Workshop Case Studies for Chemicals Guidance Document 3 Part 1 Chemical Processes

1

Workshop Case Studies for Chemicals Guidance
Document 3- Part 1 (Chemical Processes) Dr.
Supriya SenGupta National Technology Sector
Specialist Chemicals Pulp and PaperChemicals
WorkshopsNovember 2004
2
Workshop Binder Contents

• 1. Chemicals Guidance Document 1- Shop Floor
  SRED
• 2. Chemicals Guidance Document 2- Qualifying Work
• 3. Chemicals Guidance Document 3- Part 1
• 4. Powerpoint presentations
• 5. Case A - Fluidized Bed Development
• 6. Case B - Organics Pretreatment Process
• 7. Case C - Co-extrusion Process
• 8. Workshop Evaluation

3
BREAK-OUT SESSIONS

• Room will be split into teams
• Each team will have facilitators to document
  group results on a flip chart
• You will have 1.5 hours to complete your session

4
Sector Issues Covered - 1

• i. New T661 Form
• ii. Recognizing Experimental Development (ED)
  in Plant Setting
• iii. Experimental Production (EP) vs.
  Commercial Production with Experimental
  Development (CP/ED)
• iv. ASA Capital

5
Sector Issues Covered - 2

• iv. Materials consumed/Transformed in Chemical
  Plant Trials for SRED
• v. Experimental reproducibility/
  repeatability
• vii. Transition from off-grade product to
  A-grade / ramp-up/ ramp-down/ Directly
  related and Incremental
• viii. Proxy Claim

6
BREAK-OUT SESSIONS

• Break out Session A Fluidized Bed Development
  with New XC Catalyst
• Break out Session B Organics Pretreatment
  Process and 3-stage Membrane Plant
• Break out Session C Co-extrusion Process for
  Manufacture of Heavy Duty Film Applications

7
Chemicals Guidance Document 3 - Part 1 Case
Studies

• Background Information
• Scientific/Technological Objectives
• Technology or Knowledge Base Level
• Scientific/Technological Advancement
• Description of Work/Activities in This Tax Year
• Supporting Information
• Case Study Exercise
• Is there SRED?
• If SRED, are trials EP or CP/ED?
• Complete Proxy Claim (Labour, Materials, Capital)

8
BREAK-OUT SESSIONS

• Session participants to complete exercise
• Facilitators will complete tables by consensus.

9
Case Study Session A - Fluidized Bed Development
- Background

• Chemical company XYZ currently uses a
  commercial-scale fluidized bed reactor to produce
  linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) in
  Sarnia.
• Bench scale experiments with a new catalyst have
  been completed (not claimed in current tax year).
  
• At bench scale, new catalyst was 20 more active
  than the existing catalyst
• Need to demonstrate this on commercial-scale FBR.

10
Case Study Session A - Fluidized Bed Development
- Technological Objectives

• Determine
• Effects of reactor temperature, pressure and gas
  flow-rates on catalyst activity.
• Optimum particle size and particle size
  distribution for XC catalyst in fluidized bed
  reactor.
• If the 20 higher activity demonstrated by the XC
  catalyst at the bench scale can be replicated at
  the commercial scale on a fluidized bed reactor.

11
Case Study Session A - Fluidized Bed Development
- Technological Advancement

• Technological advancement sought was the
  development of a commercially viable catalyst for
  the polymerization of linear low density in a
  fluidized bed reactor that would offer 20 more
  activity than the incumbent catalyst.

12
Case Study Session A - Fluidized Bed Development
- Work Done (5 Plant Trials)

• i) Plant trial 1 Effects of various process
  variables on operability of XC catalyst.
• ii) Plant trial 2 Determination of effect of
  catalyst size distribution on catalyst activity.
• iii) Plant trial 3 Effect of gas flow rate and
  reactor pressure on resin properties using XC
  catalyst at 600 micron particle diameter.
• iv) Plant trials 4-5 Ability to reproducibly
  manufacture on-spec resin using XC catalyst.

13
Case Study Session A - Fluidized Bed Development
- Exercise for Group Discussion

• 1. Is there a SRED project? Yes / No
• Provide the rationale for your answer.
• 2. If the project involves SRED, answer the
  following
• Are Trials 1-5 either CP/ED or EP? Can material
  costs be claimed in each of these trials?
• 3. If the project involves SRED complete Tables
  I to III.
• 4. If the project is SRED what is the total
  claim for XYZ, using the proxy method?

14
Case Study Session B - 3-Stage Membrane Plant -
Background

• Company API pursued 2-step treatment process for
  removal of organics from a waste feed stream,
  prior to treatment of non-organic and other
  impurities in a membrane plant.
• Oil coalescer (stage 1) was envisaged for removal
  of suspended oil and grease fraction.
• UV/ozone system (stage 2) would then be employed
  for oxidation of more complex organic molecules.

15
Case Study Session B - 3-Stage Membrane Plant -
Technological Objectives

• Develop effective 2-stage organics pretreatment
  strategy for membrane plant using Oil coalescer
  (stage 1) UV/ozone system (stage 2)
• Develop effective integrated water treatment
  technology using 2-stage organics pretreatment
  3-stage membrane plant to achieve gt99.9 overall
  contaminant removal
• Comply with all MISA and MOE guidelines for
  multi-stage integrated plant.

16
Case Study Session B - 3-Stage Membrane Plant -
Technological Advancement

• Company API sought to develop
• 2-step Oil Coalescer/UV system to provide high
  removals of oil and grease and dissolved organic
  substances in a complex mixed wastewater feed
  stream.
• Multi-stage pretreatment/membrane plant to comply
  with all MISA and MOE contaminant limits and
  achieve gt99.9 removal of all organic and
  inorganic contaminants.

17
Case Study Session B - 3-Stage Membrane Plant -
Work Done (14 plant trials)

• 8 plant trials to determine if oil and grease/UV
  pretreatment strategy could effectively remove
  organic substances
• 3 plant trials (9-11) to optimize the final
  liquid flow rates, applied pressures, and feed pH
  through the 3-stage membrane process
• 3 final plant trials (12-14) at the optimal
  processing conditions (identified from Trials
  9-11) to verify data reproducibility and
  reliability.

18
Case Study Session B - 3-Stage Membrane Plant -
Exercise for Group Discussion

• 1. Is this a SRED project? Yes / No
• Provide the rationale for your answer.
• 2. If the project involves SRED, answer the
  following
• Do Trials 1-5 involve concurrent commercial use
  of equipment?
• 3. If the project involves SRED complete Tables
  I and II.
• 4. If the project is SRED what is the total
  claim for API, using the proxy method?

19
Session C - Co-extrusion Process for Manufacture
of Heavy Duty Film Applications - Background

• Chemical company, LRESCO developing a
  co-extrusion (co-ex) process for manufacture of
  heavy-duty garbage bag film.
• Co-extrusion is a process where two or more
  resins are extruded simultaneously, and is
  typically used to produce a multi-layered film.
• In LRESCOs envisaged co-ex process, a newly
  developed XYZ (High Clarity) film resin will be
  used in the core another low density film resin
  sealant, ABC, will used in inner and outer layers
  (at approximate ratios of 15 ABC/ 70 XYZ / 15
  ABC).

20
Session C - Co-extrusion Process for Manufacture
of Heavy Duty Film Applications - Technological
Objectives

• The objective was to develop a commercial
  co-extrusion process for the manufacture of
  heavy-duty garbage bag film from a new XYZ resin
  and another ABC resin.

21
Session C - Co-extrusion Process for Manufacture
of Heavy Duty Film Applications - Technological
Advancement

• Technological advancement sought in this project
  involved development of a co-extrusion process
  for the manufacture of heavy-duty garbage bag
  film from XYZ and ABC resins.
• Garbage bag film would need to meet sealing and
  other physical properties, such as, lower
  density, lower melt index, and 50 higher tear
  and puncture resistance.

22
Session C - Co-extrusion Process for Manufacture
of Heavy Duty Film Applications - Work Done (6
Plant Trials)

• Trials 1-3 (each 12 hours), amounts of XYZ and
  ABC resins were optimized to ensure that PPA
  could resolve the orange peel issue.
• In trials 4 and 5 (each 12 hours), extruder screw
  used for the XYZ layer was modified 4
  alternative screw configurations with reverse
  elements investigated.
• In Trial 6 (72 hours), still significant
  technological uncertainty associated with flow
  uniformity and mixing characteristics several
  additional process changes were required to
  further develop the system.

23
Session C - Co-extrusion Process for Manufacture
of Heavy Duty Film Applications - Exercise for
Group Discussion

• 1. Is there a SRED project? Yes / No
• Provide the rationale for your answer.
• 2. If the project involves SRED, answer the
  following
• Are Trials 1-6 either CP/ED or EP? Can material
  costs be claimed in each of these trials?
• 3. If the project involves SRED complete Tables
  I to III.
• 4. If the project is SRED what is the total
  claim for LRESCO, using the proxy method?

24
Chemicals Guidance Document 3 Break-out
SessionsYour turn!