A Novel Ultrasonic Dynamic Drainage Tester

A Novel Ultrasonic Dynamic Drainage Tester

Jinlan J X j n H a and H ining Xiao*Jinlan Ju, Xujun Hua and Huining Xiao*

FPInnovations, Canada

* University of New Brunswick, Canada

PaperCon 2011 Page 306

Water Removal in Papermaking

Former Presses Dryers

1% 20% 45-50% 92%1% 20% 45 50% 92%

Solids Content

100

Fiber Water Content (kg/kg)

100

1010


Cost of Water Removal

Relative cost to remove a given quantity of water:

$1 $58 $220Former Presses Dryers

Relative cost to remove a given quantity of water:

$1 $58 $220

PaperCon 2011 08

Conventional Drainage Tester

Canadian Standard F T tFreeness Tester:

Excellent tool for pulp lit t lquality control


Dynamic Drainage Jar

A very useful device for d t i i fi tdetermining first pass retention.


Modified Dynamic Drainage Jar

Dynamic Drainage Analyzer:

A simple test, but no turbulence duringdrainagedrainage


Effect of Mixing on Drainage in Modified DDJ

400400

No mixing

300

ght (

g)

300

No mixing14.1s

Mixing at 400rpm

200

ate

Wei

g

200Mixing at 1000 rpm

Mixing at 400rpm17.0s

100

Filtr

a

100

38.1s

00 10 20 30 40 50

00 10 20 30 40 500 10 20 30 40 500 10 20 30 40 50

Time (sec)


Fines Distribution of a Sheet Formed in a DDJ Under Continuous Mixingg

30

20

25

nt (%

)

15

s C

onte

n

5

10

Fine

s

00 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Wire side Thickness (mm) Top side


Other Drainage Testers

Moving Belt Drainage Tester Pulsed Drainage DevicePulsed Drainage Device…


Ultrasonic Dynamic Drainage Tester

Impeller

Vacuum Gauge

screen Impeller

Ultrasound HornVacuum Gauge

Vacuum PumpVacuum Pump

BalanceData Processing


Data Collection

Web SolidsWater Retention Value

ate

Time

Filtr

a

e Time

Pres

sure

Time


Ultrasonic Filtration Screen

Ultrasonic processor Filtration

screen

Ultrasonic filtration screenscreen


Screen Unblocking and Deflocculation by Ultrasound in Standard Retention Test

100

%)

60

80

ntio

n (% Control

Control + Chitosan

40

60

es R

eten

20Fine With ultrasound Ultrasound + Chitosan

00 500 1000 1500

Impeller Rotating Speed (rpm)Impeller Rotating Speed (rpm)


Drainage Profiles of a Newsprint FurnishAt 400 rpm with Mat Formation

400

No mixing, 14.1sUlt d 11 5

300

ht (g

)

Mixing + Ultrasound, 15.9s

Ultrasound, 11.5s

200

rate

Wei

g

Mixing, 17.0s

g

100

Filtr

00 10 20 30

Time (sec)


Drainage and Retention with ChitosanAt 400 rpm with Mat Formation

UltrasoundMixing at 400 rpmNo MixingSample

11.517.014.1Pulp Alone

Drainage Time (s)

11.814.112.3Pulp + Chitosan

p

Fines Retention (%)

80 987 388 6Pulp + Chitosan

64.179.777.6Pulp Alone

Fines Retention (%)

16.87.611.0Increase in Retention

80.987.388.6Pulp + Chitosan


Drainage Profiles of a Newsprint FurnishAt 1000 rpm with Mat Formation

400No mixing, 11.7sUltrasound, 10.0s 69.3%

300

ight

(g)

Mixing, 38.1s

53.6%

68 9%

200

ltrat

e W

e

30.9%

68.9%

Ultrasoun + Mixing, 10.7s

100

Fil

00 10 20 30 40

Time (sec)


Retention Is Changed by Ultrasound Intensity

90

%)

80

ntio

n (%

TMP + Chitosan

70

es R

eten

60Fin

TMP

500 20 40 60 80 100

Ultrasound Amplitude (%)Ultrasound Amplitude (%)


Pressure Profile under Various Turbulence Conditions

0000 10 20 30 40

a)

00 10 20 30 40

a)

-10

sure

(kPa

UltrasoundUltrasound & mixing at 1000 rpm

-10

sure

(kPa

UltrasoundUltrasound & mixing at 1000 rpm

-20

Pres No turbulence

-20

Pres No turbulence

-30

Mixing at 1000rpm

-30

Mixing at 1000rpm

-30

Time (sec)-30

Time (sec)


Drainage vs. Pressure and Retention

30a)

30 100100

20sure

(kPa

20

80

ion

(%)80

= 0.4505Fines Retention

R2 = 0 7587um P

ress

Equilibrium Vacuum

= 0 7587

Equilibrium Vacuum

40

60

es R

eten

ti

40

60

R2 = 0.758710

Vacu

u = 0.758710

20

40

Fine

20

40

08 10 12 14 16 18

08 10 12 14 16 18

00

Drainage Time (s)Drainage Time (s)


Fines Distribution of a Sheet Formed with Ultrasound

30

Under Continuous Mixing

20

25

nt (%

)

Under Continuous Mixing

15

s C

onte

n

5

10

Fine

s

With Ultrasound

00 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Wire side Thickness (mm) Top side


Drainage Mechanism with Ultrasound

Before starting drainage test

Dewatering under mixing Dewatering under ultrasound


Conclusions

• The turbulence induced by impellor in a conventional DDJ increases filtration resistance enormously.

• Ultrasound can Deflocculate fiber suspensionpUnblocking forming wireEnlarge dewatering channel in the web

• The Ultrasonic DDJ could be very useful laboratory tool to determine drainage under dynamic conditionsDrainage profileVacuum profileR t tiRetention


Acknowledgements

• T. Owston Initial experimental work

• C. Castro Data processing program

G D i G L i i T O t & M D i ill• G. Dorris, G. Laivins, T. Owston & M. Drainville Filtrate weight and pressure monitoring

• I. Tihanyi & N.VignolaI. Tihanyi & N.Vignola Vessel and accessory manufacturing

• M. Laleg, J. Jong, I. Vadeiko, T. Owston and S. Middleton Valuable discussion

• NSERC IPS program• NSERC IPS program


A Novel Ultrasonic Dynamic Drainage Tester

Documents

Transcript of A Novel Ultrasonic Dynamic Drainage Tester