Acotepac Cali Feb 2016

8/19/2019 Acotepac Cali Feb 2016

1/33

We accept the challenge!www.andritz.com

Diseno y aplicacion de las technologias del secado de tissue y su

impacto en medio ambienteAcotepac , Cali , Febrero 2016

George Nowakowski , Andritz Paper Machinery Ltd. , Montreal , Canada


2/33

2 Andritz Paper Machinery – Energy Reduction in Tissue Drying Processes

Factores del impacto sobre medio ambiente

Consumo de la energia

Emisiones del proceso de combustion

Emisiones del polvo y de la niebla


3/33


Fossil fuels consumption

Diesel Oil, Natural Gas , LPG , Carbon

21%

55%

24%Drives

Vacuum SystemDrying


4/33


Energy Cost

Cost of Natural Gas


5/33


Energy Consumption in Tissue Drying Process

Typical Drying Energy Costs

200” (5.5m)

18 ft. (5.5m)

200 – 230 t/day

Large

140” (3.6m)

15 ft. (4.5m)

110 – 130 t/day

Medium

110” (2.8m)

12 ft. (3.6m)

US$1,680,000US$1,100,000US$670,000

US$2,800,000US$1,650,000US$1,145,000

US$480,000US$320,000US$230,000

70 – 90 t/day

Small

Sheet width

Machine diameter

Typical steam cost per

year ( gas heated boiler)

Typical natural gas cost

per year

Typical electrical energy

cost per year

Production

Machine size

Natural gas: US$7.9/MBTU; electricity: US$0.065/kW; steam : US$ 20/ton


6/33


Energy Consumption in Tissue Drying

Machine Size

Small2.8m; 12ft dia. Medium3.6m; 15ft dia. Large5.5m; 18ft dia.

Typical Production 70-90 T/day 110-130 T/day 200-230 T/day

Typical Steam

Consumption,

approx.

4,000 Kg/hr 6,500 Kg/hr 10,000 Kg/hr

Typical Steam Consumption Yankee Cylinders

Note: TAPPI Rw drying contribution split ,Yankee Dryer / Yankee Hood : 50/50


7/33


Yankee Hood Fuel Energy Consumption

Yankee

web

hood


8/33


Yankee Hood Fuel Energy Reduction

STATIC DYNAMIC

IMPINGEMENT DISTANCE (mm)

JET EFFICIENCY vs IMPINGEMENT DISTANCE

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

1

2

3

5

4

6

Typical : 3/4” hood to dryer gap


9/33


0.3 0.4 0.5

30

35

40

45

25

0.1 0.2

Yankee Hood Fuel Energy Reduction

T SUPPLY = 875°F

V NOZZLE = 28,000 fpm

Basis W = 12.9 lb/3000 ft2

Pstm = 110 psi

Air Humidity (lb H2O/lb DA)

H e a t t o

H o o

d

( B t u / h r x 1 0 6 )

33-28= 5MMBTU/hrSavings: 600,600 US$/hr

Nat.Gas:US$14.3/MMBTU


10/33


Yankee Hood System Energy Reduction - Heat Recovery

Options


11/33


Yankee Hood System Energy Reduction - Cascading & Heat Recovery

s u p pl y

ai r

WE Hood DE Hood

s u p pl y

ai r

exhaust airmake up air

combustion air

recirculation air

fuel fuel


12/33


s u p pl y

ai r

WE Hood DE Hood

s u p pl y

ai r

make up air

combustion air

recirculation air

steam toYankee

condensatefrom Yankee

exhaust airfuel fuel

Steam Saving approx.

30 %

Re Evaporation - Steam generation for the Yankee dryer

Yankee Steam Energy Reduction in Tissue Drying


13/33



Re Evaporation - Steam generation for the Yankee dryer

Live Steam

Condensate

S3

CondensateHeat Exchanger

Steam and Condensate System YankeeReEvaporation System

ExhaustAir from

Hood

Existing S&C-System

New parts air system

New parts ReEvap


14/33


Condensate in

Condensate out

Exhaust air in

Exhaust air out

Heat exchanger - arrangement



15/33

15

Steam Consumption reduction

Process water preheating

Water flow :20m3/hr

Water temp. in : 24 CWater temp. out :65 C


16/33

We accept the challenge!www.andritz.com

Andritz Steel Yankee


17/33


Advantages Steel vs. Cast Iron

Higher performance (up to 20 % more evaporation

by the Yankee depending on

diameter) due to lower wall thickness and higher possible

pressure (allowed by the properties

of steel)

Example : Cast Iron 15ft ( shell 38mm; rib 42mm)

Steel 15ft (shell 28mm; rib 33mm)

Full performance of the Yankee from the

first day on, no increase or decrease of the performance

during lifespan

Higher performance can be used for

more production or for energy savings

50

45

55

H e a t F l u x [ k W / m 2 ]

Lifetime

Steel Yankee

Cast Yankee


18/33


Energy Reduction in Tissue Drying

Energy Cost Savings with Steel Yankee vs. Cast Iron Yankee

Steam Gas Electricity Energy

Energy

Savings

Energy

Cost

Cost

Savingskg/h kg/h kWh/h kWh/h kWh/h €/h €/year

Conventional

Yankee4 806 425 427 8 588 0 334 0

PrimeDry

Steel Yankee5 975 361 328 8 316 271 319 121 500

(Values shown are indicative only)

Prices typical for Western Europe today,(changes from country to country and from millto mill possible)

Steam 20 € /t

Gas 0,5 € /kgElectric 0,06 € /kWh

Annual Energy Cost Savings up to

€120.000.- ( 5 %)

or 8 % production increasedue to higher Yankee performance

2,8 m working width | 17,5 gsm (toilet paper) | 15 ft Yankee | 1 press roll | 1800 m/min

Rw TAPPI value for Steel Yankee 15%

higher than for Cast Iron Yankee


19/33



Energy Savings – Yankee Head Insulation


20/33


Fossil fuels – combustion emission & consumption reduction

Aplicacion del control automatica de la mezcla aire/combustible


21/33

Fossil fuels combustion emission reduction

Ultra Low NOx , Low CO burners


22/33


Hood Burner System Emissions – Ultra Low NOx Burner

NOx0. 036 lbs/MBTU

CO

0. 184 lbsCO/MBTU

NOx

0. 06 lbs/MBTU

CO0. 30 lbs/MBTU

Typical Emission Requiremnts in North America

US Confidential

US Confidential


23/33


Dust Emissions in Tissue Production

Paper grade (supersoft, TAD) very high

Raw material (waste paper, short / long fiber) very high

Final dry content (< 5%) very high

Refining (freeness) high Coating high

Use of chemicals high

Creping (doctor operation) high

Dust generation : 0.5 – 1.5% of the gross production

(70% approx.captured by dust extraction system)

Dust generation : 0.5 – 1.5% of the gross production

(70% approx.captured by dust extraction system)

Risk of FiresRisk of ExplosionsRespiratory Health RiskPaper Breaks


24/33


Dust Control in Tissue Production - Regulations

ACGIH TLV’s : 10 mg/m³

(American Conference of Governmental Industrial

Hygienists)

OSHA PEL’s : 15 mg/m³ Total, 5 mg/m³ Respirable fraction

(Occupational Safety & Health Administration)

NIOSH REL’s : 10 mg/m³ Total, 5 mg/m³ Respirable

fraction

(National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health)

Occupational Exposure Values


25/33


Dust Collector


26/33


Dust Extraction System – Typical Header Location


27/33

27 Paper Machines / March 2010

Wet dust extraction system- typical arrangement


28/33


Dust Extraction System – Headers Location


29/33


Dust Extraction – Typical Dust & Mist Separation Equipment


30/33


Tending Side Tissue Machine Dust Concentration - following system installation

Guarantee

0.5

0.86

1.29

0.810.69

0.95

0.57

0.92

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

mg/m3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Test samples

front side, outside machine frame

Samples 1 and 2: Reel

Samples 3 and 4: Doctor

Samples 5, 6, 7 and 8 between

reel and doctor


31/33

Wet End Tissue Machine – Mist Generation


Typical Areas of Mist Generation

• Head Box• Former• Wire• Felt• Pressure Roll

Typical Impact on Environment

• Corrosion of building structure• Corrosion of equipment• Increased cost to maintain clean operation


32/33

Wet End Mist Generation – Corrosion of building structure



33/33

Typical Arrangement of Mist Extraction System


Acotepac Cali Feb 2016

Documents

Transcript of Acotepac Cali Feb 2016