt, flow through the

floor of the recovery boiler to be recausticized.4

Quick Lime

To Energy

Lime Mud

Figure 1.3. Chemical Recovery Cycle

At Abhishek Industries, Recovery 1 has a capacity of around 130 tonnes of dry solids fired per day

and Recovery 2 has a capacity of 400 tonnes of dry solids fired per day.

1.3.1. MULTIPLE EFFECT EVAPORATORS

Figure 1.4. Multiple effect evaporators

4 M. Brongers, A. J. Mierzwa. Pulp and Paper

Raw Material

[Wheat Straw/ Wood Chips]

Pulping

Weak Black Liquor

(WBL)

[10-12 % Solids]

White Liquor

Evaporator

Heavy Black

Liquor (HBL)

Combustion

[Recovery Boiler] Green Liquor

Causticizer Lime

Kiln

Limestone Makeup

Steam

Page 14: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

14 | P a g e

The first step in recovering the chemicals from the black liquor is evaporation. This removes excess

water from the black liquor and maximizes the fuel value for the recovery furnace.

1.3.2. RECOVERY BOILER

Figure 1.5. Recovery Boiler Process flow

Figure 1.6. Recovery Boiler

Page 15: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

15 | P a g e

A recovery boiler consists of heat transfer surfaces made of steel tube; furnace-1, superheaters-2,

boiler generating bank-3 and economizers-4. The steam drum-5 design is of single-drum type. The

air and black liquor are introduced through primary and secondary air ports-6, liquor guns-7 and

tertiary air ports-8. The combustion residue, smelt exits through smelt spouts-9 to the dissolving

tank-10.

1.3.3. RECAUSTICIZING PLANT

Figure 1.7. Recausticizing Process flow

Recausticizing is the process used to transform the inorganic smelt recovered from the recovery

boiler into white liquor so that the chemicals may be recycled. The recycled inorganic chemicals are

discharged as molten smelt from the recovery boiler and then dissolved using water to form green

liquor. Any unwanted substances are precipitated out. Lime is then added to the clarified green

liquor to produce sodium hydroxide (NaOH) from the remaining sodium carbonate (Na2CO3). The

resulting solution (white liquor) contains sodium hydroxide, sodium sulfide (Na2S), and a solid phase

of calcium carbonate (lime mud). Before the white liquor is recycled back to the digester, the white

liquor is clarified further to remove the lime mud.5

The main necessities for Soda Recovery Plant are:

a. Maintaining required Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Biochemical Oxygen Demand

(BOD) levels as per Environmental regulations.

COD of inlet liquor to recovery plant is in lakhs, while regulations are 300 for COD and 30 for

BOD.

b. Recovery of caustic soda (NaOH) that results in cost benefits.

c. Energy production as steam by burning organic material in black liquor, lignin.

5 M. Brongers, A. J. Mierzwa. Pulp and Paper

Page 16: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

16 | P a g e

1.4. OVERALL RECOVERY EFFICIENCY

As the purpose of a Soda Recovery unit is to recover caustic soda from Black liquor, it calculates the

total efficiency of caustic soda recovered through a generalized term as Overall Recovery Efficiency

(ORE) which incorporates caustic soda losses both at pulp mills and in recovery units.

ORE = SRE X PME

Soda Recover Efficiency,

SRE = (WL supply to Pulp mill) ± (Recovery stock difference)

WBL Received

Pulp Mill Efficiency,

PME = (WBL received by recovery) ± (WBL stock difference of Pulp mill)

(WL supply to Pulp mill) + (Purchased caustic) ± (WL stock difference of PM)

1.4.1. ORE CALCULATIONS

Basis: TTA as Na2O

A WL used in cooking in SFL and WFL

B OS of WBL+WL in SFL and WFL

C OS of WBL+SCBL+GL+WWL+WL in Rec-1

D OS of WBL+HBL+GL+WWL+WL in Rec-2

E CS of WBL+WL in SFL and WFL

F CS of WBL+SCBL+GL+WWL+WL in Rec-1

G CS of WBL+HBL+GL+WWL+WL in Rec-2

J Purchased caustic used in cooking in SFL and WFL

P = B + C + D

Q = E + F + G

R = A + [J x 31/40]

Loss % = ���� ��∗�����

� � ∗ 100

ORE % = 100 – Loss %

The present ORE varies between 94-95 % on a general basis for the paper plant at Abhishek

Industries.

Glossary:

Total Titrable Alkali (TTA):

Na2CO3, NaOH, Na2S

Total Active Alkali (TAA):

NaOH, Na2S

OS: Opening Stock

CS: Closing Stock

WL: White Liquor

WBL: Weak Black Liquor

SCBL: Semi-Conc. Black

Liquor

HBL: Heavy Black Liquor

GL: Green Liquor

WWL: Weak White Liquor

Page 17: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

17 | P a g e

2. OBJECTIVE

The objective of the project is to identify the potential sources of soda loss in the whole stream

including both pulp mill and recovery units and present some solutions for further increment in ORE.

3. PROJECT PLAN

17.05.10 -

25.05.10

• Induction programme

26.05.10 -

03.06.10

• WBL Sampling

04.06.10 -

15.06.10

• Mud Filter

16.06.10 -

24.06.10

• Pulp mill soda carryover

25.06.10 -

01.07.10

• Pulp mill Reject

02.07.10 -

08.07.10

• ESP

09.07.10 -

12.07.10

• ORE Loss data

Page 18: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

18 | P a g e

4. ALKALI EXIT POINTS

4.1. RECOVERY 2

Rotary Lime Kiln

Steam, 460 °C, 64 kg/cm2

Figure 4.1. Process Flow Diagram of Recovery 2

4.1.1. EVAPORATOR

Before WBL is sent to evaporation it is filtered to remove fibers (cellulose) that has come along it. It

is necessary to remove it else it will scale the evaporator. These fibers are recycled and some

amount is thrown away with some amount of Black liquor. Before feeding into evaporator WL is

added to WBL to reduce the viscosity and fraction.

LP steam is preferred in evaporators. First it’s difficult to deal with very high pressures. More

importantly latent heat, λ of steam decreases with increasing temperature or high pressure. It is

advisable to feed the steam at saturation temperature as retention time of steam in evaporator is

less and latent heat transfer is more effective.

Effects 1(A, B, C) and 2(A, B, C) have high pressure, while rest work in vacuum. Inlet temperature and

pressure of steam is 140 °C, 2.5 kg/cm2. Pressure in the last effect is 0.14 kg/cm2. It is feed backward

system of evaporator. The concentration in outlet of 3rd effect is 25% solids. Concentration in inlet of

7th effect was 10% solids. In 2nd effect concentration rises to 36% solids. In 1st effect it rises to 65-

67% solids. As there is significant change in concentration in first 2 effects there is considerable rise

in viscosity. Thus, first 2 effects are divided into 3 separate bodies. Same steam is fed in 3 bodies of

an effect, while flow of Black liquor is continuous and simultaneous. First body is called wash, second

as intermediate and third as product. Vapors from each effect sent to condenser. It contains same

amount of soda.

WBL from pulp mill

WBL Storage Tank

Evaporator, 7 effects

and 11 bodies

[10% to 65%, 170T/hr]

HBL Storage Tank

[65-67% solids]

Recovery Boiler

[Total heat transfer

area = 7283 m2]

Smelt Dissolving

tank, Green liquor

[97-102 GPL Na2O

TTA]

Causticizing

[110 MT/day] Lime Mud

WL Storage Tank

Pulp Mill

Page 19: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

19 | P a g e

LP Steam

Thrown Out

Washing

Figure 4.2. Evaporator Process Flow Diagram

The identified exit points of soda for permanent losses are:

a. Vibratory Screens reject

b. Vapors to Condensers

c. Washing/Scaling

d. Tank overflows

e. Seepages and Pump leakages

Figure 4.3. 7 effect-11 body Evaporator at Recovery 2 at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex

Black liquor

[11-12% solids]

Vibratory

Screens [5 Nos]

Fibres BL Pit

WBL Storage

Tank [3 Nos]

WWL

(to reduce

viscosity)

Evaporator

[7 effects]

Vapor to

condenser

[40 ppm] BL Pit

HBL Storage Tank

[65-67% solids] Boiler

Page 20: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

20 | P a g e

Figure 4.4. Condensers at Recovery 2 at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex

4.1.2. RECOVERY BOILER

The Recovery boiler has 3 main parts:

a. Black liquor burning and Green liquor collection

b. Flue gas flow and heat transfer

c. Demineralised and deaerated water flow and heat transfer

4.1.2.1. Black liquor firing

HBL from storage tank is preheated to reach a desired temperature of 120 °C in an indirect heater. If

indirect heater is not able to heat it, direct heater is used. The liquor stream distributes into 6

nozzles. With pressurized steam, BL is sprayed in furnace from these 6 nozzles. Initially fuel oil is

used by its own component, lignin. Green liquor falls at the bottom and is collected in Main

Dissolving Tank (MDT). It is highly concentrated and very hot at temperature of around 1000 °C.

Precautions are taken in dissolving GL. As it’s very hot direct addition of water will convert it into

steam and explode. Thus, hot water/steam jets hit the fine stream of GL falling and dilute it. Instead

of using hot water, WWL from Mud Washer 1 is used to dilute to GL that helps to maintain desired

concentration.

Page 21: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

21 | P a g e

MDT has outlet for vapors. The soda carryover is very limited as WWL is sprinkled at 2 points in

exiting vapors that settles solid particles in the stream.

4.1.2.2. Flue gas flow

Air is pumped in furnace at 3 levels, viz. Primary, Secondary and Tertiary. ID fan sucks the air from

furnace and pushes it through chimney. Flue gas generated on burning lignin travels through

superheaters, boiler bank and then economizer. It passes through ESP and exits from chimney top.

4.1.2.3. Water and steam system

Demineralised water is pumped in deaeration tank. The water is then pumped in economizer, then

to boiler bank and then to superheaters to produce to produce high pressure superheated steam,

which is sent to power boiler. The water from deaeration tank is passed through economizer and not

through superheaters as flue gas has enough heat to provide latent heat to water, which if otherwise

had been passed through superheaters would have extracted heat from high temperature flu gas.

Thus, final temperature of the steam would be less and exit temperature of the flue gas would be

high.

Steam

120 °C

Hot Water

Flue Gas

Steam

DM water

Chimney

Soot Blower

Figure 4.5. Recovery Boiler Process Flow Diagram

HBL Storage Tank

[65-67% solids] Indirect

heater

Direct

heater

Furnace

[6 firing guns]

3 air pumps

(Pri-Sec-Ter)

Main

dissolving tank

MDT Outlet

GL Storage

Tank

Pri - Sec -Ter

Superheaters Boiler

Bank

Economiser – 1, 2

ESP De-aeration

Tank

Stem Drum

Power

Boiler

[HP

steam,

460 °C, 63

bars]

Ash Mixing Tank

WWL

Fuel

Oil

WWL

Page 22: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

22 | P a g e

The identified exit points of soda for permanent losses are:

a. Flue gas carryover [ESP]

b. MDT Outlet

c. Dregs washer [Recovery 1]

d. Washing/Scaling

e. Tank overflows

f. Seepages and pump leakages

4.1.3. RECAUSTICIZING PLANT

Raw material to this unit is Green Liquor. The GL feed contains sodium carbonate in large proportion

and some amount of sodium hydroxide and sulfide. The basic reaction that occurs in a Lime slaker is:

Ca(OH)2 + Na2CO3 ↔ 2 NaOH + CaCO3

85% of equilibrium concentration is achieved in slakers. The rest is achieved in causticizers that

provide retention time for completion of reaction.

Rakes installed in clarifier and mud washers are bottleneck in the process. To prevent rake failure

automatic rake lifting mechanism is put where rakes lift automatically on reaching certain limit

loads. Rakes do not disturb the settling of suspended limestone and silica particles in clarifier and

mud washer as it rotates at speed of 7 rev/min. Its purpose is to prevent deposition at the bottom

and maintain continuous flow underflow concentrated with solids. The vacuum based rotating disk

mud filters remove calcium carbonate as mud cake. It is fed to lime kiln to produce lime. Lime kiln is

not functional at present as cost of furnace oil fed to lime kiln is higher than purchased lime. Lime

kiln is 76m long and 4m wide huge rotary kiln.

Figure 4.6. Rotary lime kiln

Page 23: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

23 | P a g e

Agitator

Rake Steam Agitator

White liquor

clarifier

Overflow Steam Rake Overflow

Underflow Lime Mud [25 GPL as TTA as Na2O]

Washer 1

Overflow Hot Water

Underflow Rake

To Pulp Mill [5 GPL as TTA as Na2O]

LMW 2 Hot Water

Underflow

Hot Water

Overflow

Thrown Out

Limestone Lime to Lime bin

Furnace Oil

Figure 4.7. Recausticizing Process Flow Diagram

The identified exit points of soda for permanent losses are:

a. Sludge/Mud cake carryover

b. Grits and stones carryover

c. Washing/Scaling

d. Tank overflows

e. Seepages and leakages

Recovery Boiler

GL Storage

Tank [32-34%

TTA as Na2O]

GL

Heater

Slaker Rake

Classifier

Lime (Lime bin)

Grits

[Stones &

Silica]

Causticizer (4)

[100°C, each gives retention

time of 27-30 min]

WL Storage

Tank [95 GPL

TTA as Na2O]

Weak White Liquor

Storage Tank

[25 GPL as TTA as Na2O]

MDT

Lime Mud

Storage Tank

Mud Filter

(Vacuum disk filters)

[Pr = 550mmHg]

Sludge Cake

Lime Kiln

Page 24: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

24 | P a g e

4.2. STRAW FIBER LINE (SFL)

Figure 4.8. Wet Washing in SFL

Figure 4.9. Digester in SFL

Page 25: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

25 | P a g e

Figure 4.10. Pulp washing in SFL

Brownstock washing is a counterflow washing system with pulp and liquor stream flowing in

opposite direction. The nomenclature of washer is based on pulp flow.

The amount of water used for pulp washing is constrained at both lower and upper ends:

a. For Recovery, more water for washing implies more load on evaporator and thus higher

steam consumption. Thus, Recovery would like to reduce water content.

b. For pulp mill, more water for washing implies better washing or more soda recovery. Thus,

pulp mill would prefer high water usage.

Soda carryover in pulp has 2 major disadvantages for pulp mill:

a. Reduced paper quality, i.e. Brightness.

b. Increased use of chemicals in bleaching and further processes in paper making.

The identified exit points of soda for permanent losses are:

a. Soda carryover with pulp

b. Reject from HD cleaner

c. Reject from Delta Knotter through Vibratory Screen 1

d. Reject from Delta Screen through Vibratory Screen 2

e. Reject from Centricleaner

Page 26: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

26 | P a g e

f. Carryover with Blow Tank vapors

g. Washing/Scaling

h. Tank overflows

i. Seepages and Leakages

Figure 4.11. Digester Feed Belt in SFL at Abhishek Industries, Dhuala complex

4.3. WOOD FIBER LINE (WFL)

The process stream for WFL is almost similar with slight modifications. WFL has 3 Batch digesters as

compared to continuous digesters in SFL. There are 5 simultaneous washers and no press. The

different in the reject streams is discussed in details later.

The identified exit points of soda for permanent losses are:

a. Soda carryover with pulp

b. Reject from Vibratory Screen

c. Reject from Pressure Screen through centricleaner and vibratory screen

d. Carryover with Blow Tank vapors

e. Washing/Scaling

f. Tank overflows

g. Seepages and Leakages

4.4. SIGNIFICANT PERMANENT LOSS POINTS

On discussion with experts, as well as workers employed in the company and on the basis of general

information derived from case studies of paper plants around the globe, significant permanent loss

points are identified as follows:

a. Mud cake carryover

b. Flue gas carryover

c. Reject streams in Pulp mill

d. Grifts and stones

e. Soda carryover with pulp

f. Carryover with Blow Tank vapors

Page 27: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

27 | P a g e

To confirm the identified loss points, FMEA (Failure Mode Effectiveness Analysis) statistical analysis

was performed.

Experiment: FMEA on identified exit points of soda for permanent losses

Objective: To identify the significant permanent loss points

Survey Format:

FMEA on identified exit points of soda for permanent losses

Cause

No. Cause Severity Occurrence Detection RPN No.

C1 Soda carryover with pulp

C2 Mud cake carryover

C3 Reject streams in Pulp mills

C4 Flue gas carryover [ESP]

C5 Carryover with Blow Tank

vapors

C6 MDT Outlet

C7 Dregs washer [Recovery 1]

C8 Grifts and stones

C9 Seepages and Leakages at WFL

C10 Vibratory Screens reject in

Evaporator

C11 Washing/Scaling at WFL

C12 Washing/Scaling in

Recausticizing

C13 Vapors to Condensers

C14 Washing/Scaling in Evaporator

C15 Seepages and Pump leakages

in Evaporator

C16 Seepages and Pump leakages

in SFL

C17 Tank overflows in WFL

C18 Tank overflows in Evaporator

C19 Washing/Scaling in Recovery

Boiler

C20 Tank overflows in Recovery

Boiler

C21 Seepages and Pump leakages

in Recovery Boiler

C22 Tank overflows in

Recausticizing

C23 Seepages and Pump leakages

in Reausticizing

C24 Washing/Scaling at SFL

C25 Tank overflows in SFL

*Fill with 1, 3 or 9

Page 28: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

28

| P

ag

e

Ob

serv

ati

on

ta

ble

an

d R

esu

lts:

F

ME

A o

n id

en

tifi

ed

exi

t p

oin

ts o

f so

da

fo

r p

erm

an

en

t lo

sse

s

Ca

use

No

. C

au

se

P1

P

2

P3

P

4

P5

P

6

P7

P

8

P9

R

PN

No

.

Act

ua

l

%

Cu

mu

lati

ve

%

C1

So

da

ca

rryo

ver

wit

h

pu

lp

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

72

9

24

.95

15

2

4.9

51

5

C2

M

ud

ca

ke c

arr

yove

r 7

29

2

43

7

29

7

29

7

29

2

43

7

29

7

29

7

29

6

21

2

1.2

55

4

6.2

06

5

C3

R

eje

ct s

tre

am

s in

Pu

lp

mill

s

24

3

72

9

72

9

81

7

29

7

29

2

43

7

29

7

29

5

49

1

8.7

90

6

64

.99

71

C4

Fl

ue

ga

s ca

rryo

ver

[ESP

] 2

43

7

29

8

1

72

9

81

7

29

7

29

7

29

7

29

5

31

1

8.1

74

6

83

.17

17

C5

C

arr

yove

r w

ith

Blo

w

Ta

nk

vap

ors

8

1

24

3

24

3

27

8

1

27

2

7

81

8

1

99

3

.38

84

8

86

.56

02

C6

M

DT

Ou

tle

t 8

1

9

81

2

43

2

43

8

1

27

2

7

3

88

.33

33

3

.02

33

9

89

.58

36

C7

D

reg

s w

ash

er

[Re

cove

ry 1

] 2

43

8

1

81

9

8

1

9

3

9

27

6

0.3

33

3

2.0

65

03

9

1.6

48

6

C8

G

rift

s a

nd

sto

ne

s 8

1

27

2

7

81

8

1

81

3

3

9

4

3.6

66

7

1.4

94

58

9

3.1

43

2

C9

Se

ep

ag

es

an

d

Lea

kag

es

at

WFL

9

8

1

9

9

24

3

3

9

3

3

41

1

.40

33

1

94

.54

65

C1

0

Vib

rato

ry S

cre

en

s

reje

ct in

Eva

po

rato

r 8

1

81

2

7

9

81

3

9

3

9

3

3.6

66

7

1.1

52

31

9

5.6

98

8

C1

1

Wa

shin

g/S

cali

ng

at

WFL

9

2

7

9

27

8

1

27

9

9

2

7

25

0

.85

56

8

96

.55

45

C1

2

Wa

shin

g/S

cali

ng

in

Re

cau

stic

izin

g 8

1

3

81

3

1

9

2

7

9

3

24

.11

11

0

.82

52

5

97

.37

97

C1

3

Va

po

rs t

o C

on

de

nse

rs

27

1

2

7

9

1

27

8

1

27

9

2

3.2

22

2

0.7

94

83

9

8.1

74

6

Page 29: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

29

| P

ag

e

C1

4

Wa

shin

g/S

cali

ng

in

Eva

po

rato

r 2

7

27

9

2

7

27

9

2

7

3

3

17

.66

67

0

.60

46

8

98

.77

92

C1

5

See

pa

ge

s a

nd

Pu

mp

lea

kage

s in

Eva

po

rato

r

27

3

3

2

7

9

9

27

3

3

1

2.3

33

3

0.4

22

13

9

9.2

01

4

C1

6

See

pa

ge

s a

nd

Pu

mp

lea

kage

s in

SFL

3

9

3

1

2

7

3

9

9

3

7.4

44

44

0

.25

48

9

9.4

56

2

C1

7

Ta

nk

ove

rflo

ws

in

WFL

9

1

9

3

3

9

3

3

1

4

.55

55

6

0.1

55

92

9

9.6

12

1

C1

8

Ta

nk

ove

rflo

ws

in

Eva

po

rato

r 1

3

1

9

1

1

9

1

3

3

.22

22

2

0.1

10

29

9

9.7

22

4

C1

9

Wa

shin

g/S

cali

ng

in

Re

cove

ry B

oil

er

1

9

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

2.1

11

11

0

.07

22

6

99

.79

46

C2

0

Ta

nk

ove

rflo

ws

in

Re

cove

ry B

oil

er

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0.0

34

23

9

9.8

28

9

C2

1

See

pa

ge

s a

nd

Pu

mp

lea

kage

s in

Re

cove

ry

Bo

ile

r

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0.0

34

23

9

9.8

63

1

C2

2

Ta

nk

ove

rflo

ws

in

Re

cau

stic

izin

g 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

.03

42

3

99

.89

73

C2

3

See

pa

ge

s a

nd

Pu

mp

lea

kage

s in

Re

au

stic

izin

g

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0.0

34

23

9

9.9

31

5

C2

4

Wa

shin

g/S

cali

ng

at

SFL

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0.0

34

23

9

9.9

65

8

C2

5

Ta

nk

ove

rflo

ws

in S

FL

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0.0

34

23

1

00

10

0

Page 30: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

30 | P a g e

Conclusion:

The finally identified significant permanent loss points based on Perito hypothesis are as follows:

a. Mud cake carryover

b. Flue gas carryover [ESP]

c. Reject streams in Pulp mill

d. Soda carryover with pulp

Experiment 4.1. FMEA on identified exit points of soda for permanent losses

5. WBL SAMPLING

5.1. ORE FLUCTUATIONS

SRE and PME fluctuate between 80 to 120 on per day basis and thus, ORE fluctuates. With

approximately steady process, the losses are also steady. Thus, fluctuations in SRE, PME and ORE

values should be low. The reasons identified are:

a. Measurement error of WBL GPL: There is high variability in WBL GPL values. Sampling

followed is Grab sampling which doesn’t normalize these variations.

b. Increase or decrease in processed liquor: When more liquor is processed losses associated

with processing are higher, thus ORE decreases. Increase in processing liquor can be

associated with decrease in stock. Thus, when stock increases, ORE increase and vice versa.

The process streams are sampled once per shift for GPL TTA as Na2O. These values when multiplied

with the stock volumes give stock data as TTA as Na2O. The same data is used for ORE calculation.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920212223242526

Average RPN Np.

Cumulative %

Page 31: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

31 | P a g e

The GPL values fluctuate drastically during a shift. Thus, even small errors in measurement get

magnified when multiplied with stock values and produce incorrect SRE, PME and ORE values.

Period PME SRE ORE

Feb-09 102.69 89.58 91.99

Mar-09 96.41 93.87 90.50

Apr-09 94.93 98.55 93.55

May-09 95.33 97.86 93.29

Jun-09 98.88 94.99 93.93

Jul-09 98.64 94.53 93.24

Aug-09 108.11 85.91 92.88

Sep-09 103.6 90.62 93.88

Oct-09 101.39 93.98 95.29

Dec-09 103.04 90.5 93.25

Jan-10 103.89 91.44 95.00

Feb-10 103.26 92.29 95.30

Mar-10 97.22 97.22 94.52

Apr-10 94.77 101.29 95.99

May-10 92.49 102.42 94.73

Jun-10 88.42 106.68 94.33

Average 98.94 95.10 93.85

Coeffici

ent of

Determi

nation

0.08 0.233 0.564

Table 5.1. PME, SRE and ORE over Time

Figure 5.3. ORE versus Time plot

The low coefficient of determination, R2 values signify high unexplained variations in SRE, PME and

ORE values.

y = -0.0092x + 466.33

R² = 0.0802

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Dec-08 Mar-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 May-10 Aug-10

PME

PME

Linear (PME)

y = 0.0164x - 560.5

R² = 0.2338

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Dec-08 Mar-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 May-10 Aug-10

SRE

sre

Linear (sre)

y = 0.0065x - 167.26

R² = 0.5649

90.00

91.00

92.00

93.00

94.00

95.00

96.00

97.00

Dec-08 Mar-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 May-10 Aug-10

ORE

ORE

Linear (ORE)

Figure 5.1. PME versus Time plot

Figure 5.2. SRE versus Time plot

Page 32: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

32 | P a g e

5.2. WBL SAMPLING

For Soda recovery unit, the minimum GPL concentration is for incoming WBL, and thus highest

volume. Also the GPL values of incoming WBL stream fluctuates heavily. Discrete sampling neglects

these fluctuations and is based on assumption of uniform flow. Under failure of such assumption,

the error is further highly magnified due to huge volumes. WBL GPL measurement was identified to

be the bottleneck in SRE and thus ORE calculation.

More frequent WBL samples were taken and analyzed with generally accepted GPL for a day to

measure the variation in total WBL TTA and thus, variation in actual ORE to calculated ORE.

Experiment: Frequent sampling of WBL from SFL and WFL for measuring TTA & RAA as

Na2O and %solids for 2 days

Objective: To study variation in WBL TTA, RAA and % solids. Analyzing effect of error in

WBL GPL value on ORE

Observation table and Results:

For WFL:

Day 1: 26th May 2010

(Na2O GPL)

Time Sample Stream % Solids RAA Factor

600 1 WFL 17.02 6 2.5

900 2 WFL 16.56 7.3 2

1030 3 WFL 16.9 7.94 1.5

1200 4 WFL 16.18 7.62 2

1400 5 WFL 15.24 7 2.5

1630 6 WFL 12.2 5.39 5.5

2200 7 WFL 15.86 7.3 8

AVG 15.2275 6.762292

STD DEV 1.55111 0.848317

Avg selected for a

day GPL 16.04 6.766667

Error (Positive)

0.8125 0.004375

Avg Stock m3

1350 1350

Total Error MT 1.096875 0.005906

With Composite sampling the error is zero

Avg for Pulp Mill 13 6

Error (Positive)

-2.2275 -0.76229

Total Error (g)

-

3007125

-

1029094

Page 33: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

33 | P a g e

Day 2: 27th May 2010

(Na2O GPL)

Time Sample Stream % Solids RAA TTA Factor

600 1 WFL 15.8 6.6 31.7 2.5

830 2 WFL 17.57 8.25 41.98 2

1030 3 WFL 14.4 7.93 36.39 1.5

1200 4 WFL 15.7 7.61 36.81 2

1400 5 WFL 14.5 6.6 31.7 2.5

1630 6 WFL 15.07 8.56 38.75 5.5

2200 7 WFL 15.48 6.6 34.4 8

AVG

15.44229 7.353958 35.79125

STD DEV

0.986578 0.784098 3.457622

Avg selected for

a day GPL 15.26 6.6 32.6

Error (Positive)

-0.18229 -0.75396 -3.19125

Avg Stock m3

1350 1350 1350

Total Error MT

-0.24609 -1.01784 -4.30819

With Composite sampling the error is zero

Avg for Pulp

Mill 13.07 6 34.67

Error (Positive)

-2.37229 -1.35396 -1.12125

Total Error (g)

-

3202594

-

1827844

-

1513688

R² = 0.4123

R² = 0.0053

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 2 4 6 8

% Solids

RAA

Linear (RAA)

Linear (RAA)

Page 34: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

34 | P a g e

For SFL:

Day 1: 26th May 2010

(Na2O GPL)

Time Sample Stream % Solids RAA Factor

600 1 SFL 11.37 7 3

900 2 SFL 11.32 7.3 1.5

1030 3 SFL 10.92 7.61 1.5

1200 4 SFL 10.81 6.98 2

1400 5 SFL 10.63 7.6 2.5

1630 6 SFL 11.18 6.66 5.5

2200 7 SFL 11.45 7.6 8

AVG 11.19813 7.239792

STD DEV 0.291906 0.350651

Avg selected for

a day GPL 11.15 7.4

Error (Positive)

-0.04812 0.160208

Avg Stock m3

3300 3300

Total Error MT -0.15881 0.528688

With Composite sampling the error is zero

R² = 0.1801

R² = 0.0042

R² = 0.004

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 2 4 6 8

% Solids

RAA

TTA

Linear (% Solids)

Linear (RAA)

Linear (TTA)

R² = 0.0066

R² = 0.0108

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 2 4 6 8

% Solids

RAA

Linear (% Solids)

Linear (RAA)

Page 35: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

35 | P a g e

Day 2: 27th May 2010

(Na2O GPL)

Time Sample Stream % Solids RAA TTA

600 1 SFL 11.43 7 23.1

830 2 SFL 11.4 7.61 25.14

1030 3 SFL 11.06 7.3 22.75

1200 4 SFL 10.92 6.98 22

1400 5 SFL 10.29 7.3 23.1

1630 6 SFL 10.8 7.61 22.94

2200 7 SFL 12.03 7.7 24.3

AVG 11.29938 7.459583 23.47729

STD DEV 0.512186 0.275402 0.97089

Avg selected for

a day GPL 11.25 7.333333 23.5

Error (Positive)

-0.04937 -0.12625 0.022708

Avg Stock m3

3300 3300 3300

Total Error MT -0.16294 -0.41663 0.074937

With Composite sampling the error is zero

*While calculating Average GPL, weighted average is taken with weights equal to

time gap between present and next sample.

Calculation:

Considering for 27th

May, total error in Na2O TTA = -4.308 (WFL) + 0.075 (SFL) MT

= -4.233 MT

����� � ! "#$#%&#' = (3300 ∗ 23.477 + 1350 ∗ 35.791 11000 = 125.792 2�

Thus, % error in WBL received = 3.365 %

�ℎ45, % #""�" %7 89: $��$4���%�7 = �; �125.792< − ; �121.559<� �125.792 ∗ 100 = 3.5 %

R² = 0.0006

R² = 0.3019

R² = 0.0011

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 2 4 6 8

% Solids

RAA

TTA

Linear (% Solids)

Linear (% Solids)

Linear (RAA)

Linear (TTA)

Page 36: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

36 | P a g e

Individual errors in WFL and SFL streams are:

SFL = 8.92 %

WFL = 0.1 %

Assuming PME as 97 %, the error in ORE = 3.4 %

Conclusion:

Very low R2 values imply the high variability in WBL streams TTA, RAA and % solids value.

Also, the analysis of error in sampling results 3.5 % in SRE and 3.4 % error in ORE. Thus, it is

immediate requirement to adopt some other sampling method for correct calculation of SRE,

PME and ORE and avoid per day fluctuations.

Experiment 5.1. Frequent sampling of WBL from SFL and WFL

5.3. COMPOSITE SAMPLING

There are different kinds of sampling methods:

a. Grab Sampling / Discrete Sampling

Advantage: Gives values of specific types of unstable parameters; No infrastructure cost

Disadvantage: For highly varying values results can be very misleading due to huge errors;

Human intervention

b. Grab and composite sampling

Advantage: Higher precision in sampling; No infrastructure cost

Disadvantage: High labor hours are required; Human intervention

c. Composite sampling

Advantage: High precision in sampling; No human intervention

Disadvantage: Moderate infrastructure cost; Issues of tank fouling

d. Automation/online analyzer

Advantage: High precision in sampling; Discrete values available instantly; Better process control

Disadvantage: High infrastructure cost

Grab sampling is presently followed by QC lab to analyze the samples. It has advantage that it gives

values of specific types of unstable parameters like temperature at a given moment of time. But as

experimental results have shown it gives large errors as fluctuations are large.

In composite sampling sample is collected continuously with constant flow rate in a collection tank

through sampling pipe. After every shift the liquor collected in sampling tank can be analyzed and

average value can be noted down.

Page 37: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

37 | P a g e

The following design of the collection tank is proposed:

Agitator

Figure 5.4. Proposed collection tank design for WBL composite sampling

After every shift sample is collected and the tank is emptied in BL pit. It is then washed with hot

water to prevent fouling.

Advantage and disadvantage: It has a limitation that composite liquor will be cooler than current

measurement temperature i.e. 70 °C. Thus, new basis needs to be chosen. However, it has

advantage that error in measurement will be negligible. Also the tank is designed keeping in mind

the fouling problem.

Significant design parameters:

a. Hot water washing: To remove fouling due to deposition of WBL solids on cooling of WBL in

the tank, hot water washing needs to be done for few moments after draining the tank.

b. Valve head: it provides liquid for point temperature measurement.

c. Agitators: With time WBL cools and solids start settling, thus, agitation helps in maintaining

uniformity of the sample. In case, tank volume is reduced due to fouling then hot incoming

liquor will float at top and may exit from overflow without mixing, thus, agitation helps in

proper mixing.

d. Composite sampling point: It is provided at an intermediate point where concentration can

be assumed equal to general volume concentration.

e. Temperature measurement device: It helps to record temperature of inlet stream.

f. Discrete sampling point: Discrete samples can be taken, when required.

g. Overflow outlet: In case of overflow or if due to fouling inside tank volume is reduced, the

liquor flows to drain through overflow outlet.

SFL/WFL

receive

Discrete Sampling Point

Overflow

outlet

Valve head

Temp. measurement device

Hot

Water

Sampling

Point

Drain

Page 38: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

38 | P a g e

5.4. AUTOMATION

Online analyzers can be installed at WBL stream pipes that give value of TTA, RAA, temperature etc

almost instantly.

It gives value of measured variable almost instantly and can exactly measure the total amount of

incoming black liquor as TTA. There are negligible errors and there is no human intervention.

It is suggested to have a service tank where both SFL and WFL streams mix in desired proportion.

Online analyzer measures the stream composition and helps to maintain desired flow rates to attain

desired ratio. If streams are uniform the recovery process can be standardized easily and attainable

performance can be reached. Also, operators can operate processes more uniformly as incoming

stream composition is uniform.

A list of suppliers for online Analyzers is prepared:

a. Duralyzer-NIR [Canmark]

b. Process NIR Analyzer [MODCON]

c. kajaaniALKALi Alkali analyzer [Metso]

d. Process Analytical systems

e. Online TCC/TC Analyzer [AppliTOC]

f. In-line Process Refractometer [Liquids Solids Control, Inc]

A standard of minimum deviation in WBL measurements should be targeted.

Page 39: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

39 | P a g e

6. MUD FILTER

Figure 6.1. Lime mud filter flowsheet

6.1. LIME MUD CLARIDISC SYSTEM

Figure 6.2. Vacuum disk filter sketch Figure 6.3. Vacuum disk filter in operation

ClariDisc system consists of 3 meter diameter filter discs consisting of 18 separate sectors each

mounted on the central barrel. The sectors are made of 316L stainless steel perforated plate and

dressed with an underbag to improve liquor flow and an outer shrunk on filter bag of special

polypropylene material.

The outer layer of the cake is scrapped off the filter disc with a scrapper; the inner layer of lime mud

is retained on the filter discs to act as a filtration precoat. HiPac system breaks the precoat and helps

in its removal to prevent cake hardening.

Page 40: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

40 | P a g e

6.2. MUD FILTER ORE LOSS

The total amount of mud cake produces is not known, but the % composition of it is known. By using

lime consumption data and % composition of mud cake, total quick lime produced can be calculated,

The Mud cake sampling is done on composite basis to minimize the errors. Lime consumption data is

taken from shift in-charge of both the units. The soda loss from Mud filters is calculated based on

these data.

Recausticizing reaction:

CaO + H2O → Ca(OH)2 [74] + Na2CO3 → CaCO3 [100] + 2 NaOH

In reaction between Ca(OH)2 and Na2CO3, Ca(OH)2 is the limiting reagent. Thus, the whole CaO that

converts to Ca(OH)2 can be assumed to convert to CaCO3.

As the concentration of impurities in mud cake is very low, the dry solids in mud cake can be

assumed to be 100% limestone.

CaO → CaCO3

Initial A 0

Final yX/100 (A – yX/100) * (100/56)

X = mass of dry solids

y = % CaO in dry mud

Now, (A – yX/100) * (100/56) = X; Thus, X can be calculated

And if z = % TTA as Na2O, Total TTA as Na2O = Zx/100

Data table 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, and 6.4 in Appendix A

The combined loss from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 of the total soda loss through MUD CAKE in

MUD FILTER is 7.232 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 through MUD CAKE in MUD FILTER

is 0.677 %.

The combined loss from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 of the total soda loss through GRIFTS and

STONES is 0.269 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 through GRIFTS and STONES is

0.035 %.

The combined loss from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 of the total soda loss through MUD CAKE in

MUD FILTER and GRIFTS and STONES is 7.232 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE from Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 through MUD CAKE in MUD FILTER

and GRIFTS and STONES is 0.677 %.

A standard of 0.3% TTA as Na2O and 1% Ca(OH)2 by weight in Mud cake should be sought.

Page 41: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

41 | P a g e

6.3. PROCESS PARAMETER TESTING

Based on information collected through journals and case studies and on discussion with experts, a

few process parameters that could affect the performance of mud filter were analyzed. The

parameters are:

a. Vacuum

b. Precoat mud cake thickness

c. Vat solid composition

d. Vat solid concentration

e. % Moisture content

f. Homogeneity in vat mixture

g. Temperature

h. Disc RPM [Retention time]

i. Pre-Scrapper washing [Displacement washing]

j. Proper disc cleaning/Disc maintenance

6.3.1. VACUUM

For proper process the pressure should be close to 550 mmHg vacuum. The vacuum is manually

controlled through vacuum pump. The pressure kept is 530-560 mmHg, which is ideal requirement.

6.3.2. PRECOAT MUD CAKE THICKNESS

Less thickness would imply better effective pressure and better moisture control. The operation is

done with mud cake thickness of 10 mm approximately. The designed value is 12 mm.

6.3.3. VAT SOLID COMPOSITION

Vat solid sampling is done to quantify the % TTA as Na2O, % CaO and % Moisture in the mud cake.

The results are discussed later. Minimum % TTA, % CaO and % Moisture are desirable.

6.3.4. VAT SOLID CONCENTRATION

In ideal condition, the vat solid concentration should be 15-18% solids. There are 3 points of dilution

of feed from Mud Washer 2. First, a hot water stream dilutes the feed to 1.12-1.13 kgpl; this is

maintained by an autovalve. Second, the hot water from HiPac system, used to scrap mud cake from

filter, dilutes vat. Third, to maintain vat level hot water dozers are placed at bottom, however, they

rarely open. Vat solid concentration sampling is done and results are discussed later.

6.3.5. % MOISTURE CONTENT

Lower the moisture implies lower the dissolved alkali content in a sample of mud cake. The %

moisture in mud filter in recovery 1 is around 50, while in recovery 2 is 45. It is considerably high and

should be reduced to 35-40%. Moisture content could be reduced by lowering disc RPM or lowering

cake thickness

Page 42: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

42 | P a g e

6.3.6. HOMOGENEITY IN VAT MIXTURE

As pressure is uniform across disc, homogeneity of vat solution is important for uniform functioning

of disc. Vat homogeneity sampling is done and results are discussed later.

6.3.7. TEMPERATURE

Ideally, vat temperature should be 72-75 °C. Temperature results are discussed later.

6.3.8. DISC RPM

Disc RPM is kept at 85%. It could be decreased to provide sufficient time for moisture absorbance.

6.3.9. DISPLACEMENT WASHING

The rising side of the disc should be washed with hot water to facilitate displacement washing and

thus reduction content in the mud cake. Samples are taken at different flow rates of washing; results

are discussed later.

6.3.10. PROPER FILTER DISC CLEANING

As silica content is high in vat, around 8% as compared to wood based plants as 3%, choking of pores

is more frequent. Cleaning is done with hot water once in every shift. Once in every 2 or 3 weeks

cleaning is done though acid.

Experiment: Mud cake (from Mud filter of recovery 2) sampling to test % Moisture, % TTA

as Na2O and % Ca(OH)2. Grits tested for % TTA as Na2O and % Ca(OH)2.

Objective: To analyze variation in mud cake composition that could adversely affect

mud filter performance. Also, to confirm the values of % TTA for ORE

calculations

Observation table:

Time Sample W1 W2 W3 Co

de

%

Moist

ure

% TTA as Na2O % Ca(OH)2

Dry

wt m

%

TTA

Dry

wt p %

Units Hours g G g % g %

930 1MC 47.87 65.7 57.57 W 45.6 11.03 1.7 0.44 4.38 6.7 5.27

1100 2MC 49.02 71.21 61.62 5 43.21 8.32 1.4 0.45 3.79 4.5 3.84

1500 3MC 48.32 70.4 60.15 M 46.42 9.58 1.5 0.44 4.92 4.1 2.85

930 1G 49.01 103.89 93.28 N 23.97

0.32

2.02

1100 2G 50.14 69.18 65.14 E 21.22 0.93 3.2

1500 3G 47.28 71.28 65.65 3 23.47 0.91 3.4

Page 43: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

43 | P a g e

Conclusion:

`The % TTA is around 0.45, approximately same as generally reported by QC laboratory.

However, % Ca(OH)2 value is highly different and highly varying as well. The excess presence

of lime decreases cake porosity and thus higher amount of alkali is retained in mud cake.

The inefficient process of lime addition in slaker results in highly varying concentrations of

lime in the liquor that adversely affects the performance of the Mud filter. Causticizing

control models are discussed later.

Experiment 6.1. Mud cake sampling from Mud filter of Recovery 2

Experiment: Vat and Mud sampling to test for % Solids, Twaddell, GPL TTA as Na2O, %

Ca(OH)2 and Temperature at different zones in vat and mud filter

Objective: To analyze vat solid concentration, homogeneity in vat and mud cake and

temperature of vat

Theory:

The vat samples were taken at 3 different zones from vat to check for homogeneity. Zone A is

deadzone with little turbulence, zone B is central volume, and zone C is highly turbulent just

above feed inlet.

AP BP

A C

Disk

Vat B

INLET

Page 44: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

44 | P a g e

Observation table and Results:

Vat Homogeneity Sampling

Time Sample % Solid Twaddell TTA

(Na2O GPL)

Ca(OH)2

(%)

Temp

(°C)

Avg %

Solid

1045 A1 12.42 18 1.84 3.23

65 13.83 1045 B1 15.69 24 2.27 2.15

1045 C1 13.4 19 1.97 2.55

STD DEV 12.12 15.80 10.88 20.65

1300 A2 19.57 24 2.46 1.61

65 26.57 1300 B2 29.34 26 2.4 1.42

1300 C2 30.81 22 2.4 1.42

STD DEV 22.99 8.3 1.43 7.39

1600 A3 23.36 27 2.21 2.02

64 21.68 1600 B3 21.05 26 2.77 1.55

1600 C3 20.64 27 2.58 1.9

STD DEV 6.76 2.16 11.30 13.39 31.04

Mud Cake Homogeneity

Time Sample % Moisture TTA, % Na2O

1045 AP1 41.88 0.347

1045 BP1 42.73 0.357

STD DEV 1.42 2.00

1300 AP2 46.7 0.483

1300 BP2 49.96 0.447

STD DEV 4.76 5.47

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4

Sample 1

Sample 2

Sample 3

% Solid

0

1

2

3

4

0 2 4

Sample 1

Sample 2

Sample 3

% Ca(OH)2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0 2 4

Sample 1

Sample 2

Sample 3

TTA (GPL)

Page 45: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

45 | P a g e

Conclusion:

a. The % Solid variation is huge. It should remain between 15-20 % for proper moisture

absorbance.

The last 2 observations were taken with autovalve maintaining density of 1.135 kgpl,

and first observation was taken with 1.12 kgpl.

Density (solid phase) of limestone = 2.25 gcm-3

; thus, K = 1.8

Thus, for 1.135 kgpl, %Solid = 21.41 % & for 1.12 kgpl, % Solid = 19.28 %

b. There is contrasting difference in concentrations at different zones in vat and mud cake.

The difference in vat concentration result in non-uniform mud cake formation on mud

filter and thus, performance of the filter suffers. However, the deviations are minimized

over mud cake as disk passes through huge volumes. The %Standard Deviations are

calculated that give standard deviation over average of that quantity. A proper agitation

system needs to be installed to maintain homogeneity and reduce alkali loss. Such

system is installed in Drum filter of Recovery 1.

c. The temperature of vat solution is 65 °C, but it should be 72-75 °C.

The feed to the Mud filter is received from LMS tank, which is dozed by hot water to

maintain required density. LMS tank has supply of steam from power boiler (Pr. 4.55

atm and temp. 150 °C). With complete opening of steam valve the temperature inside

LMS tank is 70 °C, thus it cannot be further increased. There is no steam line in Mud

filter. The hot water is received from evaporator at approximately 67-70 °C. The reason

of loss in temperature from LMS to vat is due to presence of no insulation of feedline to

Mud filter. By providing insulation temperature can be kept at around 70 °C.

41.8842.73

46.7

49.96

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

0 1 2 3

Sample 1

Sample 2

0.347 0.357

0.4830.447

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 1 2 3

Sample 1

Sample 2

> = ? @@ − 1A @ = '#75%�B �C 5��%' Dℎ�5#

Glossary:

Twaddell: It helps to measure density instantly. To convert °Tw to kg/l or gcm-3

, remove the

decimal and 1 before it. Multiply the rest with 2. E.g. 1.12 kg/l = 24 °Tw.

% Solid

and Density: 8 % 8��%' = > �E�FE � G = '#75%�B, HI

J

Experiment 6.2. Vat and Mud sampling to test homogeneity from Mud filter of Recovery 2

Page 46: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

46 | P a g e

A washer system is installed in the mud filter that is used to clean the disk. The same washer can be

used with less flowrate during process for displacement washing. The experiment was conducted

with different flowrates of washing.

Experiment: Calculation of % TTA as Na2O at different flowrates of washing

Objective: To analyze effect of displacement washing on Mud cake at different

flowrates of washing

Observation table and Results:

Day 1

Sample Flowrate

(%)

%

Moisture

TTA

(NA2O

%)

%

Reduction

Cumulative

% Reduction

A1 0 50.63 0.543

A2 20 48.97 0.34 37.39 37.38

Day 2

Sample Flowrate

(%)

%

Moisture

TTA

(NA2O

%)

%

Reduction

Cumulative

% Reduction

B1 0 48.58 0.796

B2 10 48.76 0.442 44.47 44.472

B3 20 48.54 0.478 39.94 -8.14

B4 30 48.41 0.486 38.94 -1.67

B5 40 48.28 0.423 46.85 12.96

Day 3

Sample Flowrate

(%)

%

Moisture

TTA

(Na2O %

)

%

Reduction

Cumulative

% Reduction

C1 1 43.52 0.61

C2 10 43.71 0.51 16.39 16.39

C3 20 45.76 0.55 9.83 -7.84

C4 30 46.78 0.5 18.03 9.09

C5 40 47.4 0.56 8.19 -12

Page 47: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

47 | P a g e

*Composite sampling is done to minimize variation due to non-homogeneity.

Conclusion:

There is considerable reduction in alkali content on displacement washing. However, the

curve is not linearly decreasing as assumed; thus, there is no considerable difference on

increasing the flowrate. There is no major difference in % Moisture content of mud cake on

washing, thus, most of the water reabsorbed by mud cake is extracted back with filtrate.

The effects of displacement washing can be increased by increasing the porosity of the cake.

Lime mud cake has very less porosity and thus, displacement washing is not much effective.

Considerable decrease in moisture content on displacement washing can be achieved by

using Filter Aids. Principle types of Filter Aids include Diatomaceous Earth (DE), Perlite,

cellulose and Rice hull ash. Each type has its own characteristics, advantage and

disadvantages. NALCO supplies filter aids for mud washing in lime mud filters with a product

code NALCO 7560. It is a surfactant based filter aid, which is currently used by BILT and ITC.

The feed is very small as 200g/T i.e. 0.02% by wt. Thus, there is no increase in impurity of

mud cake. Also it evaporates at 800 °C and thus, will not stick on walls of lime kiln, if

operated.

Experiment 6.3. Displacement washing in mud filter of Recovery 2

48.58

48.76

48.54

48.41

48.2848.2

48.4

48.6

48.8

0 20 40 60

% Moisture - B

% Moisture

0.796

0.442 0.478 0.4860.423

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 20 40 60

% TTA Na2O - B

% TTA

0.610.51 0.55

0.50.56

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 20 40 60

% TTA Na2O - C

% TTA

43.5243.71

45.76

46.7847.4

43

44

45

46

47

48

0 20 40 60

% Moisture - C

% Moisture

Page 48: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

48 | P a g e

6.4. CAUSTICIZING CONTROL MODELS

In the slaker the amount of lime to be added depends upon causticizing efficiency required and feed

TTA (as Na2O). Presently, the operator measure the °Tw in inlet GL and keeping the °Tw difference to

a certain value depending upon GL TTA in slaker outlet, adds lime. The lime addition is manually

controlled and temperature variation provides information to operator when to stop adding further

lime.

GL TTA °Tw difference

92-93 8

85-86 9-10

The objective is to maintain TAA above 80. But causticizing efficiency is compromised and this leads

to excess lime addition in the system.

6.4.1. CAUSTICIZING EFFICIENCY

TTA is measured in lab once in 2 hours (as done presently). TTA and density (Twaddell) are used to

calculate a conversion factor for converting TTA values into density (Twaddell) and vice versa. The

conversion factor is calculated form results in the previous 8 or 24 hours. Now, based on Goodwin’s

curve the degree of causticizing is decided. The sulfidity can be taken as 5% (based on general

observation).

TTA (Na2O GPL) 80 85 90 95 100 105

CE% 89 88 87 87 86 85

The NaOH (GPL Na2O) can be related to continuous temperature difference measurement and

density (Twaddell) measurement, verified by titration results.

6.4.2. GREEN LIQUOR CONTROL AND CAUSTICIZING CONTROL

In this model the incoming GL is made uniform by WWL dozing. The TTA is maintained at around 85

GPL as Na2O. The corresponding CE% is 88 and NaOH GPL as Na2O is 70. Particular lime feeding rate

can be noted based on temperature and density. Uniform lime feeding needs to be done.

6.4.3. ADVANCED CAUSTICIZING CONTROL WITH KAJAANI ALKALI

In causticizing control there are 2 different control loops, GL TTA control and WL CE% control. GL

TTA control stabilizes the TTA value of GL flowing to the slaker. WL CE% control stabilizes the

causticizing degree of produced white liquor. The CE% of lime milk is used as a short feedback signal

to the dT controller.

Recovery 2 doesn’t have a proper lime feeding system and it’s presently manually controlled. In

order to switch on to advanced control, the feeding system needs to be automated as well.

Metso Kajaani Causticizing Control and Kajaani Alkali Analyzers are 2 such causticizing control

models supplied by Metso.

Page 49: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

49 | P a g e

7. PULP MILL SODA CARRYOVER

7.1. PULP MILL SODA CARRYOVER ORE LOSS

Data table 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 in Appendix A

The loss through SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP in SFL from total soda losses is 36.75 %.

The loss through SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP in WFL from total soda losses is 32.84 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in SFL as SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP is 4.975 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in WFL as SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP is 5.427 %.

The combined loss through SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP in SFL and WFL from total soda losses is

69.59 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in SFL and WFL as SODA CARRYOVER WITH PULP is 5.108 %.

The losses from Soda carryover with pulp in SFL and WFL lines are huge and solutions must be

sought for reduction in these losses. The solutions are discussed later in this section

A standard of 8-10 kg/MT of TTA as Na2O as soda carryover with pulp in both SFL and WFL

individually needs to be targeted.

Page 50: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

50 | P a g e

7.2. PULP MILL PRODUCTION VERSUS SODA CARRYOVER LOSSES

Soda carryover as kg/MT TTA as Na2O for WFL is very high. It is suggested that as the WFL production

has increased, Soda carryover as kg/MT has also increased manifold. Soda carryover versus

Production curves are plotted for SFL and WFL and their relationship is studied.

Data table 7.4 and 7.5 in Appendix A

For WFL,

Figure 7.1. Production versus Time in WFL

Figure 7.2. Soda carryover as kg/MT of unbleached pulp versus Time in WFL

y = 0.5626x - 21966

0

200

400

600

800

1000

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Production

Production

Linear (Production)

y = 0.0859x - 3437.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Soda carryover

Soda carryover as kg/MT

Linear (Soda carryover as

kg/MT)

Page 51: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

51 | P a g e

Figure 7.3. Production and Soda carryover versus Time in WFL

Figure 7.4. Soda carryover versus Production in WFL

y = 0.5626x - 21966

y = 0.0859x - 3437.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Weekly Production

Soda Carryover as

kg/MT

Linear (Weekly

Production)

Production and Soda Carryover

y = 0.0301x - 2.0499

R² = 0.1547

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

500 550 600 650 700 750 800

Soda Loss vs Production

% Soda Loss vs Production

Linear (% Soda Loss vs

Production)

Page 52: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

52 | P a g e

For SFL,

Figure 7.4. Production versus Time in SFL

Figure 7.5. Soda carryover as kg/MT of unbleached pulp versus Time in SFL

y = 1.2705x - 49723

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Production

Production

Linear (Production)

y = -0.0013x + 68.687

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Soda carryover

Soda carryover as kg/MT

Page 53: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

53 | P a g e

Figure 7.6. Production and Soda carryover versus Time in SFL

Figure 7.8. Soda carryover versus Production in SFL

A standard of constant soda carryover with production is targeted.

y = 1.2705x - 49723

y = -0.0013x + 68.6870

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

03-Dec 22-Jan 13-Mar 02-May 21-Jun

Production

Soda Carryover as kg/MT

Linear (Production)

Production and Soda Carryover

y = -0.0009x + 17.369

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900

Soda Loss vs Production

% Soda Loss vs Production

Linear (% Soda Loss vs

Production)

Page 54: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

54 | P a g e

Observation (WFL):

The production has risen over last few months but soda loss as kg/MT has also risen very swiftly over

the same period.

Observation (SFL):

There has been an increase in production, but the soda loss has remained constant over the same

period.

Conclusion:

As soda loss as kg/MT is rising with production, it shows the maximum capable load of washers has

been reached. Further increase in production affects the washer performance. It is necessary that

steps should be taken to improve the efficiency of washers to make them capable of handling the

increased load. Else, new washers need to installed in the process line to reduce the load on

individual washers.

On the other hand, for SFL, the operation is within the maximum capable load of washers and even

an increase in production doesn’t affect the washers’ performance.

7.3. WASHER EFFICIENCY FOR SFL AND WFL

Figure 7.9. Brown Stock Washer

Page 55: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

55 | P a g e

Presently, Soda carryover as kg/MT of unbleached pulp TTA as Na2O for SFL is around 15 and for WFL

is around 24. It is necessary to further reduce the soda loss as it contributes approximately 70% to

the total soda loss in the system. Various steps can be taken to reduce soda loss from washers.

Presently 2 projects are going on, one in each, in SFL and WFL to reduce soda loss by increasing the

efficiency of washers. Solutions given in WFL are maintaining proper vat concentration, proper

nozzle (for displacement washing) flow rate, maintenance of nozzles and proper vacuum. In SFL, the

project is focused on increasing the vacuum in the washers, which are inefficient presently.

7.3.1. TOTAL WASHABLE ALKALI AS SODA CARRYOVER IN WFL

It was suggested that the increase in loss in WFL is due to increase in bound soda loss and it cannot

be retrieved. Elemental analysis of washed pulp is conducted to calculate washable alkali in the

sample. Thus, % of bound alkali to total alkali is calculated.

Experiment: Elemental analysis of filtrate of thoroughly washed pulp from final washer in

WFL to calculate total washable alkali as kg/MT of dry unbleached pulp TTA

as Na2O.

Objective: To calculate total washable alkali in a sample of pulp from final washer

Observation table and Results:

Sample Wet

Wt

Dry

Wt

Vol. of

Solution Density

Wt. of

solution Na TWA

PPM g as

Na2O

kg/MT TTA

as Na2O

g g ml g/ml g

TWA1 10.701 1.626 1000 0.9758 975.48 15.8 0.0154 0.0208 14.79

Total soda carryover as kg/MT TTA as Na2O for same sample is 24.19 and % Moisture is 84.8.

Thus, % washable alkali = 62.87 of total soda carryover in unbleached pulp.

Conclusion: A large percentage of total soda carryover in unbleached pulp is washable

and can be retrieved.

Experiment 7.1. Analysis of total washable alkali in washed pulp in WFL

Page 56: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

56 | P a g e

8. PULP MILL REJECT

8.1. PULP MILL REJECT ORE LOSSES

8.1.1. TOTAL SODA LOSS CALCULATIONS

To calculate soda losses from pulp mill reject the amount of reject and its composition is required to

be known.

There are 3 reject streams in SFL. The total reject is 1.2 % of unbleached pulp. The ratio of reject

from these exit streams is:

Screen 1 (Thick mesh) : Sand Box : Screen 2 (Thin) = 0.35 : 0.15 : 0.50

There are 2 reject streams in WFL. The total reject is 1 % of unbleached pulp. The ratio of reject from

these exit streams is:

Vibratory Screen (Thick) : Pressure Screen (Thin) = 0.42 : 0.58

Samples were collected from the reject streams in SFL and WFL respectively with weights from

different streams in the ratio of their reject ratio.

Experiment: Reject stream analysis for TTA as Na2O in kg/MT of dry sample rejected

Objective: To calculate TTA as Na2O in kg/MT for ORE loss calculation

Observation table and Results:

For SFL,

Sample % Moisture TTA (as Na2O in kg/MT)

Wet wt Dry wt m TTA

% g g ml kg/MT

D11 82.29 11.988

6.8 49.2

D12 82.77 11.405 7.2 56.27

D21 80.72

1.381

52.79

D22 81.31 3.221 52.76

For WFL,

Sample % Moisture TTA (as Na2O in kg/MT)

Wet wt Dry wt m TTA

% g g ml kg/MT

D11 68.71 8.32

13.56 80.06

D12 63.02 7.97 16.10 83.95

D21 64.10

4.597

52.79

D22 68.21 2.068 52.76

TTA as Na2O in kg/MT for SFL is 52.76 and for WFL is 81.82.

Experiment 8.1. Reject stream analysis for TTA in WFL and SFL

Page 57: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

57 | P a g e

8.1.2. TOTAL WASHABLE SODA LOSS CALCULATIONS

Experiment: Elemental analysis of filtrate of thoroughly washed pulp from reject streams

to calculate total washable alkali as kg/MT of dry unbleached pulp TTA as

Na2O.

Objective: To calculate total washable alkali in a sample of pulp from reject stream

Observation table and Results:

A B C D H I E F G

Sampl

e

Wet

wt

Sol.

Density

Sol.

Wt

Dry

wt Na

Na as

Na2CO3

Na as

Na2O

%

Moist

TWA as

Na2O

TWA

avg

Unit g g/ml g g PPM g g g % kg/MT kg/MT

Form

ula

100

0*B

H*

(C/10

^6)

I*(53/2

3)

I*(31

/23)

[1-

(D+E)

/A]*1

00

[F/(E+D)

]*1000

S Thick

1 9.096 0.966 966 1.042

117.

6 0.114 0.262 0.153 85.65 117.440

50.990 S Thin

1 20.026 0.952 952 5.429

120.

4 0.115 0.264 0.154 71.57 27.136

WThic

k 1 11.079 0.97 970 2.404 238 0.231 0.532 0.311 73.5 105.981

55.3 W Thin

1 7.676 0.968 968 1.922 28.9 0.028 0.064 0.038 74.13 18.981

S Thick

2 10.616 0.963 963 1.112

178.

6 0.172 0.396 0.232 82.73 153.690

50.82 S Thin

2 8.381 0.978 978 2.213 46.3 0.045 0.104 0.061 76.32 26.337

WThic

k 2 9.612 0.979 979 2.118

178.

1 0.174 0.402 0.235 68.28 93.265

57.28 W Thin

2 14.781 0.959 959 2.927 52.6 0.050 0.116 0.068 69.71 22.345

*For average TWA, the weights are taken as equal to reject ratio.

Conclusion:

Assuming the total soda content same as for previously done sampling, % Soda as washable with

respect to total soda are:

SFL: 96.54%

WFL: 68.96%

Page 58: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

58 | P a g e

Thus, a large fraction of soda rejected in the reject stream can be retrieved by hot water washing.

Assuming that we can retrieve 50% of washable alkali content, then we soda washable in SFL is

24.45 kg/MT and in WFL 28.145 kg/MT.

Thus, % alkali retrieved of total alkali content is:

SFL: 48.27%

WFL: 34.48%

Average pulp loss through reject in MT (from June 1 to June 17):

SFL: 2.369 MT

WFL: 1.399 MT

Thus, % Alkali that can be retrieved,

= (48.27 ∗ 2.369 + 34.48 ∗ 1.399 12.369 + 1.399

= 43.15 %

Thus, Reduction in ORE,

= (0.4315) * 0.201

= 0.087 %

Or, New ORE loss,

= 0.114 %

Experiment 8.2. Analysis of total washable alkali in pulp from reject stream in WFL and SFL

Based on above data, ORE losses are calculated for Reject stream in SFL and WFL.

Data table 8.1 and 8.2 in Appendix A

The total soda loss as SODA CARRYOVER WITH REJECT in SFL and WFL from total soda losses is 2.81

%.

The corresponding total soda loss in ORE as SODA CARRYOVER WITH REJCT in SFL and WFL is 0.201

%.

The total washable soda loss as SODA CARRYOVER WITH REJECT in SFL and WFL from total soda

losses is 2.34 %.

The corresponding total washable soda loss in ORE as SODA CARRYOVER WITH REJCT in SFL and

WFL is 0.167 %.

A standard of reduction of loss in ORE from Reject to 0.1 % should be set.

Page 59: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

59 | P a g e

8.2. REJECT STREAM WASHING

The reject streams in SFL and WFL are thoroughly studied and measures are suggested to decrease

soda loss. To reduce washable soda loss in reject stream principle solutions are hot water alkali

washing and pressure drying for reduction in moisture content.

The devices related to reject stream in SFL line are HD (High density) Cleaner, Delta Knotter, Delta

Screen, Opti Screen, Centricleaner and Vibratory Screen. The devices related to reject stream in WFL

line are Vibratory Screen, Pressure Screen and Centricleaner.

For SFL,

Pulp + liquor

Liquor for dilution Reject

[Sand]

Accept

Liquor for dilution Accept

Liquor for washing Reject

Accept Reject [Wood chips, uncooked waste]

Figure 8.1. HD Cleaner, Delta Knotter and Vibratory Screen in SFL

HD Cleaner is a centrifugation based filtering device similar to cyclone separator but for liquids. High

density sand is settled at bottom and accept comes from top. In the system as there is no pressure

drying moisture content is very high in reject and thus soda content is high. Also, concentrated

liquor of Filtrate tank 1 is used which has highest BL content of all Filtrate tanks.

Delta Knotter has pressure screens. High pressure difference in inlet and outlet pushes material

through the screen. Again, washing is done with liquor from Filtrate tank 1.

Vibratory Screen [Delta Knotter stream] receives reject from Delta Knotter, where vibratory action

filters the pulp. The reject falling down is washed with liquor from Filtrate tank 1 that increases

moisture and alkali content of the reject.

Blow tank

HD Cleaner Filtrate tank 1

[Conc. WBL]

Delta Knotter

Sand Box

(Mixed with Reject

from Centricleaner and

thrown out)

Vibratory Screen

[Thick mesh]

Thrown

out

Washer 1 & 2

Accept tank

Blow tank

Page 60: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

60 | P a g e

Figure 8.2. HD cleaner Figure 8.3. Delta Knotter Figure 8.4. Vibratory Screen

Accept

Liquor for dilution Accept

Liquor for dilution Reject

Liquor for dilution Accept [Sand] Reject

Reject

Liquor for washing Accept

Reject [Shives]

Figure 8.5. Delta Screen, Opti Screen, Centricleaner and Vibratory Screen in SFL

Delta Screen and Opti Screen are similar to Delta Knotter but the screens are thin. Also, a pressure

plug, moved by a rotor pushes material through screen. The outlet is dry but the moisture content is

increased on washing at Vibratory Screen.

Centricleaner is based on principle same as cyclone separator. In the 4 units, pulp and paper flow

counter wise.

Press 1

Low Consistency Tank

Delta Screen

Filtrate tank 3 Opti Screen

Centricleaner

[Pri-Sec-Ter-Quar]

Delta Thickener

Sand Box LC tank

Vibratory Screen

[Thin mesh] Dump tank

Thrown

out

Page 61: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

61 | P a g e

For WFL,

Liquor for washing Accept

Reject [Uncooked waste]

Figure 8.6. Vibratory Screen in WFL

The alkali content in reject from vibratory screen is very high as there is no washing or pressure

drying.

Figure 8.7. Centricleaner Figure 8.8. Delta Screen Figure 8.9. Pressure Screen

Liquor for washing Accept

Reject

Reject

[Shives]

Figure 8.10. Pressure Screen, Centricleaner and Vibratory Screen in WFL

Blow tank

Vibratory Screen Filtrate tank 1

[Conc. WBL]

Thrown

out

Washer 1

Washer 3

Pressure Screen Filtrate tank 4 Washer 4

Dilution tank Centricleaner

[Pri-Sec-Ter-Quar]

Vibratory Screen Thrown

out

Page 62: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

62 | P a g e

Solutions suggested to reduce alkali loss from reject stream are:

a. Hot water header for washing

Instead of using liquor for washing the pulp in Vibratory Screens and especially liquor from Filtrate

tank 1, a common hot water header can be made that takes its feed from hot water tank used to

wash pulp in final washer or press. To avoid increase in hot water consumption and black liquor

dilution, the Accept can be fed back to the hot water tank.

Hot Water Hot water for washing

Header

Accept

Figure 8.11. Hot water header for washing

b. Parallel cleaning in Centricleaner

Presently, flow in centricleaner bodies is anti-parallel. The liquor in the first stage gets highly

concentrated. To incorporate soda washing in the process, a system of parallel flow of liquor into the

different bodies can be provided.

c. Pressure filter dryer

A pressure filter dryer can be installed common to both SFL and WFL. In these dryers, the reject

streams are first washed with hot water. They are then dried by applying pressure. Thus maximum

washable alkali can be extracted.

The required size of such dryers is less considering the load. Thus, the capital cost is not too high.

Further, depending upon the extent of alkali washing, best suitable size can be selected. Some of the

suppliers of such filters are:

a. 3Di Equipment Ltd

b. Dhananjaya Global Business Solutions

c. GEA Barr-Rosin Inc.

d. Aeroglide Corporation

e. MET-CHEM Inc.

f. Bhagwati Machines India Pvt Ltd

g. Arjun Technologies (I) Ltd

Hot water tank

Vibratory Screen

[Thin mesh]

Vibratory Screen

[Thick mesh] Sand Box

Page 63: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

63 | P a g e

9. ESP – ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR

ESP PHOTO!!

Figure 9.1. ESP

Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) essentially consists of 2 sets of electrodes, viz. collecting electrodes

and emitting (discharge) electrodes. These two electrodes are arranged in alternate rows. A

unidirectional high voltage from a rectifier is applied between these 2 electrodes, connecting its

negative polarity to the emitting electrodes and the positive polarity to the collecting electrodes

which are earthed.

Because of physical configuration field in the neighborhood of the emitting electrode is very high.

The dust laden flue gas from boiler passes between rows of collecting and discharge electrodes. The

gas molecules which are normally neutral are ionized due to the presence of high electric field. The

positive charges of the ions created travel towards the discharge electrodes and the negative

charges (ions and electron) towards the collecting electrodes.

On the way to the collecting electrode, the negative charges get attached to the dust particles. Thus

the dust particles are electrically charged. In the presence of high electric field between emitting and

collecting electrodes the charged dust particle experience a force which causes the particles to move

towards the collecting electrodes and finally get deposited on them.

A minor portion of dust particles which have acquired positive charges get deposited on the emitting

electrodes also. Periodically these particles are dislodged from the electrodes by rapping the

electrodes. The particles then fall into the bottom from where they are removed by the ash deposal

system.

Page 64: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

64 | P a g e

Various parts of the precipitator are:

a. Precipitator chamber

b. Discharge system

c. Collecting system

d. Gas distribution system

e. Dust conveying system

f. Flue gas valve

g. Rectifier-Transformers

9.1. BHEL ESP SYSTEM

Design Parameter Design Value Unit

Gas Flow rate 31.45 m3/s

Inlet Temperature 170 °C

Inlet dust concentration 16 g/Nm3

Outlet dust concentration 75 mg/Nm3

ESP efficiency 99.53 %

No. of fields in series 3 Units

Press. drop across precipitator 25 mmWC

Gas velocity (inside ESP) 0.66 m/s

Treatment time 14.65 s

No. of collecting electrode in a

row in a field 8 Units

No. of rows of CEs per field 25 for field 1 and 21 for field 2

and 3 Units

Specific collection area 97.68 s/m

Table 9.1. BHEL ESP Design Conditions

Page 65: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

65 | P a g e

9.2. PROCESS PARAMETERS

The parameters are divided as constant and variable parameters based on the scope of variation in

their values in the installed ESP at Recovery unit in Abhishek Industries.

Constrained/constant parameters are:

a. Aspect ratio; Height, length and spacing of collection plate i.e. crossection area of ESP

b. Diameter of entering particles

c. Gas uniformity/Gas distribution

d. No. and type of discharge electrodes and collection plates

e. Sneakage

f. Particulate size distribution

Variable parameters are:

a. Gas flow rate; Treatment time; Velocity

b. Temperature

c. Moisture

d. Gas composition [Flue gas conditioning]

e. Gas viscosity

f. ESP ash composition

g. Peak Voltage; Spark rate; Energization

h. Pressure drop

i. Resistivity

j. Re-entrainment

k. Specific Collection Area

l. Inlet dust load

m. Effectiveness of dust removal system

Many of the above mentioned parameters are inter-related. All the parameters can be reduced to 5

basic variables:

a. Collection Efficiency

Theoretical collection efficiency is given by Matts-Ohnfeldt equation6,

6 Rose, H. E., and A. J. Wood. An Introduction to Electrostatic Precipitation in Theory and Practice

Page 66: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

66 | P a g e

Or,

Certain values like particle size distribution and gas viscosity could not be calculated, thus,

theoretical collection efficiency could not be calculated.

Practical collection efficiency is calculated from inlet dust concentration and outlet dust

concentration of an ESP under process.

Practical Collection Efficiency,

= MNJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUN�YRPJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUNMNJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUN *100

Practical Collection Efficiency calculations are done and results are discussed later.

b. Resistivity

Resistivity, which is a characteristic of particles in an electric field, is a measure of a particle's

resistance to transferring charge (both accepting and giving up charges). Resistivity is a function of a

particle's chemical composition as well as flue gas operating conditions such as temperature and

moisture. Particles can have high, moderate (normal), or low resistivity7.

7 Rose, H. E., and A. J. Wood. An Introduction to Electrostatic Precipitation in Theory and Practice

Page 67: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

67 | P a g e

Table 9.2. ESP characteristics with Resistivity; Source: Adapted from U.S. EPA 1985

Fly ash from Recovery boilers tends to have a good resistivity. The reason for this good resistivity

comes from the chemistry of the process. Typical alumina (Al2O3) and silica (SiO2) content (which are

poor electrical conductors) is high. Also since combustion is commonly done with a wet fuel in a

mass type firing mode, it typically generates a higher level of conductive carbon in the ash. Lastly,

the surface moisture of the fuel and inherent hydrogen in cellulose, cause the flue gas to have

appreciable moisture (typically 15-25%). This flue gas moisture tends to give some "surface

conditioning", or a conductive liquid film to the particulate. These factors result in "good" resistivity

for ESP ash8.

Resistivity measurements could not be done in laboratories of the company. The company can send

sample for resistivity to some other labs which will provide important information on flue gas

characteristics. Also, the reason of ash build up on ESP and frequent conveyor failures can be high

resistivity of ESP ash that means high cohesivity. Thus, the correct reason for current problems in

ESP can be known.

8 Prakash H. Dhargalkar, Jose Astolphi, Jr. Advancements in air pollution control for pulp and paper industry

Page 68: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

68 | P a g e

c. Specific Collection Area (SCA)

The specific collection area (SCA) is defined as the ratio of collection surface area to the gas flow rate

into the collector.

Most conservative designs call for an SCA of 20 to 25 m2 per 1000 m3/h to achieve collection

efficiency of more than 99.5%.

Total collection area in Recovery 1 = 3276.8 m2 [(48*8*0.4*8) + 2*(40*8*0.4*8)]

d. Aspect Ratio

Aspect ratio relates the length of an ESP to its height and is an important factor in reducing rapping

loss (dust re-entrainment).

Aspect ratios for ESPs range from 0.5 to 2.0. However, for high-efficiency ESPs (those having

collection efficiencies of > 99%), the aspect ratio should be greater than 1.0 (usually 1.0 to 1.5).

For Recovery 1,

Length of each plate = 0.4 m

No. of plates in each field = 8

Thus, total length of plates in each field = 3.2 m

No. of fields = 3

Thus, total length of plates = 9.6 m

Thus, Effective length = 9.6 m

Effective height = 8 m

Thus, AR = 9.6/8 = 1.2

e. Corona Power

The corona power is the power that energizes the discharge electrodes and thus creates the strong

electric field. A strong electric field is needed for achieving high collection efficiency of dust particles.

Page 69: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

69 | P a g e

The following values are recorded for Recovery 1 and 2:

For Recovery 1,

Field Peak Voltage

(Supplied) [kV]

Average Voltage

[kV] Current [mA]

Corona Power,

Pc [kW]

1 65 50 80 4

2 65 50 100 5

Table 9.3. Corona power of ESP of Recovery 1

*The values are taken normal performance; ESP at Recovery 1 is producing less corona power most

of the time

For Recovery 2,

Field Peak Voltage

(Supplied) [kV]

Average Voltage

[kV] Current [mA]

Corona Power,

Pc [kW]

1 65 62 53 3.286

2 95.5 83.6 154 12.874

3 55 45 250 11.250

Table 9.4. Corona power of ESP of Recovery 2

For Recovery 1, total Pc = 9.00 kW

For Recovery 2, total Pc = 27.41 kW

The corona power generated in Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 at normal conditions is close to ideal

values. However, as mentioned ESP of Recovery 1 often produces reduced Corona power and thus

its performance is adversely affected.

f. Dust dislodging system

Dust build up on collection plate reduces corona power of the field and sometimes lead to back

corona, further reducing electric field strength.

With the installment of Alstom controller for rapping, dust dislodging is highly improved. The

problem of inefficient performance of ESP and frequent failures of conveyor belt was supposed to be

due to rapping problems.

Page 70: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

70 | P a g e

9.3. Collection Efficiency

Practical Collection Efficiency,

= MNJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUN�YRPJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUNMNJOP QRSP TUNTONPVWPXUN *100

The outlet dust concentration is taken from flue gas analyzer. For inlet dust concentration, an

experiment is performed on Ash mixing tank.

Experiment: For Recovery 2, density of AMT is noted at different time intervals with ESP

ash falling rate as the only variable and rest as constants. Gas flowrates are

noted down for different sampling periods.

Objective: To calculate rate of ash collected in ESP through sampling AMT density. With

known gas flowrate practical collection efficiency is calculated.

Procedure:

To calculate inlet dust concentration, two parameters can be evaluated – ash collection rate

and inlet gas flow rate. The ratio of Ash collection rate to Inlet gas flow rate when added

with outlet dust concentration will give Inlet dust concentration.

Z7�#� '45� $�7$#7�"��%�7= ([5ℎ $���#$�%�7 "��# \D5 1

(Z7�#� \�5 C��]"��# $4^%$ _D5 1 + (`4��#� '45� $�7$. 1 \ D#" _ $4^#

To calculate ash collection rate AMT density sampling is done. The outlet flow to MDT from

AMT was closed and the level in the tank is made to rise to 65% as displayed on DCS. WWL

and hot water inlet supply is then closed to maintain the volume constant during sampling

period. Density of AMT sample was taken at an interval of 15 minutes.

The solids fired in the boiler remained constant during the experiment. The soot blowing was

switched off to prevent ash from superheaters, boiler bank and economizer from falling into

the tank. The system is assumed to be in steady state with no excess ash falling and no ash

building on collection plate. Multiple samples are taken to determine average ash collection

rate as there is variability in ash falling rate depending upon rapper frequency. We assume

that all the ash falling is collected and is falling from ESP only during the experiment.

Constants during the experiment are time interval, tank level, MDT outlet flow = 0, Hot water

inlet flow = 0, WWL inlet flow = 0, firing rate, % solids in BL, soot blower = off. Variables

during the experiment are Gas flow rate and ESP ash quantity.

Page 71: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

71 | P a g e

Gas flowrates and their temperatures are taken are taken from DCS. Collection efficiency is

calculated after processing these values in appropriate units.

Observation table and Results:

Tank Volume = 10 m3

Tank Level = 63.5 %

Thus, Volume of tank filled = 6.35 m3

ρ

(kg/m3) 0.75 0.8 1.2

Temp

(°C) 200 160 30

Pressure = 1 bar

Firing rate = 26 TPH

Solids firing rate = 17.5 TPH

Amount of water = 8.5 TPH

Vapor generation rate = 3.11

(m3/s)

Symbol A B

Sample Time

Temp. at

density

calculation

Twaddell Density ∆ρ ESP Ash

collected

Weight Volume Ρ (/15

min)

Unit Hours °C g ml kg/m3 kg/m3 kg

Formula A*6.35

1 1445 39 15 53.138 50 1062.76

2 1500 40 16 53.29 50 1065.8 3.04 19.304

3 1515 41 17 53.558 50 1071.16 5.36 34.036

4 1530 40 18 53.724 50 1074.48 3.32 21.082

5 1545 40 19 54.01 50 1080.2 5.72 36.322

Page 72: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

72

| P

ag

e

Sy

mb

ol

D1

D2

D

3

D4

D5

D

6

D7

D8

D

9

D1

0

S

am

ple

T

ime

G

as

Flo

w R

ate

Pri

ma

ry

Se

con

da

ry

Te

rtia

ry

Ne

t

Flo

w

rate

T

em

p

Flo

w

rate

N

orm

al

FR

F

low

rate

T

em

p

Flo

w

rate

N

orm

al

FR

F

low

rate

T

em

p

Flo

w

rate

N

orm

al

FR

Un

it

H

ou

rs

TP

H

°C

m3

/s

Nm

3/s

T

PH

°C

m

3/s

N

m3

/s

TP

H

°C

m3

/s

Nm

3/s

N

m3

/s

Fo

rmu

la

D1

*1

0 /

(36

*0

.75

) D

2*

29

3/4

68

D

4*

10

/

(36

*0

.75

) D

5*

29

3/4

68

D

7*

10

/

(36

*0

.75

) D

8*

29

3/4

68

D

1+

D2

+D

3

1

1

44

5

23

1

95

8

.51

85

19

5

.33

31

75

1

34

1

59

1

1.8

05

56

7

.98

85

16

81

6

3

0

1.3

88

88

9

1.3

43

05

09

7

14

.66

47

4

2

1

50

0

23

1

97

8

.51

85

19

5

.33

31

75

1

34

1

59

1

1.8

05

56

7

.98

85

16

81

6

3

0

1.3

88

88

9

1.3

43

05

09

7

14

.66

47

4

3

1

51

5

22

.5

19

6

8.3

33

33

3

5.2

17

23

65

3

3

15

9

11

.45

83

3

7.7

53

56

04

3

6

30

1

.38

88

89

1

.34

30

50

97

1

4.3

13

85

4

1

53

0

22

1

97

8

.14

81

48

5

.10

12

97

9

32

1

60

1

1.1

11

11

7

.51

86

04

05

6

3

0

1.3

88

88

9

1.3

43

05

09

7

13

.96

29

5

5

1

54

5

22

1

96

8

.14

81

48

5

.10

12

97

9

32

1

59

1

1.1

11

11

7

.51

86

04

05

6

3

0

1.3

88

88

9

1.3

43

05

09

7

13

.96

29

5

Sy

mb

ol

E

F G

H

I

S

am

ple

T

ime

F

low

to

ES

P I

nle

t

Inle

t D

ust

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

Inle

t D

ust

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

Ou

tle

t D

ust

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

Ne

t In

let

Du

st

Co

nce

ntr

ati

on

Co

lle

ctio

n

Eff

icie

ncy

Av

era

ge

Un

it

H

ou

rs

Nm

3/s

g

/Nm

3

g/N

m3

m

g/N

m3

g

/Nm

3

Fo

rmu

la

D1

0+

3.1

1

[B*

10

00

/

(15

*6

0)]

/ E

F

ave

rag

e

G

+H

(G

/I)*

10

0

1

1

44

5

17

.77

47

4

23

.04

6

12

0

23

.16

6

99

.48

2

2

1

50

0

17

.77

47

4

15

.63

89

09

8

3

1

51

5

17

.42

38

5

28

.12

91

71

22

4

1

53

0

17

.07

29

5

17

.78

13

88

01

5

1

54

5

17

.07

29

5

30

.63

54

03

43

Page 73: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Conclusion:

The collection efficiency is close to designed value of 99.53. But to meet environmental

norms outlet dust concentration, must be 75 mg/Nm3. Thus, required CE = 99.676.

When the amount of liquor burned is increased to 27 TPH or 28 TPH, it is believed that outlet

dust concentration increases significantly. Thus, it can be deduced that maximum capable

load of ESP is reached at firing rate of 26 TPH. It can be concluded that maximum collection

efficiency of ESP is 99.50, under these conditions. To get 75 mg/Nm3

outlet dust

concentration inlet dust concentration should be 15 g/Nm3.

Thus, either process conditions can be varied like moisture or dust composition or inlet dust

load can be reduced to reduce outlet dust concentration. A multi-cyclone or other mechanical

dust collector is used to reduce the inlet dust load.

Specific Collection Area calculation:

Total collection area = 3276.8 m2

Gas flow rate = 17.424 Nm3/s

Inlet temperature = 180 °C

Outlet temperature = 160 °C

Gas flow rate (@170 °C) = 26.344 m3/s

Thus, SCA = 124.38 m2/m3s-1

For 1000 m3/hr, CA = 34.55 m2

For 99.5 % above efficiencies conservative SCA is 20-25 m2 for 1000 m3/hr. The SCA in

operation is sufficiently above the ideal value.

A standard of outlet dust concentration equal to 75 mg/Nm3 in ESPs of both the units is targeted.

Experiment 9.1. Calculation of Practical Collection Efficiency

Page 74: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

74 | P a g e

Figure 9.2. Dust collection systems

9.4. DUST COMPOSITION

To understand dust characteristics, dust composition is very important.

Quantity Unit Value As Base Group

Moisture % by weight 0.31

Loss on Ignition % by weight 24.8

Carbonates as Na2CO3 % by weight 28 15.85

Sulfates as Na2SO4 % by weight 27.9 18.86

Chlorides as NaCl % by weight 33.1 20.09

Acid insoluble % by weight 0.42

Water insoluble % by weight 0.19

Table 9.5. ESP dust composition

Elemental analysis of ESP is also done to determine the amount of Na and K in the ash.

Experiment: Elemental analysis of ESP ash to determine Na and K

Objective: To determine % of Na and K in ESP ash

Observation table and Results:

Sample Wt of sol.

(g)

PPM Wt in g % Wt

Na K Na K

1 10002 39.8 67.8 0.398 0.678 23.044 - Na

2 6251.88 76.3 108.8 0.477 0.68 35.765 – K

Conclusion:

Based on above data and various journals, articles and discussions, the final composition of

ESP ash is concluded to be:

Page 75: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

75 | P a g e

Quantity Units Value

Na2SO4 mole 0.098

K2SO4 mole 0.098

NaCl mole 0.283

KCl mole 0.283

Na2CO3 mole 0.198

K2CO3 mole 0.066

The presence of K and Cl expressed as ratios:

Chloride Enrichment Factor (CEF),

Cl/(Na + K) mole % = 29.525

For wood based paper plants, the general CEF value is 1.5-2.5 %.

Potassium Enrichment Factor, (PEF),

K/(K + Na) mole % = 47.835

For wood based paper plants, the general PEF value is 1.2-2 %.

Experiment 9.2. ESP Dust elemental analysis

To increase the collection efficiency of ESP, treating K and Cl can help.

9.5. POTASSIUM & CHLORIDES PURGING

The chloride and potassium content in the ESP dust are very large. The presence of these elements

adversely affects ESP and Recovery Boiler. High content of Chlorides and Potassium causes

corrosion, cracking and fouling in Recovery boilers and causes ESP problems in form of inlet corona

suppression and build ups on the ESP internals.

Also, it is important to note that at low chloride concentrations, potassium has very little effect on

sticky deposit temperature. On the other hand, when the chloride mole % [Cl/(Na+K)] exceeds 10%,

potassium has a significant effect on lowering the sticky temperature.9

9 Moyer S., Wiggins D., Blair M.A. and Hiner L.A. (2000). Liquor Cycle Chloride Control Restores Recovery Boiler

Availability

Figure 9.3. Effect of Chloride and Potassium on Sticky Deposit Temperature (TSTK)

Page 76: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

76 | P a g e

The sticky temperature is the temperature that results in a sticky deposit with 15% liquid phase

(TSTK).

Of the various sources of potassium and chlorides in the system the important ones are10:

a. Bound to wheat straw or wood

b. Makeup caustic

c. Make up lime

d. Fresh water

The 2 major points that can be interfered for reduction of potassium and chlorides are:

a. Wet washing

By adapting to rigorous wet washing and using hot water with minimum reuse of water, potassium

and chloride content can be reduced. Potassium and chlorides easily dissolve in water and can be

removed at the potential source.

b. Purging precipitator dust

The potassium and chlorine content is highest in precipitator dust. Thus purging precipitator dust

and treating it is one important method of potassium and chlorides removal.

Various methods for potassium and chlorides removal through precipitator dust purging are:

a. Ash Purging

By purging some amount of ESP ash highly concentrated with potassium and chlorides, a

proper balance can be maintained. It is practiced at Alabama River Pulp and Alabama Pine

Pulp of 1200 and 1600 TPD capacity. It has disadvantage that alkali is also lost with ash and

needs to be covered by makeup caustic.

b. Ash leaching

It is the most popular method where ash and water are mixed in a slurry. Most of the alkali

remains solid while most of the potassium and chlorine dissolve. By centrifuge liquid fraction

is separated from solid fraction, where liquid fraction is sent to waste water treatment and

alkali is returned to liquor cycle.

c. Electrodialysis using a bipolar membrane

d. Specific crystallization processes

Sodium sulfate and carbonate crystals are selectively removed from a concentrated filtrate

stream containing potassium and chlorine. It is used in Champion International

Corporation’s bleach filtrate recycle process in Canton, North Carolina.

Systems based on Ash Leaching:

a. AshLeach [Metso Power]

b. ARC [Andritz]

CEF in the range of 1.5 – 2.5 % and PEF in the range of 1.2 – 2 % are targeted.

10

Michael A., Craig J., A. Mark and Douglas W. An overview of various strategies for balancing saltcake,

chloride and potassium levels in an ECF kraft mill

Page 77: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

77 | P a g e

9.6. ESP ORE LOSS

For Recovery 2

Outlet gas concentration = 120 mg/Nm3

Inlet dust concentration = 23.166 g/Nm3

Gas Flow Rate = 17.424 Nm3/s

Thus,

Outlet SPM flow rate = 2.091 g/s or 0.181 MT/day

With ESP shutdown,

Outlet SPM flow rate = 403.64 g/s

% Weight of Na as Na2O = 31.06

Thus,

Outlet Na flow rate = 0.0561 MT of Na as Na2O/day

Thus,

Outlet Na flow rate = 10.83 MT of Na as Na2O/day

Outlet Na flow rate (considering 2 hour ESP shut down) = 0.954 MT of Na as Na2O/day

For Recovery 1

Inlet dust concentration = 23 g/Nm3 (Considering similar performance as Recovery 2 boiler)

With 80% collection efficiency, outlet dust concentration = 4.6 g/Nm3

Gas flow rate = 5.5 Nm3/s

Thus, Outlet SPM flow rate = 25.3 g/s or 2.186 MT/day

Thus, Outlet Na flow rate = 0.6789 MT of Na as Na2O/day

Data table 9.6 in Appendix A

The soda loss in Recovery 2 through Flue gas carryover of total soda losses is 11.48 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in Recovery 2 through Flue gas carryover is 0.817 %.

The soda loss in ORE in Recovery 1 through Flue gas carryover is 8.15 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in Recovery 1 through Flue gas carryover is 0.580 %.

The combined soda loss in ORE in Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 through Flue gas carryover is 19.63 %.

The corresponding loss in ORE in Recovery 1 and Recovery 2 through Flue gas carryover is 1.397 %

A standard of 75 mg/Nm3 of outlet dust concentration is targeted for Recovery 1 and Recovery 2.

Also identified performance parameters must be in desired range.

Page 78: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

78 | P a g e

10. ORE LOSS DATA

Mud Filter,

Grifts and

Stones

Flue gas

carryover [ESP]

Soda Carryover

with Pulp

Screen Losses

in Pulp mill Total

% Loss of Total

soda loss 7.50 19.63 69.59 2.81 99.53

% Loss in ORE 0.712 1.397 5.108 0.201 7.418

Table 10.2. % Loss from significant loss points

99.53 % of the total soda losses are explained by these 4 major loss points. Steps to reduce soda

losses from these points and set targets are discussed in the report before.

% Loss (ORE)

Recovery I & II SFL and WFL

Date Mud

Filter

Grifts

and

Stones

Dregs

Washer

Flue gas

carryov

er [ESP]

Condenser,

Vibro

Screen, &

MDT

Outlet

Seepage

&

Overflow

Soda

Carryover

with Pulp

Screen

Losses

in Pulp

mill

Seepage

&

Overflow

01-Jun -

17-Jun 0.677 0.035 0 1.397 0.05 0 5.108 0.201 0

Table 10.3. % Net Loss in ORE from individual loss points

ORE based on individual losses is 92.532 %.

Data table 10.1 in Appendix A

The average ORE based on stock (June 1st – June 17th 2010) is 94.000 %.

If the suggestions are implemented and standards are met, ORE can be increased to 97-97.5 %.

While the ORE from stock has come out to be 94 %, in general the ORE on average basis is

approximately 94.5 %. However ORE based on individual losses has come significantly higher than

that based on stock. The reason of difference in ORE based on stock and ORE based on individual

losses could be:

a. Screen losses are calculated based on limited number of sampling and could be lower than

estimated.

b. Due to very high soda carryover through pulp in WFL, ORE could have been affected.

Page 79: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

79 | P a g e

11. FUTURE WORK

a. A rigorous study can be done by quantifying loss data from every possible major soda loss

source.

b. WBL sampling should be done for few weeks and results should be analyzed.

c. Quotations for online analyzers can be invited from suppliers and the economic viability of

the change can be analyzed.

d. Samples should be analyzed while displacement washing for weeks and results should be

tabulated to see any benefits.

e. Mud cake sampling can be done with Filter Aids and benefits can be noted.

f. Causticizing control models can be studied for better lime control.

g. Proper steps should be taken to reduce soda loss in pulp carryover.

h. % Charging (White liquor charged per tonne of fibres cooked in the digester) could be

plotted against the soda carryover as kg/MT and production. A relative study can be done

whether higher production has resulted in increased charging and thus, increased soda loss.

i. Pulp mill reject should be treated with hot water and moisture should be reduced. Samples

should be analyzed to observe any benefits.

j. ESP process parameters like resistivity and theoretical collection efficiency should be

evaluated through an external lab for better understanding of performance limitations.

k. The amount of Potassium and Chlorine needs to be reduced through proper steps.

In brief,

First, Check Technical and Economic viability for

a. Composite sampling or Automation in WBL testing

b. Automation in lime slaking

c. Filter Aid use in Mud filter

d. Pulp mill reject washing

e. Potassium and Chlorides purging

With the proposed benefits if technical and economical viability is found then,

Perform rigorous sampling for a month to validate observations in

a. WBL TTA

b. Mud cake displacement washing

c. ESP collection efficiency

d. ESP Dust composition

Page 80: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

80 | P a g e

12. REFERENCES

Dalmon J. (1980). Electrostatic precipitators for large power station boile,

Dalmon J. and Tidy D. (1972). A comparison of chemical additives as aids to the electrostatic

precipitation of fly ash

Johnson M. (1996). The effect of humidity on the performance of electrostatic precipitators at

Tarong Power Station

Harker J.R. and Pimkarkar P.M. (1988). The effect of additives on the electrostatic precipitation

of flu ash

Tran H.N. Kraft Recovery Boiler Plugging and Prevention

Jaye P. H. History of Alabama River Pulp Company and The Claiborne Mill Complex

Unified Air Toxics, (August 2000). www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/pulp/pulppg.html

Moyer S., Wiggins D., Blair M.A. and Hiner L.A. (2000). Liquor Cycle Chloride Control Restores

Recovery Boiler Availability

Mckean W. and Jacobs R. S. (1997). Wheat Straw as a Paper Fiber Source

M. Brongers, A. J. Mierzwa. Pulp and Paper

American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA). (October 1999). www.afandpa.com

Michael A., Craig J., A. Mark and Douglas W. An overview of various strategies for balancing saltcake,

chloride and potassium levels in an ECF kraft mill

Uschan R.M. and Trick L.C. (Sept. 1994). Corrosion Control Needs of the Pulp and Paper Industry

Rose, H. E., and A. J. Wood. An Introduction to Electrostatic Precipitation in Theory and Practice

U.S. EPA 1985

Pirita Mikkanen. Fly ash particle formation in Kraft Boilers

Hein A.G and Gibson D. Skewed Gas Flow Technology Improves Precipitator Performance

Prakash H. Dhargalkar, Jose Astolphi, Jr. Advancements in air pollution control for pulp and paper

Industry

Ibach, S. Conversion to high solids firing

Kraft Recovery Boilers, TAPPI Press

ESP Design Parameters and Their Effects on Collection Efficiency, Lesson 3

Gallaer C. A. (1983). Electrostatic Precipitator Reference Manual. Electric Power Research Institute

Coal and Ash Testing and Predictive Analyses, Neundorfer, Inc.

Chandra A., Sanjeev Kumar, Subodh Kumar and Sharma P.K. Investigations on Fly Ash Resistivity:

Development of Empirical Relations Based on Experimental Measurement

Thomas e. Sulpizio. Advances in filter aid and precoat Filtration technology. Presentation at the

American filtration & separations society

Rees, R. H. and Cain, C. W. (1990). Let Diatomite Enhance Your Filtration

Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines Pulp and Paper Mills

Arpalahti.O., White liquor preparation, Paper Making Science and Technology

Page 81: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

81 | P a g e

LIST OF EXPERIMENTS

Experiment 4.1. FMEA on identified exit points of soda for permanent losses [Page 27]

Experiment 5.1. Frequent sampling of WBL from SFL and WFL [Page 32]

Experiment 6.1. Mud cake sampling from Mud filter of Recovery 2 [Page 42]

Experiment 6.2. Vat and Mud sampling to test homogeneity from Mud filter of Recovery 2 [Page 43]

Experiment 6.3. Displacement washing in mud filter of Recovery 2 [Page 46]

Experiment 7.1. Analysis of total washable alkali in washed pulp in WFL [Page 55]

Experiment 8.1. Reject stream analysis for TTA in WFL and SFL [Page 56]

Experiment 8.2. Analysis of total washable alkali in pulp from reject stream in WFL and SFL [Page 57]

Experiment 9.1. Calculation of Practical Collection Efficiency [Page 70]

Experiment 9.2. ESP Dust elemental analysis [Page 74]

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5.1. PME, SRE and ORE over Time [Page 31]

Table 6.1. Loss through Mud filter for Recovery 1 and 2 [Page 84]

Table 6.2. Loss through Mud filter for Recovery 1 and 2 combined [Page 85]

Table 6.3. Loss through Grifts and stones for Recovery 1 and 2 [Page 86]

Table 6.4. Combined loss through Mud filter and Grifts and stones for Recovery 1 and 2 [Page 87]

Table 7.1. Soda carryover with pulp in SFL [Page 88]

Table 7.2. Soda carryover with pulp in WFL [Page 90]

Table 7.3. Combined soda carryover with pulp in SFL and WFL [Page 92]

Table 7.4. WFL production and total soda loss [Page 94]

Table 7.5. SFL production and total soda loss [Page 98]

Table 8.1. Soda loss from Screens as Reject in WFL and SFL [Page 101]

Table 8.2. Combined soda loss from Screens as Reject in WFL and SFL [Page 104]

Table 9.1. BHEL ESP Design Conditions [Page 64]

Table 9.2. ESP characteristics with Resistivity [Page 67]

Table 9.3. Corona power of ESP of Recovery 1 [Page 69]

Table 9.4. Corona power of ESP of Recovery 2 [Page 69]

Table 9.5. ESP dust composition [Page 75]

Table 9.6. ESP ORE Loss [Page 106]

Table 10.1. Average ORE based on stock [Page 108]

Table 10.2. % Loss from significant loss points [Page 31]

Table 10.3. %Loss in ORE from individual loss points [Page 31]

Page 82: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

82 | P a g e

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Sulfuric Acid Plant (SAP) at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex [Page 9]

Figure 2. COGEN-1, a 20 MW unit at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex [Page 9]

Figure 3. Demineralised water plant at Abhishek Industries at Dhaula complex [Page 10]

Figure 1.1. Paper making process [Page 11]

Figure 1.2. Paper making flowchart [Page 12]

Figure 1.3. Chemical Recovery Cycle [Page 13]

Figure 1.4. Multiple effect evaporators [Page 13]

Figure 1.5. Recovery Boiler Process flow [Page 14]

Figure 1.6. Recovery Boiler [Page 14]

Figure 1.7. Recausticizing Process flow [Page 15]

Figure 4.1. Process Flow Diagram of Recovery 2 [Page 18]

Figure 4.2. Evaporator Process Flow Diagram [Page 19]

Figure 4.3. 7 effect/11 body Evap. at Recovery2 at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex [Page 19]

Figure 4.4. Condensers at Recovery 2 at Abhishek Industries, Dhaula complex [Page 20]

Figure 4.5. Recovery Boiler Process Flow Diagram [Page 20]

Figure 4.6. Rotary lime kiln [Page 21]

Figure 4.7. Recausticizing Process Flow Diagram [Page 23]

Figure 4.8. Wet Washing in SFL [Page 24]

Figure 4.9. Digester in SFL [Page 24]

Figure 4.10. Pulp washing in SFL [Page 25]

Figure 4.11. Digester Feed Belt in SFL at Abhishek Industries, Dhuala complex [Page 26]

Figure 5.1. PME versus Time plot [Page 31]

Figure 5.2. SRE versus Time plot [Page 31]

Figure 5.3. ORE versus Time plot [Page 31]

Figure 5.4. Proposed collection tank design for WBL composite sampling [Page 37]

Figure 6.1. Lime mud filter flowsheet [Page 39]

Figure 6.2. Vacuum disk filter sketch [Page 39]

Figure 6.3. Vacuum disk filter in operation [Page 39]

Figure 7.1. Production versus Time in WFL [Page 50]

Figure 7.2. Soda carryover as kg/MT of unbleached pulp versus Time in WFL [Page 50]

Figure 7.3. Production and Soda carryover versus Time in WFL [Page 51]

Figure 7.4. Soda carryover versus Production in WFL [Page 51]

Figure 7.5. Production versus Time in SFL [Page 52]

Page 83: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

83 | P a g e

Figure 7.6. Soda carryover as kg/MT of unbleached pulp versus Time in SFL [Page 52]

Figure 7.6. Production and Soda carryover versus Time in SFL [Page 53]

Figure 7.8. Soda carryover versus Production in SFL [Page 53]

Figure 7.9. Brown Stock Washer [Page 54]

Figure 8.1. HD Cleaner, Delta Knotter and Vibratory Screen in SFL [Page 59]

Figure 8.2. HD cleaner [Page 60]

Figure 8.3. Delta Knotter [Page 60]

Figure 8.4. Vibratory Screen [Page 60]

Figure 8.5. Delta Screen, Opti Screen, Centricleaner and Vibratory Screen in SFL [Page 60]

Figure 8.6. Vibratory Screen in WFL [Page 61]

Figure 8.7. Centricleaner [Page 61]

Figure 8.8. Delta Screen [Page 61]

Figure 8.9. Pressure Screen [Page 61]

Figure 8.10. Pressure Screen, Centricleaner and Vibratory Screen in WFL [Page 61]

Figure 8.11. Hot water header for washing [Page 62]

Figure 9.1. ESP [Page 63]

Figure 9.2. Dust collection systems [Page 74]

Figure 9.3. Effect of Chloride and Potassium on Sticky Deposit Temperature (TSTK) [Page 75]

Page 84: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

AP

PE

ND

IX A

Ta

ble

6.1

. Lo

ss t

hro

ug

h M

ud

fil

ter

for

Re

cove

ry 1

an

d 2

Loss

th

rou

gh

Mu

d F

ilte

r

Re

cove

ry I

Re

cove

ry I

I

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2O

MT

)

Lim

e

con

sum

pti

on

(MT

)

%

Ca

(OH

) 2

in M

ud

Ca

ke

Ca

CO

3

Pro

du

cti

on

(M

T)

% S

od

a

(TT

A

Na

2O

)

To

tal

So

da

lo

ss

(Na

2O

MT

)

Lim

e

con

sum

pti

on

(MT

)

%

Ca

(OH

) 2

in M

ud

Ca

ke

Ca

CO

3

Pro

du

ctio

n

(MT

)

% S

od

a

(TT

A

Na

2O

)

To

tal

So

da

lo

ss

(Na

2O

MT

)

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

46

.83

20

5

11

2

.1

19

.10

00

5

0.4

4

0.0

84

04

02

2

8

1.4

4

9.0

70

32

0

.48

0

.23

55

37

5

01

-Ju

n

A

48

.43

45

1

1

2

19

.12

52

2

0.4

5

0.0

86

06

35

2

6

1.5

4

5.5

04

86

0

.46

0

.20

93

22

3

01

-Ju

n

B

37

.62

21

1

1

2

19

.12

52

2

0.4

5

0.0

86

06

35

2

6

1.5

4

5.5

04

86

0

.45

0

.20

47

71

9

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

44

.39

64

3

11

.5

1.9

2

0.0

20

93

0

.45

0

.09

00

94

2

27

1

.4

47

.31

78

1

0.4

6

0.2

17

66

19

02

-Ju

n

A

46

.40

72

9

2

1

5.6

47

91

0

.5

0.0

78

23

95

2

7

1.5

4

7.2

55

04

0

.45

0

.21

26

47

7

02

-Ju

n

B

38

.41

44

1

1

2

19

.12

52

2

0.4

6

0.0

87

97

6

27

1

.5

47

.25

50

4

0.4

4

0.2

07

92

22

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

35

.28

46

7

10

1

.9

17

.40

95

0

.45

0

.07

83

42

8

29

1

.5

50

.75

54

2

0.4

5

0.2

28

39

94

03

-Ju

n

A

38

.22

76

2

11

1

.7

19

.20

11

2

0.4

5

0.0

86

40

5

23

1

.3

40

.36

13

6

0.4

4

0.1

77

59

03

-Ju

n

B

42

.49

79

4

11

1

.8

19

.17

57

5

0.4

5

0.0

86

29

09

2

3

1.3

4

0.3

61

36

0

.46

0

.18

56

62

3

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

39

.73

04

4

11

1

.9

19

.15

04

5

0.4

5

0.0

86

17

7

31

1

.4

54

.32

78

5

0.4

6

0.2

49

90

81

04

-Ju

n

A

30

.30

21

6

10

0

1

7.8

57

14

0

0

2

2

1.5

3

8.5

04

11

0

.44

0

.16

94

18

1

04

-Ju

n

B

27

.88

12

1

1

1.8

1

9.1

75

75

0

.43

0

.08

24

55

7

22

1

.2

38

.65

79

3

0.4

3

0.1

66

22

91

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

40

.97

62

8

10

1

.9

17

.40

95

0

.44

0

.07

66

01

8

23

1

.3

40

.36

13

6

0.4

4

0.1

77

59

05

-Ju

n

A

40

.44

38

6

11

2

1

9.1

25

22

0

.46

0

.08

79

76

1

5

1.5

2

6.2

52

8

0.4

5

0.1

18

13

76

05

-Ju

n

B

41

.22

21

2

11

2

1

9.1

25

22

0

.46

0

.08

79

76

4

1

.3

7.0

19

36

8

0.4

5

0.0

31

58

72

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

44

.54

12

6

11

1

.9

19

.15

04

5

0.4

5

0.0

86

17

7

29

1

.4

50

.82

28

3

0.4

4

0.2

23

62

04

06

-Ju

n

A

41

.74

74

7

11

1

.9

19

.15

04

5

0.4

6

0.0

88

09

21

2

8

1.4

4

9.0

70

32

0

.45

0

.22

08

16

4

06

-Ju

n

B

49

.50

07

8

12

1

.9

20

.89

14

0

.45

0

.09

40

11

3

30

1

.4

52

.57

53

4

0.4

6

0.2

41

84

66

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

45

.65

22

8

11

1

.8

19

.17

57

5

0.4

4

0.0

84

37

33

2

9

1.5

5

0.7

55

42

0

.46

0

.23

34

74

9

07

-Ju

n

A

40

.76

67

2

10

1

.9

17

.40

95

0

.45

0

.07

83

42

8

25

1

.5

43

.75

46

7

0.4

5

0.1

96

89

6

07

-Ju

n

B

41

.49

19

4

11

1

.9

19

.15

04

5

0.4

5

0.0

86

17

7

24

1

.5

42

.00

44

8

0.4

5

0.1

89

02

02

Page 85: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

85

| P

ag

e

Ta

ble

6.2

. Lo

ss t

hro

ug

h M

ud

fil

ter

for

Re

cove

ry 1

an

d 2

co

mb

ine

d

Loss

th

rou

gh

Mu

d F

ilte

r

Co

mb

ine

d

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2O

MT

)

To

tal

So

da

lo

ss

(Na

2O

MT

)

% L

oss

th

rou

gh

Mu

d f

ilte

r o

f

To

tal

loss

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

%

(%)

% L

oss

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

46

.83

20

5

0.9

05

79

9

60

.83

27

03

34

7.2

32

0.6

82

39

1

0.6

77

01

-Ju

n

A

48

.43

45

0

.60

98

67

01

-Ju

n

B

37

.62

21

0

.77

30

44

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

44

.39

64

3

0.8

94

54

15

6

.55

77

41

65

3

0.6

93

2

02

-Ju

n

A

46

.40

72

0

.62

68

15

02

-Ju

n

B

38

.41

44

0

.77

02

79

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

35

.28

46

7

0.8

42

69

04

8

.32

45

12

12

7

0.8

69

33

5

03

-Ju

n

A

38

.22

76

2

0.6

90

58

7

03

-Ju

n

B

42

.49

79

4

0.6

39

92

1

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

39

.73

04

4

0.7

54

18

81

1

7.1

64

04

40

2

0.8

45

91

3

04

-Ju

n

A

30

.30

21

6

0.5

59

09

6

04

-Ju

n

B

27

.88

12

0

.89

19

45

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

40

.97

62

8

0.5

79

86

86

3

.24

74

72

10

3

0.6

20

33

9

05

-Ju

n

A

40

.44

38

6

0.5

09

62

9

05

-Ju

n

B

41

.22

21

2

0.2

90

04

6

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

44

.54

12

6

0.9

54

56

39

4

.25

78

34

31

4

0.6

95

52

9

06

-Ju

n

A

41

.74

74

7

0.7

39

94

5

06

-Ju

n

B

49

.50

07

8

0.6

78

49

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

45

.65

22

8

0.8

68

28

42

3

.83

77

20

43

4

0.6

96

23

7

07

-Ju

n

A

40

.76

67

2

0.6

75

15

6

07

-Ju

n

B

41

.49

19

4

0.6

63

25

5

Page 86: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

86

| P

ag

e

Ta

ble

6.3

. Lo

ss t

hro

ug

h G

rift

s a

nd

sto

ne

s fo

r R

eco

ve

ry 1

an

d 2

Gri

fts

an

d S

ton

es

Re

cove

ry I

Re

cove

ry I

I C

om

bin

ed

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2

O

MT

)

To

tal

Loss

(MT

Ca

CO

3)

% S

od

a

(TT

A

Na

2O

)

To

tal

So

da

loss

(Na

2O

)

To

tal

Loss

(MT

Ca

CO

3)

% S

od

a

(TT

A

Na

2O

)

To

tal

So

da

loss

(Na

2O

)

To

tal

So

da

loss

(Na

2O

)

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

%

(%)

% L

oss

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

46

.83

20

5

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0.2

69

0.0

32

0.0

35

01

-Ju

n

A

48

.43

45

01

-Ju

n

B

37

.62

21

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

44

.39

64

3

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.03

3

02

-Ju

n

A

46

.40

72

02

-Ju

n

B

38

.41

44

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

35

.28

46

7

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.03

7

03

-Ju

n

A

38

.22

76

2

03

-Ju

n

B

42

.49

79

4

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

39

.73

04

4

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.04

3

04

-Ju

n

A

30

.30

21

6

04

-Ju

n

B

27

.88

12

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

40

.97

62

8

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.03

5

05

-Ju

n

A

40

.44

38

6

05

-Ju

n

B

41

.22

21

2

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

44

.54

12

6

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.03

1

06

-Ju

n

A

41

.74

74

7

06

-Ju

n

B

49

.50

07

8

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

45

.65

22

8

2.5

0

.5

0.0

12

5

6

0.5

0

.03

0

.04

25

0

.03

3

07

-Ju

n

A

40

.76

67

2

07

-Ju

n

B

41

.49

19

4

Page 87: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

87

| P

ag

e

Ta

ble

6.4

. C

om

bin

ed

loss

th

rou

gh

Mu

d f

ilte

r a

nd

Gri

fts

an

d s

ton

es

for

Re

cove

ry 1

an

d 2

Mu

d F

ilte

r a

nd

Gri

fts

Co

mb

ine

d

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2

O

MT

)

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

% (

%)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

46

.83

20

5

7.5

01

0

.71

2

01

-Ju

n

A

48

.43

45

01

-Ju

n

B

37

.62

21

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

44

.39

64

3

02

-Ju

n

A

46

.40

72

02

-Ju

n

B

38

.41

44

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

35

.28

46

7

03

-Ju

n

A

38

.22

76

2

03

-Ju

n

B

42

.49

79

4

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

39

.73

04

4

04

-Ju

n

A

30

.30

21

6

04

-Ju

n

B

27

.88

12

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

40

.97

62

8

05

-Ju

n

A

40

.44

38

6

05

-Ju

n

B

41

.22

21

2

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

44

.54

12

6

06

-Ju

n

A

41

.74

74

7

06

-Ju

n

B

49

.50

07

8

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

45

.65

22

8

07

-Ju

n

A

40

.76

67

2

07

-Ju

n

B

41

.49

19

4

Page 88: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

88

| P

ag

e

S

od

a C

arr

yo

ve

r

S

FL

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

% S

od

a

(TT

A N

a2

O,

Kg

/MT

)

Pu

lp

Pro

du

ctio

n

(MT

)

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

% L

oss

in

So

da

Ca

rry

ov

er

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

(To

tal

Loss

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A

Na

2O

MT

)

% L

oss

(SF

L P

ME

)

Av

g %

Loss

(S

FL

PM

E)

RE

SU

LT

3

6.7

5

4.9

75

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

14

.53

94

36

6

86

1

.25

03

92

3.7

66

08

1

25

2.9

26

85

36

.75

24

.98

70

5

5.0

04

15

84

4.9

75

01

-Ju

n

A

13

.92

81

69

8

8.8

8

1.2

37

93

6

26

.15

45

4

.73

31

65

1

01

-Ju

n

B

15

.10

70

42

3

84

.58

1

.27

77

54

2

1.1

95

1

6.0

28

53

32

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

14

.36

47

88

7

81

.9

1.1

76

47

6

3.5

54

53

7

26

.05

77

47

27

.47

34

3

4.2

82

23

27

02

-Ju

n

A

15

.06

33

80

3

83

.51

1

.25

79

43

2

4.6

94

2

5.0

94

08

24

02

-Ju

n

B

12

.92

39

43

7

86

.67

1

.12

01

18

2

2.0

27

4

5.0

85

11

31

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

12

.4

74

.47

0

.92

34

28

2.8

93

57

5

28

.58

41

64

18

.66

86

7

4.9

46

40

49

03

-Ju

n

A

11

.48

30

98

6

80

.47

0

.92

40

45

2

1.3

23

62

4

.33

34

33

7

03

-Ju

n

B

11

.83

23

94

4

88

.41

1

.04

61

02

2

5.7

83

94

4

.05

71

84

4

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

12

.79

29

57

7

84

.07

1

.07

55

04

2.5

00

15

9

56

.89

93

89

22

.63

64

4

4.7

51

20

63

04

-Ju

n

A

11

.87

60

56

3

53

.11

0

.63

07

37

1

3.4

11

16

4

.70

30

78

3

04

-Ju

n

B

12

.92

39

43

7

61

.43

0

.79

39

18

1

6.7

26

2

4.7

46

55

25

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

13

.01

12

67

6

87

.88

1

.14

34

3

3.5

35

51

6

19

.80

01

56

24

.22

72

8

4.7

19

59

79

05

-Ju

n

A

12

.83

66

19

7

89

.12

1

.14

4

23

.63

28

6

4.8

40

71

56

05

-Ju

n

B

14

.49

57

74

6

86

.1

1.2

48

08

6

24

.60

91

2

5.0

71

64

09

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

14

.88

87

32

4

86

.67

1

.29

04

06

3.7

22

96

2

16

.60

62

82

28

.35

82

6

4.5

50

37

24

06

-Ju

n

A

13

.27

32

39

4

86

.99

1

.15

46

39

2

4.5

50

47

4

.70

31

24

2

06

-Ju

n

B

14

.58

30

98

6

87

.63

1

.27

79

17

2

7.3

52

78

4

.67

19

81

9

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

12

.74

92

95

8

85

.69

1

.09

24

87

3.4

62

85

1

5.3

05

41

5

23

.20

92

8

4.7

07

11

35

07

-Ju

n

A

13

.70

98

59

2

90

.27

1

.23

75

89

2

4.2

11

72

5

.11

15

28

6

07

-Ju

n

B

14

.27

74

64

8

79

.34

1

.13

27

74

2

4.6

29

94

4

.59

91

75

1

Ta

ble

7.1

. So

da

ca

rryo

ver

wit

h p

ulp

in S

FL

Page 89: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

89

| P

ag

e

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

68

14

.53

94

36

6

72

.83

1

.05

89

07

3.0

78

79

2

12

4.7

48

46

19

.58

1

5.4

07

82

99

08

-Ju

n

A

12

.92

39

43

7

78

.92

1

.01

99

58

2

0.1

57

45

5

.05

99

53

7

08

-Ju

n

B

12

.74

92

95

8

78

.43

0

.99

99

27

2

3.1

92

16

4

.31

14

88

3

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

34

14

.36

47

88

7

80

.92

1

.16

23

99

3.5

94

01

9

-52

.59

02

7

24

.95

65

4

.65

76

99

2

09

-Ju

n

A

14

.71

40

84

5

83

.67

1

.23

11

27

2

1.4

46

08

5

.74

05

71

09

-Ju

n

B

13

.44

78

87

3

89

.27

1

.20

04

93

2

4.2

89

79

4

.94

23

76

6

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

61

12

.48

73

23

9

86

.2

1.0

76

40

7

3.1

85

91

-3

2.9

77

02

23

.60

83

2

4.5

59

44

06

10

-Ju

n

A

12

.83

66

19

7

83

.6

1.0

73

14

1

26

.16

10

4

4.1

02

05

94

10

-Ju

n

B

14

.45

21

12

7

71

.71

1

.03

63

61

1

6.7

44

19

6

.18

93

76

7

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

08

11

.70

14

08

5

71

.33

0

.83

46

61

1.6

35

41

9

14

7.6

01

03

22

.67

49

6

3.6

80

98

32

11

-Ju

n

A

14

.58

30

98

6

54

.91

0

.80

07

58

3

.83

4

20

.88

57

05

11

-Ju

n

B

0

0

0

0

0

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

12

.13

80

28

2

20

.14

0

.24

44

6

2.4

65

11

1

72

.93

22

86

12

.61

41

6

1.9

37

97

99

12

-Ju

n

A

13

.44

78

87

3

80

.18

1

.07

82

52

2

3.4

65

52

4

.59

50

46

7

12

-Ju

n

B

15

.01

97

18

3

76

.06

1

.14

24

2

2.0

56

3

5.1

79

47

15

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

15

.45

63

38

9

0.5

1

1.3

98

95

3

3.1

48

55

6

18

.54

27

35

23

.26

86

6

.01

21

93

1

13

-Ju

n

A

12

.88

02

81

7

79

.84

1

.02

83

62

1

9.4

31

72

5

.29

21

80

5

13

-Ju

n

B

12

.13

80

28

2

59

.42

0

.72

12

42

1

9.5

24

12

3

.69

41

05

7

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

13

.18

59

15

5

81

.11

1

.06

95

1

2.9

17

10

3

-14

0.2

45

4

19

.67

25

6

5.4

36

55

53

14

-Ju

n

A

13

.18

59

15

5

55

.84

0

.73

63

02

1

9.1

51

82

3

.84

45

51

2

14

-Ju

n

B

13

.01

12

67

6

85

.41

1

.11

12

92

2

4.8

80

68

4

.46

64

87

1

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

12

.57

46

47

9

90

.58

1

.13

90

12

3.3

02

85

2

47

.66

01

99

25

.84

47

4

.40

71

38

15

-Ju

n

A

12

.31

26

76

1

89

.33

1

.09

98

91

2

6.9

91

69

4

.07

49

25

8

15

-Ju

n

B

12

.18

16

90

1

87

.34

1

.06

39

49

2

1.5

01

6

4.9

48

23

09

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

13

.97

18

31

8

9.1

3

1.2

45

30

9

3.3

63

75

1

28

.94

79

4

23

.28

48

5

.34

81

64

16

-Ju

n

A

12

.74

92

95

8

88

.88

1

.13

31

57

2

4.9

87

96

4

.53

48

13

6

16

-Ju

n

B

11

.91

97

18

3

82

.66

0

.98

52

84

2

3.3

70

9

4.2

15

85

78

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

15

.10

70

42

3

96

.57

1

.45

88

87

3.7

70

25

9

72

.92

57

12

26

.84

22

5

.43

50

50

3

17

-Ju

n

A

12

.83

66

19

7

94

.53

1

.21

34

46

2

5.4

36

88

4

.77

04

18

6

17

-Ju

n

B

11

.65

77

46

5

94

.18

1

.09

79

27

2

0.9

21

22

5

.24

79

08

9

Page 90: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

90

| P

ag

e

S

od

a C

arr

yo

ve

r

W

FL

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

% S

od

a

(TT

A N

a2

O,

Kg

/MT

)

Pu

lp

Pro

du

ctio

n

(MT

)

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

% L

oss

in

So

da

Ca

rry

ov

er

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

(To

tal

Loss

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A

Na

2O

MT

)

% L

oss

(SF

L P

ME

)

Av

g %

Loss

(S

FL

PM

E)

RE

SU

LT

3

2.8

4

5.4

27

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

23

.92

67

60

6

49

.26

7

1.1

78

8

3.2

98

06

4

22

1.4

95

21

32

.84

21

.84

5

5.3

96

19

92

5.4

27

01

-Ju

n

A

24

.49

43

66

2

51

.17

9

1.2

53

59

7

22

.28

5

.62

65

58

2

01

-Ju

n

B

23

.88

30

98

6

36

.24

6

0.8

65

66

7

16

.42

7

5.2

69

78

02

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

21

.78

73

23

9

32

.69

8

0.7

12

40

2

2.8

92

85

6

21

.20

70

67

16

.92

3

4.2

09

66

68

02

-Ju

n

A

23

.40

28

16

9

52

.18

7

1.2

21

32

3

21

.71

3

5.6

24

84

6

02

-Ju

n

B

24

.66

90

14

1

38

.88

0

.95

91

31

1

6.3

87

5

.85

30

01

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

22

.44

22

53

5

40

.08

1

0.8

99

50

8

2.4

75

64

1

24

.45

56

08

16

.61

6

5.4

13

50

48

03

-Ju

n

A

23

.05

35

21

1

34

.20

7

0.7

88

59

2

16

.90

4

4.6

65

11

95

03

-Ju

n

B

22

.70

42

25

4

34

.68

7

0.7

87

54

1

16

.71

4

4.7

11

86

71

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

25

.89

15

49

3

38

.20

3

0.9

89

13

5

2.4

86

50

6

56

.58

86

75

17

.09

4

5.7

86

44

47

04

-Ju

n

A

23

.05

35

21

1

40

.12

4

0.9

24

99

9

16

.89

1

5.4

76

28

61

04

-Ju

n

B

23

.31

54

93

2

4.5

49

0

.57

23

72

1

1.1

55

5

.13

10

80

6

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

22

.00

56

33

8

36

.53

3

0.8

03

93

2

2.8

72

25

2

16

.08

56

41

16

.74

9

4.7

99

87

95

05

-Ju

n

A

23

.88

30

98

6

49

.34

1

1.1

78

41

6

16

.81

1

7.0

09

79

1

05

-Ju

n

B

23

.14

08

45

1

38

.45

6

0.8

89

90

4

16

.61

3

5.3

56

67

45

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

24

.58

16

90

1

36

.86

2

0.9

06

13

2.9

77

92

5

13

.28

30

41

16

.18

3

5.5

99

27

25

06

-Ju

n

A

23

.62

11

26

8

37

.18

7

0.8

78

39

9

17

.19

7

5.1

07

86

09

06

-Ju

n

B

23

.35

91

54

9

51

.08

9

1.1

93

39

6

22

.14

8

5.3

88

27

82

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

26

.28

45

07

3

9.5

59

1

.03

97

89

3.2

07

57

8

14

.17

71

42

22

.44

3

4.6

33

02

06

07

-Ju

n

A

24

.49

43

66

2

38

.91

0

.95

30

76

1

6.5

55

5

.75

70

26

8

07

-Ju

n

B

23

.92

67

60

6

50

.76

8

1.2

14

71

4

16

.86

2

7.2

03

85

35

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

68

2

2.8

78

87

32

2

2.0

59

0

.50

46

85

2

.46

33

71

9

9.8

12

43

3

11

.35

4

4.4

44

99

79

Ta

ble

7.2

. So

da

ca

rryo

ver

wit

h p

ulp

in W

FL

Page 91: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

91

| P

ag

e

08

-Ju

n

A

23

.35

91

54

9

39

.50

6

0.9

22

82

7

16

.88

6

5.4

65

04

07

08

-Ju

n

B

25

.80

42

25

4

40

.14

3

1.0

35

85

9

16

.77

7

6.1

74

28

04

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

34

25

.41

12

67

6

39

.67

6

1.0

08

21

7

3.0

42

04

4

-

44

.51

33

82

16

.59

2

6.0

76

52

76

09

-Ju

n

A

23

.31

54

93

4

8.2

94

1

.12

59

98

2

2.1

03

5

.09

43

23

9

09

-Ju

n

B

23

.66

47

88

7

38

.36

2

0.9

07

82

9

16

.38

2

5.5

41

62

27

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

61

24

.58

16

90

1

36

.85

3

0.9

05

90

9

3.3

71

56

9

-

34

.89

87

53

21

.88

6

4.1

39

21

7

10

-Ju

n

A

24

.05

77

46

5

50

.46

1

.21

39

54

1

7.0

8

7.1

07

45

84

10

-Ju

n

B

24

.8

50

.47

2

1.2

51

70

6

21

.76

7

5.7

50

47

37

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

08

24

.97

46

47

9

32

.74

2

0.8

17

72

2.6

67

95

2

24

0.7

89

9

17

.01

4

.80

72

89

4

11

-Ju

n

A

22

.39

85

91

5

51

.61

3

1.1

56

05

9

22

.17

7

5.2

12

87

15

11

-Ju

n

B

25

.49

85

91

5

27

.22

4

0.6

94

17

4

11

.01

4

6.3

02

64

81

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

23

.66

47

88

7

49

.72

6

1.1

76

75

5

2.7

45

69

7

81

.23

36

26

16

.33

9

7.2

02

12

55

12

-Ju

n

A

23

.05

35

21

1

36

.71

1

0.8

46

31

8

16

.86

2

5.0

19

08

32

12

-Ju

n

B

20

.91

40

84

5

34

.55

2

0.7

22

62

3

21

.85

7

3.3

06

14

2

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

23

.14

08

45

1

23

.53

1

0.5

44

52

7

2.0

13

11

1

1.8

55

77

2

11

.49

4

4.7

37

49

11

13

-Ju

n

A

25

.67

32

39

4

20

.93

4

0.5

37

44

4

10

.73

5

.00

87

94

13

-Ju

n

B

22

.74

78

87

3

40

.93

3

0.9

31

13

9

17

.00

3

5.4

76

32

34

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

24

.14

50

70

4

54

.33

1

1.3

11

82

6

3.2

04

60

1

-

15

4.0

67

37

16

.71

8

7.8

46

78

68

14

-Ju

n

A

25

.41

12

67

6

36

.45

6

0.9

26

39

3

16

.43

3

5.6

37

39

53

14

-Ju

n

B

22

.66

05

63

4

42

.64

6

0.9

66

38

2

22

.4

4.3

14

20

71

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

20

.17

18

31

4

6.7

67

0

.94

33

76

3.1

11

31

7

44

.89

63

54

21

.70

6

4.3

46

15

32

15

-Ju

n

A

25

.23

66

19

7

51

.02

1

1.2

87

59

8

22

.04

9

5.8

39

70

96

15

-Ju

n

B

23

.40

28

16

9

37

.61

7

0.8

80

34

4

16

.57

2

5.3

12

23

61

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

22

.52

95

77

5

44

.16

0

.99

49

06

2.8

13

58

1

24

.21

32

63

21

.89

5

4.5

43

98

79

16

-Ju

n

A

21

.35

07

04

2

50

.64

8

1.0

81

37

2

2.2

66

4

.85

65

99

6

16

-Ju

n

B

19

.38

59

15

5

38

.03

3

0.7

37

30

5

16

.62

1

4.4

35

98

17

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

21

.56

90

14

1

24

.75

6

0.5

33

96

3

2.7

53

34

2

53

.25

61

33

19

.35

3

2.7

59

06

84

17

-Ju

n

A

22

.18

02

81

7

46

.78

6

1.0

37

72

7

23

.43

9

4.4

27

35

04

17

-Ju

n

B

23

.70

84

50

7

49

.84

1

1.1

81

65

3

10

.21

2

11

.57

12

19

Page 92: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

92

| P

ag

e

S

od

a C

arr

yo

ve

r

C

om

bin

ed

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

% L

oss

in

So

da

Ca

rry

ov

er

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

%

Loss

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

RE

SU

LT

69

.59

5.1

08

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

7

.06

41

45

4

74

.42

20

6

69

.59

5.1

9

5.1

08

01

-Ju

n

A

5.1

4

01

-Ju

n

B

5.7

0

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

6.4

47

39

3

47

.26

48

14

4.2

5

02

-Ju

n

A

5.3

4

02

-Ju

n

B

5.4

1

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

5.3

69

21

6

53

.03

97

72

5.1

7

03

-Ju

n

A

4.4

8

03

-Ju

n

B

4.3

1

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

4

.98

66

66

1

13

.48

80

6

5.2

0

04

-Ju

n

A

5.1

3

04

-Ju

n

B

4.9

0

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

6.4

07

76

8

35

.88

57

98

4.7

5

05

-Ju

n

A

5.7

4

05

-Ju

n

B

5.1

9

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

6.7

00

88

7

29

.88

93

23

4.9

3

06

-Ju

n

A

4.8

7

06

-Ju

n

B

4.9

9

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

6.6

70

42

9

29

.48

25

57

4.6

7

07

-Ju

n

A

5.3

7

07

-Ju

n

B

5.6

6

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

68

5

.54

21

63

2

24

.56

09

5

.05

08

-Ju

n

A

5.2

4

Ta

ble

7.3

. C

om

bin

ed

so

da

ca

rryo

ver

wit

h p

ulp

in S

FL a

nd

WFL

Page 93: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

93

| P

ag

e

08

-Ju

n

B

5.0

9

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

34

6

.63

60

64

-9

7.1

03

65

5.2

2

09

-Ju

n

A

5.4

1

09

-Ju

n

B

5.1

8

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

61

6

.55

74

78

-6

7.8

75

77

4.3

6

10

-Ju

n

A

5.2

9

10

-Ju

n

B

5.9

4

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

08

4

.30

33

71

3

88

.39

09

3

4.1

6

11

-Ju

n

A

7.5

2

11

-Ju

n

B

6.3

0

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

5.2

10

80

8

15

4.1

65

91

4.9

1

12

-Ju

n

A

4.7

7

12

-Ju

n

B

4.2

5

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

5

.16

16

67

3

0.3

98

50

7

5.5

9

13

-Ju

n

A

5.1

9

13

-Ju

n

B

4.5

2

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

6.1

21

70

5

-29

4.3

12

7

6.5

4

14

-Ju

n

A

4.6

7

14

-Ju

n

B

4.3

9

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

6.4

14

16

9

92

.55

65

53

4.3

8

15

-Ju

n

A

4.8

7

15

-Ju

n

B

5.1

1

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

6

.17

73

32

5

3.1

61

20

3

4.9

6

16

-Ju

n

A

4.6

9

16

-Ju

n

B

4.3

1

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

6.5

23

60

1

12

6.1

81

84

4.3

1

17

-Ju

n

A

4.6

1

17

-Ju

n

B

7.3

2

Page 94: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Table 7.4. WFL production and total soda loss

WFL Period Production Soda Loss

Bleached

Pulp

(MT)

Weekly

Bleached

Production

Unbleached

Pulp (MT)

% Soda

(TTA

Na2O,

Kg/MT)

Soda Loss

(Weekly

basis MT)

01-Jan 81.11

532.956667

102.63

10.69718 7.1959951 02-Jan 85.71 99.23

03-Jan 61.59 86.44

04-Jan 88.6

648.62

88.72

10.60986 7.1888162

05-Jan 94.91 87.95

06-Jan 89 103.89

07-Jan 98.32 94.74

08-Jan 89.61 97.06

09-Jan 92.47 106.75

10-Jan 95.71 98.45

11-Jan 58.43

625.64

76.42

11.70141 8.2131016

12-Jan 92.3 96.79

13-Jan 98.13 115.43

14-Jan 96.14 102.42

15-Jan 87.55 99.28

16-Jan 97.42 113.05

17-Jan 95.67 98.5

18-Jan 94.53

657.45

112.23

14.62676 10.813418

19-Jan 97.33 100.44

20-Jan 90.21 109.23

21-Jan 95.77 110.11

22-Jan 92.38 90.94

23-Jan 96.56 94.29

24-Jan 90.67 122.05

25-Jan 80.33

637.33

108.46

11.30845 8.2252016

26-Jan 97.85 91.72

27-Jan 98.25 103.17

28-Jan 90.52 111.08

29-Jan 93.43 119.31

30-Jan 79.55 90.39

31-Jan 97.4 103.22

01-Feb 105.27

724.14

107.97

12.31268 9.9831177

02-Feb 106.83 127.9

03-Feb 105.45 109.46

04-Feb 106.24 120.15

05-Feb 92.04 99.57

06-Feb 105.13 123.91

07-Feb 103.18 121.84

08-Feb 100.65

596.93

111.63

15.1507 9.778416 09-Feb 96.73 105.47

10-Feb 42.99 28.24

11-Feb 39.84 64.06

Page 95: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

95 | P a g e

12-Feb 105.2 107.69

13-Feb 105.33 114.13

14-Feb 106.19 114.19

15-Feb 103.11

706.83

116.56

17.55211 12.194506

16-Feb 92.4 104.67

17-Feb 90.01 108.41

18-Feb 105.68 107.92

19-Feb 106.32 42.64

20-Feb 106.75 120.11

21-Feb 102.56 94.45

22-Feb 83.72

708.29

111.02

22.79155 18.524743

23-Feb 98.37 131.3

24-Feb 103.83 112.87

25-Feb 94.26 105.23

26-Feb 108.73 115.22

27-Feb 110.31 113.96

28-Feb 109.07 123.19

01-Mar 109.48

754.42

121.25

18.9493 15.669931

02-Mar 110.65 116.04

03-Mar 92.54 108.33

04-Mar 111 126.83

05-Mar 109.36 128.31

06-Mar 110.59 118.77

07-Mar 110.8 107.41

08-Mar 108.13

665.29

110.65

19.34225 14.758139

09-Mar 70.74 84.59

10-Mar 91.16 110.28

11-Mar 107.62 121.58

12-Mar 87.57 107.8

13-Mar 102.06 109.9

14-Mar 98.01 118.2

15-Mar 114.4

753.03

118.61

18.20704 15.051762

16-Mar 106.32 112.63

17-Mar 112.28 118.45

18-Mar 101.94 133.76

19-Mar 96.44 106.16

20-Mar 112.47 115.07

21-Mar 109.18 122.02

22-Mar 104.05

733.89

105.81

18.42535 14.658289

23-Mar 109.73 121.33

24-Mar 112.95 120.9

25-Mar 100.11 122.24

26-Mar 108.14 112.06

27-Mar 106.21 112.61

28-Mar 92.7 100.6

29-Mar 95.53

619.73

115.04

19.42958 13.468195

30-Mar 79.76 94.62

31-Mar 52.31 71.82

01-Apr 98.02 74.91

02-Apr 83.34 99.6

Page 96: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

96 | P a g e

03-Apr 100.5 117.66

04-Apr 110.27 119.53

05-Apr 76.3

728.38

91.28

20.7831 16.495961

06-Apr 110.1 128.84

07-Apr 110.02 106.25

08-Apr 110.73 121.03

09-Apr 110.81 129.43

10-Apr 104.47 121.57

11-Apr 105.95 95.32

12-Apr 90.2

682.72

108.52

21.48169 16.342411

13-Apr 102.45 114.53

14-Apr 103.83 121.37

15-Apr 84.99 103.43

16-Apr 103.18 94.44

17-Apr 99.26 108.28

18-Apr 98.81 110.19

19-Apr 100.04

616.88

109.16

23.75211 16.740964

20-Apr 90.35 107.38

21-Apr 99.37 106.41

22-Apr 98.04 108.93

23-Apr 91.17 109.3

24-Apr 77.29 97.88

25-Apr 60.62 65.76

26-Apr 83.82

644.18

95.34

24.97465 17.526209

27-Apr 96.58 105.71

28-Apr 101.17 111.61

29-Apr 70.5 83.49

30-Apr 96.34 110.99

01-May 94.98 97.23

02-May 100.79 97.39

03-May 100.15

711.36

109.28

22.57324 17.758367

04-May 100.49 110.16

05-May 103.13 109.58

06-May 103.26 122.74

07-May 103.67 106.09

08-May 96 114.87

09-May 104.66 113.98

10-May 104.13

762.86

119.7

19.95352 17.341805

11-May 105.23 105.92

12-May 102 155.33

13-May 112.35 113.03

14-May 114.04 135.51

15-May 112.58 118.09

16-May 112.53 121.53

17-May 106.11

677.4

120.6

21.39437 16.610158

18-May 60.55 74.83

19-May 104.61 115.98

20-May 98.5 104.95

21-May 92.66 122.96

22-May 108.66 108.84

Page 97: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

97 | P a g e

23-May 106.31 128.22

24-May 68.06

668.77

101.92

23.27183 17.395461

25-May 86.78 73.13

26-May 111.82 103.35

27-May 114.36 126.26

28-May 74.82 88.14

29-May 110.89 130.71

30-May 102.04 123.98

31-May 110.02 770.14 112.24 23.5338 18.490038

Page 98: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

98 | P a g e

Table 7.4. SFL production and total soda loss

SFL Period Production Soda Loss

Bleached

Pulp

(MT)

Weekly

Bleached

Production

Unbleached

Pulp (MT)

Weekly

Unbleached

Pulp (MT)

% Soda

(TTA

Na2O,

Kg/MT)

Soda Loss

(Weekly

basis MT)

01-Jan 210.9

1128.26

267.36

1508.243333 17.94507 27.065533 02-Jan 161.76 218.92

03-Jan 110.88 160.11

04-Jan 190.81

1364.54

134.03

1395.77 14.88873 20.781246

05-Jan 195.73 198.33

06-Jan 173.98 234.3

07-Jan 124.68 127.86

08-Jan 255.84 268.38

09-Jan 203.76 213.35

10-Jan 219.74 219.52

11-Jan 175.76

1446.65

165.62

1469.37 17.3338 25.46977

12-Jan 226.86 240.51

13-Jan 198.93 193.95

14-Jan 226.01 244.67

15-Jan 241.11 239.17

16-Jan 150.85 177.26

17-Jan 227.13 208.19

18-Jan 217.41

1532.29

231.07

1583.97 17.11549 27.110427

19-Jan 234.27 209.28

20-Jan 204.78 232.66

21-Jan 207.34 215.89

22-Jan 225.1 227.42

23-Jan 216.96 219.44

24-Jan 226.43 248.21

25-Jan 135.45

1368.06

228.4

1532.89 14.80141 22.688931

26-Jan 170.71 206.68

27-Jan 211.03 199.6

28-Jan 200.98 236.3

29-Jan 183.38 189.29

30-Jan 226.45 222.03

31-Jan 240.06 250.59

01-Feb 202.779

1374.019

237.27

1418.87 15.10704 21.434929

02-Feb 211.93 204.82

03-Feb 198.86 237.81

04-Feb 190.08 196.68

05-Feb 169.13 173.78

06-Feb 179.18 142.06

07-Feb 222.06 226.45

08-Feb 205.01

1151.77

212.54

1220.48 15.41268 18.810863 09-Feb 205.91 203.57

10-Feb 57.1 96.44

11-Feb 81.83 52.83

Page 99: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

99 | P a g e

12-Feb 192.16 208.4

13-Feb 194.78 210.22

14-Feb 214.98 236.48

15-Feb 145.29

1322.98

198.25

1444.47 18.6 26.867142

16-Feb 189.83 162.34

17-Feb 165.1 198.59

18-Feb 196.56 176.79

19-Feb 193.63 258.11

20-Feb 220.43 234.16

21-Feb 212.14 216.23

22-Feb 205.08

1473.11

196.82

1641.5 15.67465 25.729935

23-Feb 233.91 211.89

24-Feb 205.41 223.29

25-Feb 223.68 249.81

26-Feb 177.19 279.19

27-Feb 225.35 231.51

28-Feb 202.49 248.99

01-Mar 186.42

1535.62

218.26

1651.4 14.40845 23.794115

02-Mar 220.63 235.87

03-Mar 227.64 244.09

04-Mar 230.68 231.93

05-Mar 240.33 241.53

06-Mar 232.86 231.83

07-Mar 197.06 247.89

08-Mar 179.58

1220.72

180.96

1441.13 15.76197 22.71505

09-Mar 215.88 195.55

10-Mar 216.81 296.68

11-Mar 215.2 262.92

12-Mar 85.61 86.6

13-Mar 125.51 151.98

14-Mar 182.13 266.44

15-Mar 224.06

1424.72

230

1619.24 16.32958 26.441505

16-Mar 168.05 230.41

17-Mar 181.68 224.24

18-Mar 180.98 228.82

19-Mar 271.06 237.96

20-Mar 221.41 253.84

21-Mar 177.48 213.97

22-Mar 198.61

1479.99

223.67

1570.94 16.94085 26.613051

23-Mar 223.51 211

24-Mar 268.87 272.71

25-Mar 204.16 216.14

26-Mar 204.65 226.19

27-Mar 218.66 241.23

28-Mar 161.53 180

29-Mar 303.02

1481.47

341.12

1662.56 14.93239 24.826002

30-Mar 99.52 135.44

31-Mar 211.08 247.62

01-Apr 208.3 186.76

02-Apr 221.63 251.49

Page 100: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

100 | P a g e

03-Apr 225.83 267.71

04-Apr 212.09 232.42

05-Apr 175

1455.96

230.41

1714.69 13.3169 22.834358

06-Apr 223.82 257.37

07-Apr 227.31 258.7

08-Apr 210.9 244.38

09-Apr 228.28 263.2

10-Apr 190.29 220.63

11-Apr 200.36 240

12-Apr 230.92

1479.51

240

1568.35 16.02394 25.131152

13-Apr 177.93 200.59

14-Apr 211.74 216.3

15-Apr 231.06 253

16-Apr 221.66 228.21

17-Apr 170.44 174.36

18-Apr 235.76 255.89

19-Apr 163.16

1340.79

190.61

1508.17 16.15493 24.36438

20-Apr 147.35 158.05

21-Apr 206.49 242.1

22-Apr 200.81 213.52

23-Apr 197.49 239.43

24-Apr 210.53 229.05

25-Apr 214.96 235.41

26-Apr 225.53

1490.34

239.62

1678.42 16.19859 27.18804

27-Apr 98.84 124.72

28-Apr 213.6 243.13

29-Apr 236.3 257.99

30-Apr 239.23 272.63

01-May 244.69 268

02-May 232.15 272.33

03-May 171.13

1589.17

185.68

1782.65 16.80986 29.966095

04-May 241.09 271.98

05-May 227.04 252.06

06-May 226.18 247.94

07-May 242.45 278.68

08-May 238.14 271.53

09-May 243.14 274.78

10-May 220.75

1677.12

230.59

1893.33 17.72676 33.562608

11-May 238.63 277.73

12-May 240.56 276.94

13-May 245.45 269.35

14-May 245 276.22

15-May 245.93 277.99

16-May 240.8 284.51

17-May 205.36

1449.36

248.82

1657.66 17.72676 29.384942

18-May 224 225.06

19-May 205 230.97

20-May 193 227.64

21-May 204 216.8

22-May 222 258.59

Page 101: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

101 | P a g e

23-May 196 249.78

24-May 46

1292.02

73.6

1460.52 16.7662 24.487366

25-May 210.01 222.13

26-May 224.01 172.54

27-May 208 331.46

28-May 169 172.18

29-May 210 241.17

30-May 225 247.44

31-May 222 1554 255.97 1791.79 13.70986 24.565189

Page 102: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Ta

ble

8.1

. So

da

loss

fro

m S

cre

en

s a

s R

eje

ct in

WFL

an

d S

FL

Scr

ee

n L

oss

SF

L W

FL

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

TT

A

(Na

2C

O3

)

% T

ota

l

So

da

(T

TA

Na

2O

,

Kg

/MT

)

%

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

lo

ss

Ma

ss o

f

Pu

lp

(MT

)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

Lo

ss

(MT

)

% T

ota

l

So

da

(T

TA

Na

2O

,

Kg

/MT

)

%

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

lo

ss

Ma

ss o

f

Pu

lp

(MT

)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

Lo

ss

(MT

)

RE

SU

LT

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

33

.3

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.59

46

0

.13

68

91

0

.13

20

65

1

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.3

66

92

0

.11

18

41

0

.07

69

43

9

01

-Ju

n

A

31

.9

01

-Ju

n

B

34

.6

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

32

.9

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.52

08

0

.13

29

97

0

.12

83

08

7

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.2

37

65

0

.10

12

65

0

.06

96

67

3

02

-Ju

n

A

34

.5

02

-Ju

n

B

29

.6

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

28

.4

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.43

35

0

.12

83

91

0

.12

38

65

2

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.0

89

75

0

.08

91

63

0

.06

13

42

0

3-J

un

A

2

6.3

03

-Ju

n

B

27

.1

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

29

.3

52

.76

5

0.9

1

.98

61

0

.10

47

87

0

.10

10

92

5

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.0

28

76

0

.08

41

73

0

.05

79

08

9

04

-Ju

n

A

27

.2

04

-Ju

n

B

29

.6

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

29

.8

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.63

1

0.1

38

81

2

0.1

33

91

79

8

1.8

2

56

.29

1

.49

19

6

0.1

22

07

2

0.0

83

98

24

0

5-J

un

A

2

9.4

05

-Ju

n

B

33

.2

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

34

.1

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.61

29

0

.13

78

57

0

.13

29

96

6

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.5

01

65

6

0.1

22

86

5

0.0

84

52

82

0

6-J

un

A

3

0.4

06

-Ju

n

B

33

.4

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

29

.2

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.55

3

0.1

34

69

6

0.1

29

94

77

8

1.8

2

56

.29

1

.55

08

44

0

.12

68

9

0.0

87

29

7

07

-Ju

n

A

31

.4

07

-Ju

n

B

32

.7

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

68

3

3.3

5

2.7

6

50

.9

2.3

01

8

0.1

21

44

3

0.1

17

16

16

8

1.8

2

56

.29

1

.22

04

96

0

.09

98

61

0

.06

87

01

7

Page 103: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

10

3 |

Pa

ge

08

-Ju

n

A

29

.6

08

-Ju

n

B

29

.2

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

34

32

.9

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.53

86

0

.13

39

37

0

.12

92

14

7

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.5

15

98

4

0.1

24

03

8

0.0

85

33

47

0

9-J

un

A

3

3.7

09

-Ju

n

B

30

.8

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

61

28

.6

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.41

51

0

.12

74

21

0

.12

29

28

6

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.6

53

42

0

.13

52

83

0

.09

30

71

1

0-J

un

A

2

9.4

10

-Ju

n

B

33

.1

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

08

26

.8

52

.76

5

0.9

1

.26

24

0

.06

66

04

0

.06

42

56

2

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.3

38

94

8

0.1

09

55

3

0.0

75

36

94

1

1-J

un

A

3

3.4

11

-Ju

n

B

0

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

27

.8

52

.76

5

0.9

1

.76

38

0

.09

30

58

0

.08

97

77

4

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.4

51

86

8

0.1

18

79

2

0.0

81

72

56

1

2-J

un

A

3

0.8

12

-Ju

n

B

34

.4

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

35

.4

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.29

77

0

.12

12

27

0

.11

69

52

9

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.0

24

77

6

0.0

83

84

7

0.0

57

68

46

1

3-J

un

A

2

9.5

13

-Ju

n

B

27

.8

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

30

.2

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.22

36

0

.11

73

17

0

.11

31

81

2

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.6

01

19

6

0.1

31

01

0

.09

01

31

3

14

-Ju

n

A

30

.2

14

-Ju

n

B

29

.8

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

28

.8

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.67

25

0

.14

10

01

0

.13

60

30

3

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.6

24

86

0

.13

29

46

0

.09

14

63

4

15

-Ju

n

A

28

.2

15

-Ju

n

B

27

.9

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

32

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.60

67

0

.13

75

29

0

.13

26

81

8

1.8

2

56

.29

1

.59

40

92

0

.13

04

29

0

.08

97

31

4

16

-Ju

n

A

29

.2

16

-Ju

n

B

27

.3

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

34

.6

52

.76

5

0.9

2

.85

28

0

.15

05

14

0

.14

52

07

5

81

.82

5

6.2

9

1.4

56

59

6

0.1

19

17

9

0.0

81

99

18

1

7-J

un

A

2

9.4

17

-Ju

n

B

26

.7

Page 104: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

10

4 |

Pa

ge

Ta

ble

8.2

. C

om

bin

ed

so

da

loss

fro

m S

cre

en

s a

s R

eje

ct in

WFL

an

d S

FL

Scr

ee

n L

oss

Co

mb

ine

d

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

TT

A

(Na

2

CO

3)

To

tal

So

da

Loss

(MT

)

To

tal

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

Lo

ss

(MT

)

% T

ota

l

Loss

in

Scr

ee

n

%

Wa

sha

ble

Loss

in

Scr

ee

n

%

Ge

ne

ral

To

tal

So

da

Loss

%

Ge

ne

ral

Wa

sha

b

le S

od

a

Loss

% L

oss

for

To

tal

So

da

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

fo

r

To

tal

So

da

(OR

E)

% L

oss

fo

r

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

fo

r

Wa

sha

ble

So

da

(OR

E)

RE

SU

LT

2

.81

2

.34

0.2

01

0.1

67

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

89

33

.3

0.2

48

73

2

0.2

09

00

91

1

6.7

04

67

1

4.0

36

87

49

2.8

09

2

.34

0

0.1

87

17

4

0.2

01

0.1

57

28

14

0.1

67

01

-Ju

n

A

31

.9

01

-Ju

n

B

34

.6

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

1

32

.9

0.2

34

26

2

0.1

97

97

6

1.7

17

33

7

1.4

51

33

08

3

0.1

81

29

2

0.1

53

21

08

0

2-J

un

A

3

4.5

02

-Ju

n

B

29

.6

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

3

28

.4

0.2

17

55

5

0.1

85

20

72

2

.14

91

14

1

.82

95

68

09

0

.18

75

31

0

.15

96

47

3

03

-Ju

n

A

26

.3

03

-Ju

n

B

27

.1

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

94

29

.3

0.1

88

96

0

.15

90

01

4

4.3

00

40

5

3.6

18

60

24

2

0.1

92

98

6

0.1

62

38

92

0

4-J

un

A

2

7.2

04

-Ju

n

B

29

.6

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.85

6

29

.8

0.2

60

88

4

0.2

17

90

03

1

.46

10

42

1

.22

03

19

94

0

.21

27

19

0

.17

76

71

5

05

-Ju

n

A

29

.4

05

-Ju

n

B

33

.2

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.41

9

34

.1

0.2

60

72

2

0.2

17

52

48

1

.16

29

52

0

.97

02

69

98

0

.19

20

05

0

.16

01

92

7

06

-Ju

n

A

30

.4

06

-Ju

n

B

33

.4

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.62

5

29

.2

0.2

61

58

6

0.2

17

24

47

1

.15

61

83

0

.96

01

97

61

0

.20

45

07

0

.16

98

40

6

07

-Ju

n

A

31

.4

Page 105: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

10

5 |

Pa

ge

07

-Ju

n

B

32

.7

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

68

33

.3

0.2

21

30

4

0.1

85

86

33

8

.96

69

35

7

.53

09

29

49

0

.20

50

11

0

.17

21

79

2

08

-Ju

n

A

29

.6

08

-Ju

n

B

29

.2

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

34

32

.9

0.2

57

97

4

0.2

14

54

95

-3

.77

48

7

-3.1

39

44

22

0

.20

51

17

0

.17

05

89

6

09

-Ju

n

A

33

.7

09

-Ju

n

B

30

.8

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

61

28

.6

0.2

62

70

4

0.2

15

99

96

-2

.71

92

2

-2.2

35

78

93

0

.20

64

52

0

.16

97

48

9

10

-Ju

n

A

29

.4

10

-Ju

n

B

33

.1

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

08

26

.8

0.1

76

15

7

0.1

39

62

55

1

5.8

98

64

1

2.6

01

58

33

0

.22

96

4

0.1

82

01

75

1

1-J

un

A

3

3.4

11

-Ju

n

B

0

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

27

.8

0.2

11

85

0

.17

15

03

1

6.2

67

74

9

5.0

74

05

53

2

0.1

87

15

7

0.1

51

51

25

1

2-J

un

A

3

0.8

12

-Ju

n

B

34

.4

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

35

.4

0.2

05

07

4

0.1

74

63

76

1

.20

77

37

1

.02

84

89

82

0

.20

21

4

0.1

72

13

91

1

3-J

un

A

2

9.5

13

-Ju

n

B

27

.8

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

30

.2

0.2

48

32

7

0.2

03

31

26

-1

1.9

38

8

-9.7

74

64

24

0

.20

82

3

0.1

70

48

41

1

4-J

un

A

3

0.2

14

-Ju

n

B

29

.8

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

28

.8

0.2

73

94

7

0.2

27

49

36

3

.95

30

61

3

.28

27

36

21

0

.20

34

29

0

.16

89

33

1

5-J

un

A

2

8.2

15

-Ju

n

B

27

.9

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

32

0.2

67

95

8

0.2

22

41

25

2

.30

60

08

1

.91

40

48

78

0

.20

23

46

0

.16

79

52

7

16

-Ju

n

A

29

.2

16

-Ju

n

B

27

.3

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

34

.6

0.2

69

69

2

0.2

27

19

93

5

.21

64

88

4

.39

45

70

77

0

.21

36

95

0

.18

00

25

1

7-J

un

A

2

9.4

17

-Ju

n

B

26

.7

Page 106: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Ta

ble

9.6

. E

SP O

RE

Lo

ss

Re

cov

ery

2

Re

cov

ery

1

To

tal

W

FL

SFL

Da

te

Sh

ift

To

tal

Loss

(MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2

O

MT

)

WL

Co

nsu

me

d

(TT

A N

a2

O

MT

)

% L

oss

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

% L

oss

thro

ug

h

ES

P

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

tho

ug

h

ES

P

% L

oss

(OR

E)

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

% L

oss

thro

ug

h

ES

P

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

tho

ug

h

ES

P

Av

g %

Loss

(OR

E)

%

Ge

ne

ral

Loss

tho

ug

h

ES

P

RE

SU

LT

0

.81

7

1

1.4

8

0

.58

0

8

.15

1

.39

7

19

.63

01

-Ju

n

C

1.4

9

21

.8

25

.0

0.7

2

0.8

2

64

.08

11

.48

0.5

1

0.5

8

45

.53

8.1

5

1.4

0

19

.63

01

-Ju

n

A

22

.3

26

.2

01

-Ju

n

B

16

.4

21

.2

02

-Ju

n

C

13

.64

16

.9

27

.5

0.7

4

6.9

9

0.5

2

4.9

7

02

-Ju

n

A

21

.7

24

.7

02

-Ju

n

B

16

.4

22

.0

03

-Ju

n

C

10

.12

16

.6

18

.7

0.8

2

9.4

3

0.5

8

6.7

0

03

-Ju

n

A

16

.9

21

.3

03

-Ju

n

B

16

.7

25

.8

04

-Ju

n

C

4.3

9

17

.1

22

.6

0.9

7

21

.71

0

.69

1

5.4

3

04

-Ju

n

A

16

.9

13

.4

04

-Ju

n

B

11

.2

16

.7

05

-Ju

n

C

17

.86

16

.7

24

.2

0.7

8

5.3

4

0.5

5

3.8

0

05

-Ju

n

A

16

.8

23

.6

05

-Ju

n

B

16

.6

24

.6

06

-Ju

n

C

22

.42

16

.2

28

.4

0.7

0

4.2

6

0.5

0

3.0

2

06

-Ju

n

A

17

.2

24

.6

06

-Ju

n

B

22

.1

27

.4

07

-Ju

n

C

22

.63

22

.4

23

.2

0.7

5

4.2

2

0.5

3

3.0

0

07

-Ju

n

A

16

.6

24

.2

07

-Ju

n

B

16

.9

24

.6

Page 107: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

10

7 |

Pa

ge

08

-Ju

n

C

2.4

7

11

.4

19

.6

0.8

8

38

.66

0

.63

2

7.4

7

08

-Ju

n

A

16

.9

20

.2

08

-Ju

n

B

16

.8

23

.2

09

-Ju

n

C

-6.8

3

16

.6

25

.0

0.7

6

-13

.96

0

.54

-9

.92

09

-Ju

n

A

22

.1

21

.4

09

-Ju

n

B

16

.4

24

.3

10

-Ju

n

C

-9.6

6

21

.9

23

.6

0.7

5

-9.8

8

0.5

3

-7.0

2

10

-Ju

n

A

17

.1

26

.2

10

-Ju

n

B

21

.8

16

.7

11

-Ju

n

C

1.1

1

17

.0

22

.7

1.2

4

86

.11

0

.88

6

1.1

9

11

-Ju

n

A

22

.2

3.8

11

-Ju

n

B

11

.0

0.0

12

-Ju

n

C

3.3

8

16

.3

12

.6

0.8

4

28

.23

0

.60

2

0.0

6

12

-Ju

n

A

16

.9

23

.5

12

-Ju

n

B

21

.9

22

.1

13

-Ju

n

C

16

.98

11

.5

23

.3

0.9

4

5.6

2

0.6

7

3.9

9

13

-Ju

n

A

10

.7

19

.4

13

-Ju

n

B

17

.0

19

.5

14

-Ju

n

C

-2.0

8

16

.7

19

.7

0.8

0

-45

.87

0

.57

-3

2.6

0

14

-Ju

n

A

16

.4

19

.2

14

-Ju

n

B

22

.4

24

.9

15

-Ju

n

C

6.9

3

21

.7

25

.8

0.7

1

13

.77

0

.50

9

.78

15

-Ju

n

A

22

.0

27

.0

15

-Ju

n

B

16

.6

21

.5

16

-Ju

n

C

11

.62

21

.9

23

.3

0.7

2

8.2

1

0.5

1

5.8

3

16

-Ju

n

A

22

.3

25

.0

16

-Ju

n

B

16

.6

23

.4

17

-Ju

n

C

5.1

7

19

.4

26

.8

0.7

6

18

.45

0

.54

1

3.1

1

17

-Ju

n

A

23

.4

25

.4

17

-Ju

n

B

10

.2

20

.9

Page 108: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

Table 10.1. Average ORE based on stock

SFL WFL

Date Shift

Total

Loss

(MT)

WL

Consumed

(TTA

Na2O MT)

WL

Consumed

(TTA

Na2O MT)

Total WL

Consumed % Loss ORE

Average

ORE

01-Jun C

1.489

24.98705 21.845 46.83205

1.1205 98.88 94.0003

01-Jun A 26.1545 22.28 48.4345

01-Jun B 21.1951 16.427 37.6221

02-Jun C

13.641

27.47343 16.923 44.39643

10.557 89.443 02-Jun A 24.6942 21.713 46.4072

02-Jun B 22.0274 16.387 38.4144

03-Jun C

10.123

18.66867 16.616 35.28467

8.726 91.274 03-Jun A 21.32362 16.904 38.22762

03-Jun B 25.78394 16.714 42.49794

04-Jun C

4.394

22.63644 17.094 39.73044

4.4876 95.512 04-Jun A 13.41116 16.891 30.30216

04-Jun B 16.7262 11.155 27.8812

05-Jun C

17.856

24.22728 16.749 40.97628

14.559 85.441 05-Jun A 23.63286 16.811 40.44386

05-Jun B 24.60912 16.613 41.22212

06-Jun C

22.419

28.35826 16.183 44.54126

16.51 83.49 06-Jun A 24.55047 17.197 41.74747

06-Jun B 27.35278 22.148 49.50078

07-Jun C

22.625

23.20928 22.443 45.65228

17.688 82.312 07-Jun A 24.21172 16.555 40.76672

07-Jun B 24.62994 16.862 41.49194

08-Jun C

2.468

19.581 11.354 30.935

2.2863 97.714 08-Jun A 20.15745 16.886 37.04345

08-Jun B 23.19216 16.777 39.96916

09-Jun C

-6.834

24.9565 16.592 41.5485

-5.434 105.43 09-Jun A 21.44608 22.103 43.54908

09-Jun B 24.28979 16.382 40.67179

10-Jun C

-9.661

23.60832 21.886 45.49432

-7.592 107.59 10-Jun A 26.16104 17.08 43.24104

10-Jun B 16.74419 21.767 38.51119

11-Jun C

1.108

22.67496 17.01 39.68496

1.4444 98.556 11-Jun A 3.834 22.177 26.011

11-Jun B 0 11.014 11.014

12-Jun C

3.38

12.61416 16.339 28.95316

2.986 97.014 12-Jun A 23.46552 16.862 40.32752

12-Jun B 22.0563 21.857 43.9133

13-Jun C

16.98

23.2686 11.494 34.7626

16.737 83.263 13-Jun A 19.43172 10.73 30.16172

13-Jun B 19.52412 17.003 36.52712

14-Jun C -2.08 19.67256 16.718 36.39056 -1.744 101.74

Page 109: Overall Recovery Efficiency_Pulp and Paper_Project Report

109 | P a g e

14-Jun A 19.15182 16.433 35.58482

14-Jun B 24.88068 22.4 47.28068

15-Jun C

6.93

25.8447 21.706 47.5507

5.1461 94.854 15-Jun A 26.99169 22.049 49.04069

15-Jun B 21.5016 16.572 38.0736

16-Jun C

11.62

23.2848 21.895 45.1798

8.7747 91.225 16-Jun A 24.98796 22.266 47.25396

16-Jun B 23.3709 16.621 39.9919

17-Jun C

5.17

26.8422 19.353 46.1952

4.0965 95.903 17-Jun A 25.43688 23.439 48.87588

17-Jun B 20.92122 10.212 31.13322


Recommended