See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/289002307

Multivariate Analysis of Variables Affecting Thermal Performance of Black

Liquor Evaporators

Article · January 2009

CITATIONS READS

4 201

5 authors, including:

Hamideh Hajiha Honghi Tran

University of Toronto University of Toronto
6 PUBLICATIONS   52 CITATIONS    233 PUBLICATIONS   1,978 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Honghi Tran on 27 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIABLES AFFECTING THERMAL
PERFORMANCE OF BLACK LIQUOR EVAPORATORS

Hamideh Hajiha and Honghi Tran

Pulp & Paper Centre
University of Toronto
Toronto, ON, CANADA

Odessa Websdale, Denys Holik and Bill Downing

DMI Peace River Pulp Division
Peace River, AB, CANADA

ABSTRACT

Understanding the main operating variables that affect heat transfer in multi-effect evaporators is of importance for
developing strategies to improve the evaporator thermal performance. Daily average data for nearly 100 variables
related to MEE and mill operations over a 12 month period were analyzed using a commercial multivariate data
analysis program. The results show that the thermal performance is positively correlated with the weak black liquor
flow rate processed through the system and the cooling water flow rate in the surface condenser, but is negatively
correlated with the weak black liquor solids content and the saturated steam pressure to the 1st Effect.

INTRODUCTION

In kraft pulp mills, Multi-Effect Evaporators (MEE) and concentrators are used to concentrate black liquor to enable
it to be burned efficiently in recovery boilers. As the liquor is concentrated, dissolved alkali salts precipitate when
their solubilities are reached. A portion of such precipitated salts may form scale on tube surfaces, which can
drastically hinder the tube heat transfer efficiency and negatively impact the thermal performance of the evaporators
[1,2]. The severity of fouling varies from mill to mill depending on liquor properties, equipment design, and
evaporator/mill operating conditions. It can be costly particularly if the MEE need to be shutdown for scale removal
leading to production loss. Burning low solids black liquor also adversely affects the thermal efficiency and stability
of the recovery boiler.

Much work has been done in the past two decades to determine the mechanisms of fouling in various Effects of
MEE and concentrators, and to develop possible mitigation measures [3-6]. Fouling by residual fibres occurs mostly
in the 6th and 5th Effects, while scaling by precipitated calcium compounds is confined to the 4th, 3rd, 2nd, and 1st
Effects, and fouling by burkeite (2Na2SO4xNa2CO3) and dicarbonate (Na2SO4x2Na2CO3) occurs mostly in the 1st
Effect and flash tank where the liquor concentration exceeds 50% solids. While these fouling mechanisms are
relatively known, how scaling is affected by evaporator/mill operations at a given mill is not well understood. This
is because the operating variables in the chemical recovery process are often interrelated to one another, making it
difficult to single out one or two variables that lead to fouling and low thermal performance of the evaporators.

High steam costs in recent years have forced mills to pay more attention to the thermal performance of the
evaporators. This is particularly the case at Daishowa Marubeni International Peace River Pulp (DMI), where
operation has been disrupted frequently due to fouling around the product flash tank. In collaboration with the
University of Toronto, an investigation was conducted using Multivariate Data Analysis (MVDA) to investigate
possible correlations between operating variables, to identify key variables that affect heat transfer, and to develop
strategies for improving the evaporator thermal performance. This paper discusses the evaporator operating issues at
DMI, the basics of MVDA, the method used and the key results obtained from this investigation.

EXPERIENCE AT DMI

The black liquor evaporation system at DMI is a 1990 HPD unit consisting of a five-Effect falling film type
evaporator, a 58% liquor flash tank, a high solids concentrator (HSC), and a 70% liquor flash tank (Figure 1). The
system was designed to process 467 metric tons/hr weak black liquor at 13.5% solids and 85°C to produce 109

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 1

October 12-14, 2009
tons/hr of strong black liquor at 58% solids and 115°C during hardwood pulping, and 15% more liquor during
softwood pulping. In the past years, however, it has consistently been operated at 15-20% above design capacity.

Steam Primary
Reflux
condenser TW

Cond. C CW
SC
WW
HSC 1 2 3 4 5 WBL
FT

70% 70% 58% 58% #2

ST FT ST FT FT Secondary
Reflux
condenser
Soap
Skimmer Black Liquor Flow
Tank
Steam Flow

CW=Cooling Water, TW=Tempering Water, C=Coolant with constant temperature, WW=Warm Water,
Cond.=Condensate, WBL=Weak Black Liquor, FT=Flash Tank, ST=Storage Tank, HSC=High Solids Concentrator

Figure 1. Schematic drawing of the evaporator system at DMI

As shown in Figure 1, weak black liquor from the flash tank enters the 5th Effect where it is concentrated to about
17% solids. The liquor then flows to the 4th Effect, the secondary reflux condenser, the 2nd Effect, the #2 product
flash tank, the soap skimming tank, the 3rd Effect, the primary reflux condenser, the 1st Effect, the 58% flash tank,
the 58% storage tank, the HSC, the 70% product flash tank, and the 70% storage tank where it is stored to be fed to
the recovery boiler. Saturated steam enters the system at 325 kPa (143°C) through the HSC and the 1st Effect. The
vapour from the 1st Effect is used as a steam source to concentrate the liquor in the 2nd Effect. The resulting vapour
from the 2nd Effect is, in turn, used to concentrate the liquor in the 3rd Effect, and so on. The same process principle
is carried through the 4th effect and the 5th Effect. The final vapour from the 5th Effect is condensed in the surface
condenser to create a vacuum of –70 kPa to help drive steam and vapour through the system.

Historically, the 1st Effect at DMI has been subject to severe scaling such that some 30% to 50% of the heat
exchange tubes have to be high pressure cleaned every annual maintenance shutdown to remove scale. Scaling has
also been observed in the 58% product flash tank, particularly around the vortex breaker in the outlet pipe (Figure
2). Unscheduled shutdowns of the evaporators have been occasionally required to remove scale. In order to continue
operating between annual maintenance shutdowns, the 1st Effect and the 58% flash tank are periodically taken off
line and boiled out. For each boilout, the evaporator train must be slowed back to approximately half of normal
throughput for 1 to 2 hours. The boilout frequency varies with time, but averages about once per week and can be as
frequently as three times per week. It is usually higher in the winter months when the 1st Effect steam pressure (and
hence 1st Effect liquor solids concentration) can fluctuate widely due to inconsistent hog fuel quality. The problem is
particularly worse at DMI, as the high and medium pressure steam headers are controlled by the turbine generator,
leaving the low pressure steam header to float.

During an evaporator outage in 2007, scale samples from the 1st Effect, 58% flash tank and HSC tube were collected
and sent to the Institute of Paper Science and Technology at Georgia Tech for analysis (Figure 3). The results
indicated that both scale samples were composed primarily of sodium sulphate dicarbonate (Na2SO4x2Na2CO3),
90%, with a small amount of sodium oxalate (Na2C2O4), <10%. This laboratory work also suggested that the
dicarbonate would begin to precipitate out of the liquor at about 58% solids concentration; the 1st Effect is routinely
operated at about 61% solids concentration, but can fluctuate significantly with steam pressure, as mentioned earlier.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 2

October 12-14, 2009
 Figure 2. Heavy scale built up around the 58% flash tank outlet vortex breaker that led to the
unscheduled shutdown of the evaporator system in May 2007 for scale removal.

MULTIVARIATE DATA ANALYSIS

Multivariate data analysis (MVDA) of mill/evaporator operating data may help untangle the relationships between
operating variables, scaling and thermal performance of evaporators. In this study, two common techniques,
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Partial Least Squares (PLS) of a commercially available MVDA program,
SIMCA-P, were used. These techniques have been successfully used to correlate operating parameters with
fouling/plugging problems in recovery boilers [7], with ringing problems in lime kilns [8], and with performance of
waste water treatment in a kraft pulp mill [9], as well as various operating issues in other industries [10-13]. The
principles of the techniques can be seen in the SIMCA-P User Guide [14].

Input and Output Variables

Daily averages for 98 variables related to evaporators and mill operations at DMI over a 12-month period (from
January 1 to December 31, 2007) were collected and analyzed. These variables are listed in Appendix 1. They can
be either treated as either Input variables or Output variables. Input variables are independent, measureable
operating variables that may have had a direct or indirect impact on the thermal performance of the evaporator
system. Output variables, on the other hand, are measured variables or calculated ones from other measured
variables, which can be used to indicate the extent of scaling in the system and/or the need for boil-out. Based on the
experience at DMI, four output variables were used in this study.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 3

October 12-14, 2009
 Figure 3. Scale Samples collected from the 1st Effect, 58% flash tank outlet pipe, and
high solids concentrator tube

1. Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient: The thermal efficiency of an evaporation system is dictated by its ability to
remove water from weak black liquor at a given steam flow rate and condition. It is related largely to the overall
heat transfer coefficient, U, of the system, which is defined as:

Q Wevap λ o + WWL Cp WL (To − Ti )

U= = (Eq.1)
A ΔT A (TSat − TCond. − ∑ BPR )
where
Q = Total amount of heat transferred in the evaporator set
A = Total heat transfer area

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 4

October 12-14, 2009
 ∆T = Differential temperature
TSat = Temperature of saturated steam to the 1st Effect
TCon= Temperature of condensate in the surface condenser
∑ BPR = Sum of boiling point rises of liquor in all Effects
WEvap = Evaporated water flow rate
λo = latent heat of water at outlet pressure
WWL = weak liquor flow rate
CpWL = specific heat of weak liquor
To = product liquor temperature
Ti = inlet liquor temperature

A high U value means the system is operated well, with a high rate of heat transfer.

2. 58% Flash Tank Level: The liquor level in the 58% flash tank indirectly indicates the extent of scaling in the
system. As scale forms around the vortex breaker in the 58% flash tank and in the piping downstream of the 58%
flash tank, it obstructs the liquor flow out of the 58% flash tank. This causes the liquor level in the flash tank to
increase until the flash tank is flooded. A high liquor level in the 58% flash tank is an indication that scale
deposition has accumulated to the point where 58% flash tank level control has been lost.

3. 58% Flash Tank Discharge Temperature: This temperature also indirectly indicates scaling in the system. As
scale accumulates in the system and the level in the flash tank rises, the pressure in the flash tank increases,
making it more difficult for the liquor to flash. Once the flash tank is flooded, no flashing at all occurs, hence
resulting in a higher liquor discharge temperature.

4. 58% Storage Tank Vent Temperature: Once flashing is no longer occurring in the 58% flash tank and hotter
liquor is exiting the flash tank as a result, flashing begins to occur in the atmospheric 58% storage tank. The 58%
storage tank is vented into the HVLC NCG system.. Sufficient flashing in the 58% storage tank will cause the
storage tank to become pressurised. As the pressure in the storage tank reaches its set point, the vent valve is
automatically opened to release the flashed vapour into the HVLC system. This causes an abrupt increase in vent
temperature. Once the gas has been vented, the pressure decreases causing the vent valve to close and the storage
tank vent temperature to decrease. Thus, more frequent excursions of the 58% storage tank vent temperature
indicate more scaling in the system.

Using these output variables, the performance of the evaporator system at DMI is expected to be directly related to
the heat transfer coefficient across the Effects, and inversely related to the 58% flash tank liquor level, and the 58%
tank discharge temperature, and the 58% storage tank vent gas temperature.

Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

In this study, seven principal components were calculated through cross-validation accounting for 68% of the
variability in the data. Of these principal components, the first two were used mostly, since they captured most of
the variability, 25% and 14% respectively. Figure 4 is an X-Y plot of the first and second principal components. It is
known as “Scatter Plot” which is a two dimensional presentation of the multidimensional dataset. The x-axis (or
t[1]) of the plot represents the first principal component, while the y-axis (or t[2]) the second. Each dot on the chart
represents the information generated from daily averages of all 98 variables for a specific day during the 12 month
period. It is numbered according to its date of the year, i.e. 1 means January 1, 2007, 32 means February 1, 2007 and
so on. The ellipse represents a 95% confidence interval of the data. The center (origin; 0,0) of the graph represents
the average value across all 98 variables. The majority of the data points fall within the 95% confidence interval
indicating that the data can be used to build a good PLS model.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 5

October 12-14, 2009
 289
223
169 240 202183
284 253 188191 167
282 201
5 3 286 287 165
168
164 171
271 272 273 45 205
281 283 252
290 5 187 221 254 241 186 185 184
239
247 242
220219 163222
323 270 218
2 288 249216
256
255 130 224
269 334 136 275 129
251 246 244 190243 225 203
332
250 40
67 128 245 24842
127 200
212 182
276 333 161 34 4 189 209 210
204
93
123 162 126 226
279
277 274 257
68 217291 699 61
122 94 95
215 38 125 208
280 278 214 8
199 69 213 172
15 211
262 358 292 326 65 104 103
258 352
312 320 121102 10772 105 207 96
35 62 921239
331 314227
318
335 75 133 131
4364 132
206 11
268 356 63
t[2]

309 198197 196 313 361 363 71 1 100 13 7 10

362 336 120 181 76324325 97 9
0 267 340 238
308 349
337 319
315
194195 321 91 70 33327 98 16 14 41 36
106 37
299 146 322 346 345 66
108 73
265 348 317 347 316 193
32
351
355 350 259 60 364
365 74
339 353 357 175
330 329
237 266 338307 137
173 109 328
236 354 260 135
235 231
264 232 77 139
293294 174 110359 134 17
295 233 118119 176177 230
141 360
342 234 114 17918 180
50 117 90 113 140
229 111 178
261142 82 147
79 49 54138
341 300 145
8826 144 56
297296 263 112 55
298 83 80
-5 306 302 344
87 28 29
143
116
2352 57
24
303 343 89 58 22
305
304
301 78 30 31 25 27 21
86 59
85 81 84 20 19

-14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

t[1]

Figure 4. PCA scatter plot. The first 2 PC’s on the evaporators’ model.

Partial Least Square Analysis (PLS)

A PLS model was built based on the above PCA model by assigning the overall heat transfer coefficient U, 58%
flash tank level, 58% flash tank discharge temperature, and 58% storage tank vent temperature as output variables.
Correlations between input variables and each output variable were determined by means of Coefficient Plots
generated by PLS. An example of such a plot is shown in Figure 5, which correlates the overall heat transfer
coefficient U with the top 15 input variables. Each input variable is represented by a bar. The height of each bar
represents the strength of the correlation, i.e. a higher bar means a stronger correlation. Variables represented by
bars above the zero line are those that have a positive correlation with U, whereas variables represented by bars
below the zero line are those with a negative correlation. For a given input variable, if its error bar crosses the zero
line, its correlation with the output variable is considered to be none or statically unreliable.

The coefficient plot in Figure 3 suggests that the overall heat transfer coefficient of the evaporator system at DMI
during the period examined was correlated with the weak black liquor flow rate and % solids concentration, the
saturated steam pressure, the total amount of water evaporated by the system, and the cooling water flow used in the
surface condenser. The results are understandable since these input variables were used in Equation 1 to calculate U.
No clear correlation was observed between U and other input variables.

Coefficient plots for other three output variables related to 58% flash tank and storage tank were also created and
used to correlate each of them with all 98 input variables. Table 1 summarizes the correlations between each output
variable and the top 10 important input variables. The number in each cell indicates the relative strength of the
correlation between the input variable (row) and the output variable (column) of that cell. A higher number indicates
a stronger correlation, while the + and - signs that precede the number respectively indicate positive and negative
correlations. Blank cells (cells with no number/sign) indicate no consistent correlations were observed. The
variables were ranked according to their importance, using the Variable Influence on Projection (VIP) feature of
SIMCA-P.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 6

October 12-14, 2009
 Heat Transfer
Coefficient
5

-5

-10

Mill Water Temp to SC

WBL Flow to WBL Flash Tank

WBL % Solids to WBL Flash Tank

Evaporation across Effects

70% BL Storage Tank #2 Level

Steam Pressure to Evaporators

Tempering Water Flow to SC

Warm Water Temp from SC

Cooling Water Flow to SC
4th Effect Recirc. Pump Load

Steam Flow to 1st Effect

Steam Temp to 1st Effect

Manual Valve Steam to 1st Effect

2nd Effect Transfer Pump Load

1st Effect Boiling Point Rise

Figure 5. Coefficient plot for the heat transfer coefficient

Table 1. Correlations Between Output Variables and Top 10 Input Variables

Output Variables
Rank Input Variables Heat Transfer 58% FT 58% FT 58% ST
Coefficient Level Discharge Temp. Vent Temp.
1 Tempering Water Flow to Surface Condenser -2.2 -1.7 -3.4
2 Total Water Evaporated Across Evaporators +5.0
3 Solids of WBL to Weak Liquor Flash Tank -3.3
4 Cooling Water Flow to Surface Condenser +2.3 +2.5
5 Steam Pressure to Evaporators -3.0 -1.1
6 4th Effect Recirculation Pump Load +1.8
7 WBL Flow to Weak Liquor Flash Tank +3.7 -1.4
8 Mill Water Temperature to Surface Condenser -1.4
9 2nd Effect Transfer Pump Load +2.3
10 Wash Residual Effective Alkali +2.9
Notes: FT=Flash Tank, ST=Storage Tank, Temp.=Temperature, Blank=No correlation

The correlations in Table 1 between the overall heat transfer coefficient and the total amount of water evaporated,
the flow rate of the cooling water to surface condenser, the weak black liquor flow rate, the weak black liquor
concentration and the saturated steam pressure are essentially the same as those shown in Figure 5. Although the
results can be expected from Equation 1, the fact that they were actually shown by the multivariate data analysis is
important, confirming the goodness of the PLS model.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 7

October 12-14, 2009
Note also from Table 1 that all three output variables related to 58% liquor tank were negatively correlated with the
tempering water flow rate to the surface condenser. At DMI, tempering water is needed to regulate the cooling water
flow to surface condenser. The tempering water flow is typically low during winter months. Since the tempering
water is remote from the 58% flash tank and 58% storage tank, the negative correlations between the tempering
water flow and all three 58% liquor tank output variables suggests indirectly that the scaling problem around these
tanks was more severe during colder months.

The 58% flash tank level was positively correlated with the wash residual Effective alkali (EA). This may be
explained by the fact that a higher EA means a higher boiling point rise of the liquor, making it more difficult to
flash in the flash tank and thus resulting in a higher tank level.

The positive correlation between the 58% flash tank discharge temperature and the 4th Effect recirculation pump
load and the 2nd Effect transfer pump load may be explained by the fact that as the system fouls up, the liquor needs
to be circulated at a higher rate in these effects in order to achieve the same thermal efficiency.

The 58% storage tank vent temperature was positively correlated with the cooling water flow rate to the surface
condenser. This is understandable, since both high 58% storage tank vent temperature and high cooling water flow
rate can be caused by scaling around the 58% flash tank and storage tank. As scaling becomes more severe, the vent
temperature increases as explained earlier. The system therefore requires more cooling water to maintain sufficient
vacuum in the 5th Effect to be effective.

High Heat Transfer Period versus Low Heat Transfer Period

Figure 6 shows the daily average of the overall heat transfer coefficient during the investigation period from January
1 to December 31, 2007. The value varied widely with an average of about 610 kJ/(m2 hr oC). It was high, about 660
kJ/(m2hroC), during the months of June and May, and low, about 540 kJ/m2hoC during the month of September.

800

700
U (KJ/m hr-C)
2

600

500

400
1/1/07 1/4/07 30/6/07 28/9/07 27/12/07
Date

Figure 6. Time series plot of heat transfer coefficient

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 8

October 12-14, 2009
 Low U Period High U Period

-2
-1
0
1
2

-2
-1
0
1
2
Chipmeter Speed
WBL Storage Tank #1

performance.
SUMMARY
WBL Storage Tank #2
WBL Flow to Flash Tank
WBL % Solids to Flash Tank
BL Mass Flow to Evaporators
WBL Temperature to 5th Effect
5th Effect Recirc. Temperature
4th Effect Recirc. Temperature
2nd Effect Recirc. Temperature

October 12-14, 2009

3rd Effect Recirc. Temperature
1st Effect Recirc. Temperature
5th Effect Level
2nd Effect Level
5th Effect Recirc. Pump Load
4th Effect Recirc. Pump Load
2nd Effect Recirc. Pump Load
3rd Effect Recirc. Pump Load
1st Effect Recirc. Pump Load
Steam Flow to 1st Effect

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN,

Steam Temperature to 1st Effect
Steam Pressure to Evaporators
Manual Valve Steam to 1st Effect
1st Effect Vapour Pressure
2nd Effect Vapour Pressure
3rd Effect Vapour Pressure
4th Effect Vapour Pressure
5th Effect Vapour Pressure
Surface Condenser Pressure
1st Effect Boiling Point Rise
Evaporation across Effects
Cooling Water Flow to SC
Tempering Water Flow to SC
Mill Water Temperature to SC

9
Warm Water Temp. from SC
Clean Condensate Conductivity
Combined Condensate Conductivity
Foul condensate Conductivity
2nd Effect Flash Tank Level
SBL Temp. -Soap Skimmer Tank
2nd Effect Transfer Pump Load
Soap Skimmer Tank Level
58% BL Storage Tank Level
BL Flow to HSC
SBL % Solids
BL Temp. to N. HSC Heater
BL Temp. to S. HSC Heater
BL Temp. from N. HSC Heater
BL Temp. from S. HSC Heater
HSC Pressure
HSC Boiling Point Rise
Steam Flow to HSC Heaters
Steam Temp. to HSC Heaters
Steam Pressure to HSC De-SH
Control Valve Steam to HSC Heaters
Manual Valve Steam to HSC Heaters
N. HSC Steam Mass Flow
Effect, and a higher vapour pressure in the 5th Effect than during the low heat transfer period.

S. HSC Steam Mass Flow

Figure 7. Contribution Plots for Low and High Heat Transfer Periods
Evaporation across HSC
70% BL Storage Tank Temperature
70% Flash Tank Vapour Pressure
Product BL % Solids
70% BL Storage Tank #1 Level
70% BL Storage Tank #2 Level
1100 KPa Steam Flow to Ejectors
400 KPa Steam Flow to Stripper
Condensate Stripper Temperature
Stripped Condensate to Recaust
Mill Water to Trim Condenser Temp
% Causticity
EA-to-Wood
Species into Chipmeter

change in most of these variables was more likely to be a result of the scaling problem, rather than the cause of it.
MCC EA
Wash Residual EA

commercially available Multivariate Data Analysis program, SIMCA-P. The results show that the thermal

in surface condenser, but is negatively correlated with the weak black liquor solids content and the saturated steam
liquor flash tank, a higher cooling water flow to surface condenser, a higher weak black liquor temperature to the 5th

pressure to the 1st Effect. These correlations can be useful in developing strategies to improve the evaporator thermal
A total of 98 evaporator and mill operating data at DMI over a one-year period were collected and analyzed using a

output variables confirm that the scaling problem around these tanks was more severe during colder months. While
the analysis was able to identify a number of variables that correlate well with the scaling problem at DMI, the
The negative correlations between the tempering water flow to surface condenser and all three 58% liquor tank
performance of the system is positively correlated with the weak black liquor flow rate, and the cooling water flow
higher steam temperature, pressure and flow rate to the 1st Effect, a higher weak black liquor flow rate to weak black
the system was also operated at a lower weak black liquor % solids content, a lower recirculation pump load, a
Figure 7 shows contribution plots for these high and low heat transfer periods. During the high heat transfer period,

KAPPA #
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was conducted as part of the research program on “Increasing Energy and Chemical Recovery Efficiency
in the Kraft Process”, jointly supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
(NSERC) and a consortium of the following companies: Abiti-Bowater, Alstom Power, Andritz, Aracruz Celulose,
Babcock & Wilcox, Boise Paper Solutions, Carter Holt Harvey, Celulose Nipo-Brasileira, Clyde-Bergemann,
Diamond Power International, Domtar, DMI Peace River Pulp, Georgia Pacific, International Paper, Irving Pulp &
Paper, Metso Power, MeadWestvaco, Stora Enso Research, Tembec and Votorantim Celulose e Papel.

REFERENCES

1. Grace, T. M., “Black Liquor Evaporation, in Pulp and Paper Manufacture, 3rd ed;, Volume 5-Alkaline Pulping”,
Joint Textbook Committee of the Paper Industry, TAPPI/CPPA, p. 477-530 (1989).
2. Venkatesh, V, and Nguyen, X. N., Evaporation and Concentration of Black Liquor, in Chemical Recovery in
the Alkaline Pulping Process, TAPPI Press, Atlanta (1992).
3. Lansdell, G. M., Frederick, W. J. Jr., Schmidl, W., Euhus, D. D., An Investigation of the Accelerated CaCO3
Fouling in Evaporators Processing Black Liquor from Displacement Batch Kraft Pulping, TAPPI Pulping Conf.,
Session 59, Boston (November 5-8, 2000).
4. Frederick, W. J. Jr., Shi, B., Euhus, D. D., and Rousseau, R. W., Crystallization and Control of Sodium Salt
Scales in Black Liquor Concentrators, Tappi J. 3(6):7-13 (2004).
5. DeMartini, N., Frederick, W.J., “Review of Sodium Salt Scaling in the Liquid Streams of the Chemical
Recovery Cycle of Kraft Pulp Mills”, TAPPI Engineering, Pulping and Environmental Conference, 2008.
6. Verrill, C.L., Frederick, W.J., “Evaporator Fouling 101 - Sodium Salt Crystallization and Soluble-scale
Fouling”, TAPPI Engineering, Pulping & Environmental Conference, 2005.
7. Versteeg, P. and Tran, H.N. "Using Principal Component Analysis to Monitor Kraft Recovery Boiler Fouling",
Proceedings of 2008 TAPPI Engineering, Pulping and Environmental Conference, Portland, OR, TAPPI Press,
2008.
8. D’Souza, T.; Repka, J.; Tran, H.N. "Effects of Process Variability on Ring Formation in Lime Kilns",
Proceedings of 2006 TAPPI Engineering, Pulping and Environmental Conference, Atlanta, GA, TAPPI Press,
2006.
9. Bendwell, N."Monitoring of a wastewater-treatment plant with a multivariate model," Control Systems, 2000.
10. Uosukainen, E.; Lämsä, M.; Linko, Y.; Linko, P. and Leisola, M. "Optimization of enzymatic transesterification
of rapeseed oil ester using response surface and principal component methodology," Enzyme and Microbial
Technology, vol. 25, pp. 236-243, 8. 1999.
11. Mulligan, C.N.; Yong, R.N. and Gibbs, B.F. "Remediation technologies for metal-contaminated soils and
groundwater: An evaluation," Engineering Geology, vol. 60, pp. 193-207, 2001.
12. Erikson, L.; Johansson, E.; Kettaneh-Wold, N.; Trygg, J.; Wikstrom, C. and Wold, S. Multi- and Megavariate
Data Analysis. , 2nd ed., Sweden: Umetrics AB, 2006.
13. Hoeskuldsson, A. "A Combined Theory for PCA and PLS" Journal of Chemometrics, vol. 98, pp. 91, 1995.
14. Umetrics AB., User Guide to SIMCA-P and SIMCA-P +11 version11.0. Umea, Sweden: 2005.

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 10

October 12-14, 2009
 APPENDIX 1. Evaporator and Mill Operating Variables Included in this Study

Variable Variable
1 #1 WBL Storage Tank Level 51 58% Storage Tank Vent Temperature
2 #2 WBL Storage Tank Level 52 Makeup Saltcake Addition
3 WBL Flow to Weak Liquor Flash Tank 53 SBL % Solids
4 % Solids of WBL to Weak Liquor Flash Tank 54 SBL Flow to HSC
5 Mass Flow BL Solids to Evaporators 55 SBL Temperature to N. HSC Heater
6 WBL Temperature to 5th Effect 56 SBL Temperature to S. HSC Heater
7 5th Effect Level 57 SBL Temperature from N. HSC Heater
8 4th Effect Level 58 SBL Temperature from to S. HSC Heater
9 3rd Effect Level 59 HSC Pressure
10 2nd Effect Level 60 HSC Boiling Point Rise
11 1st Effect Level 61 Steam Flow to HSC Heater
12 5th Effect Recirculation Temperature 62 Steam Temperature to HSC Heaters
13 4th Effect Recirculation Temperature 63 Steam Pressure to HSC Heaters
14 2nd Effect Recirculation Temperature 64 Control Valve Steam to HSC Heaters
15 3rd Effect Recirculation Temperature 65 Manual Valve Steam to HSC Heaters
16 1st Effect Recirculation Temperature 66 Evaporation N. HSC Steam Mass Flow
17 5th Effect Recirculation Pump Load 67 Evaporation S. HSC Steam Mass Flow
18 4th Effect Recirculation Pump Load 68 Evaporation Across HSC
19 3rd Effect Recirculation Pump Load 69 Steam Economy Across Effects and HSC
20 2nd Effect Recirculation Pump Load 70 70% Storage Tank Liquor Temperature
21 1st Effect Recirculation Pump Load 71 70% Flash Tank Vapour Pressure
22 Steam Flow to #1 Effect 72 70% Flash Tank Level
23 Steam Temperature to 1st Effect 73 Product Liquor % Solids
24 Steam Pressure to Evaporators 74 70% Storage Tank #1 Level
25 Control Valve for Steam to 1st Effect 75 70% Storage Tank #2 Level
26 Manual Valve for Steam to 1st Effect 76 Pulp Production Rate
27 1st Effect Vapour Pressure 77 Wood Chip Meter Speed
28 2nd Effect Vapour Pressure 78 Wood Species
29 3rd Effect Vapour Pressure 79 1100 KPA Steam Flow to Ejectors
30 4th Effect Vapour Pressure 80 400 KPA Steam Flow to Stripper
31 5th Effect Vapour Pressure 81 Foul Condensate Flow to Stripper Preheater
32 Surface Condenser Pressure 82 Foul Condensate Temperature to Stripper Preheater
33 1st Effect Boiling Point Rise 83 Condensate Stripper Level
34 Evaporation Across Effects 84 Stripper Condensate Temperature (Upper Section)
35 Steam Economy Across Effects 85 Stripper Condensate Temperature (Lower Section)
36 Cooling Water Flow to Surface Condenser 86 Stripped Condensate to Recaust
37 Tempering water flow to surface condenser 87 Mill Water Temperature to Trim Condenser
38 Water temperature to surface condenser 88 Warm Water Temperature to Trim Condenser
39 Water temperature from surface condenser 89 NCG Pressure from Trim Condenser
40 Clean condensate conductivity 90 Green Liquor Reduction
41 Combined condensate conductivity 91 White Liquor % Causticity
42 Foul Condensate Conductivity 92 White Liquor TTA
43 2nd Effect Flash Tank Level 93 Caustic Flow to White Liquor Storage Tank
44 SBL Temperature to Soap Skimmer Tank 94 Effective Alkali-to-Wood Ratio
45 2nd Effect Transfer Pump Load 95 Extraction Residual From Digester
46 Soap Skimmer Tank Level 96 Modified Continuous Cooking (MCC) Effective Alkali
47 Skimmed Liquor Pump Load 97 Weak Wash Residual Effective Alkali
48 58% Storage Tank Level 98 Kappa Number
49 58% Flash Tank Level
50 58% Flash Tank Discharge Temperature

Notes: WBL=Weak Black Liquor, SBL=Strong Black Liquor, HSC=High Solids Concentrator,

TAPPI EPE Conference, Memphis, TN, 11

October 12-14, 2009

View publication stats