Understanding theUnderstanding theFinal Molasses Survey :Final Molasses Survey :

More than TPDMore than TPD

B.E. White and C.K. Verret

Audubon Sugar InstituteLouisiana State University Agricultural Center

Annual Factory SeminarApril 17, 2007

Introduction• Presentation of final molasses survey results from

2006 season

• Comparison of results to previous seasons

• Discussion of Final Molasses Survey Report

• Effects of the Target Purity Difference (TPD) and the Fructose/Glucose Ratio

• Discussion

2006 ASI Final Molasses Survey

F/G (F+G)/ Target T. P.Ratio Ash Purity Diff.

1.37 1.14 33.2 8.51.33 1.08 33.6 8.61.59 0.86 34.9 9.11.59 0.92 34.7 9.01.30 0.98 34.3 12.01.48 0.98 34.1 8.91.82 0.95 34.3 5.91.56 0.93 34.4 10.01.68 0.80 35.5 6.71.58 0.80 35.3 9.41.39 0.90 34.7 6.41.54 0.95 34.4 7.3

1.52 0.94 34.4 8.5

Ref. App. Ratio pol True Fructose Glucose F/G Cond. (F+G)/ Target

Sample Brix Purity /sucrose Purity F G Ratio Ash Ash Purity

% mol. % % % T.S. % T.S. % T.S. %

Juice 13.8 84.3 0.97 87.3 2.38 2.41 1.00 4.5 1.06 33.7

Syrup 61.4 86.5 0.97 89.6 2.07 2.18 0.96 3.9 1.08 33.6

Mol 81.6 34.4 0.81 43.0 9.41 6.45 1.50 16.7 0.98 34.2

2006 Seasonal Average for Juice, Syrup and Final Molasses

Target Purity= 33.9 - 13.4log[(F+G)/Ash]

Average Weekly Target Purity Differences2003-2006

TPD Data Summary for 2000-2006

Year TPD Average

TPD Minimum

TPD Maximum

2000 10.2 4.8 15.2

2001 10.5 6.3 23.8

2002 10.4 5.6 18.7

2003 8.9 4.4 18.3

2004 9.9 4.7 16.2

2005 8.9 3.6 18.3

2006 8.5 3.3 15.5

Yearly Average Target Purity Differences2000-2006

Yearly Average F/G Ratio2000-2006

Fructose + Glucose vs. F/G Ratio

Target Purity vs. F/G Ratio

2006 Juice, Syrup and C-Molasses Ratios

Brix %Cane

CaneGround

Juice TruePurity

SugarPol

SugarPrice

MolassesPrice

Non MolassesLoss

SeasonLength

% tons/day % % $/lb $/ton % Cane days

14.4 10000 87.3 98.5 $0.20 $120.00 12 90

TargetPurity

Difference

FinalMolasses

True Purity

SucroseRecovery

Seasonal Value for each

1% drop in finalMolasses Purity

Sugar Loss to Final

Molasses

Seasonal Value for a3% drop in finalMolasses Purity

% % % % Lbs/ton of cane %

1 35.0 92.93 $75,802 0.68

2 36.0 92.61 $78,227 0.70

3 37.0 92.28 $80,771 0.73 $258,883

4 38.0 91.94 $83,442 0.75

5 39.0 91.59 $86,246 0.78

6 Low 40.0 91.23 $89,195 0.80 $286,870

7 41.0 90.85 $92,297 0.83

8 42.0 90.46 $95,565 0.86

9 Average 43.0 90.06 $99,008 0.89 $319,655

10 44.0 89.64 $102,642 0.92

11 45.0 89.21 $106,479 0.96

12 High 46.0 88.76 $110,535 1.00

Calculated Value of Decrease in TPD

Effect of Maillard Reaction on Target PurityFructose Glucose F/G (F+G)/ Target T. P.

F G Ratio Ash Purity Diff.

% T.S. % T.S. %

9.9 9.9 1.00 1.23 32.7 8.6

9.9 9.3 1.07 1.19 32.9 8.5

9.9 8.6 1.14 1.15 33.1 8.3

9.9 7.4 1.33 1.08 33.5 7.9

9.9 6.8 1.45 1.04 33.7 7.7

9.9 6.2 1.60 1.00 33.9 7.5

9.9 5.6 1.78 0.96 34.1 7.3

9.9 4.9 2.00 0.92 34.4 7.0

True Purity maintained at the seasonal average of 41.4%Conductivity Ash maintained at the seasonal average of 16.1 % true solids

Effect of Inversion on Target Purity

Fructose Glucose F+G (F+G)/ Target T. P.

F G Ash Purity Diff.

% T.S. % T.S. % T.S. %

9.7 7.3 17.0 1.06 33.6 7.8

10.3 7.8 18.0 1.12 33.2 8.1

10.9 8.2 19.0 1.18 32.9 8.5

11.5 8.6 20.0 1.25 32.6 8.8

12.0 9.0 21.0 1.30 32.4 9.0

12.5 9.4 22.0 1.36 32.1 9.3

True Purity maintained at the seasonal average of 41.4%Conductivity Ash maintained at the seasonal average of 16.1 % true solids

True Purity of Juice and Sucrose Recovery

JuiceTrue

Purity

FinalMolasses

True Purity

SucroseRecovery

% % %

87 36 92.4

85 34 91.6

Discussion

• Seasonal average TPD decreased from previous season continuing an encouraging trend

• Fructose to glucose ratio decreased or remained constant from 2000 to 2005, but increased significantly in 2006

• The F/G ratio is a good indicator of Maillard Reaction which is a result of high C strike temperature

• High strike temperatures in C pans lower reducing sugar in C massecuites and increase sugar losses to molasses

Discussion Continued

• The TPD has continued to decrease improving sugar recovery

• TPD is a good indicator of how well C-massecuite is exhausted.

• The occurrence of Maillard reaction and inversion does not necessarily have an effect on TPD, but does affect target purity

• A low purity on final molasses does not always equal to sugar in the warehouse

Acknowledgements

Louisiana Sugar Mills Dr. Harold Birkett Dr. Donal Day Dr. Vadim Kochergin Lee Madsen II Jennifer Chatelain

Questions