THE EFFECTS OF FINAL MOLASSES AND SUGAR PURITY VALUES ON THE CALCULATION OF 96 0 SUGAR AND FACTORY RECOVERY INDEX BY Heera Singh Worthy Park Estate Ltd.
INTRODUCTION The objective of this paper is not to test the accuracy of Quality Control Methodologies, therefore no standard deviation evaluation was done. Rather it characterizes the effects of sugar and final molasses purities on some sensitive calculated values. Sugar Purity is calculated using Sugar Pol % and Moisture % and with Final Molasses purity, are critical analytical results in the formula used to calculate the Copps Factor and Tonne 96 0 Sugar which is used for F.R.I. determination. Sugar Factory Laboratories during cropping period are required daily to analyze Raw Sugar for Pol% and Moisture % and Final Molasses for Purity. Portion of these samples are uniformly composited for weekly recheck at S.I.R.I. Central Laboratory. The results are sent to Factories with the comparative values. The to date data in Report No. 34 for Week Ending 30 07 11 during the 2010/2011 crop were used in the statistical calculations in this paper. It must be noted that there are some slight difference in statistical values in S.I.R.I. reports for some Factories, but this in no way alters the objective this paper is intended to demonstrate. This paper consists of four sections. The first being a list of formulae used, followed by sugar and final molasses analyses used in the recalculated values and comparing with the values reported. The final two sections consist of analytical compliance information followed by suggestions and conclusion.
SECTION 1 FORMULAE USED Refractometer Purity of Final Molasses = Pol % x 100 Refractometer Brix Hydrometer Purity of Final Molasses = Pol % x 100 Hydrometer Brix Purity of Sugar = Pol% Sugar x 100 100 Moisture % Sugar ( 0 Brix ) Copps Factor = 97 (Purity of Sugar Purity of Final Molasses) Purity of Sugar ( 97 Purity of Final Molasses) x 100 96 Tonne 96 0 Sugar = **Tonne Commercial Sugar x Pol % Sugar x Copps Factor 100 Note: ** Tonne Commercial Sugar is actual from scale weight. Formulae are from A Manual of Analytical Methods for use in the Control Laboratories of Raw Sugar Factories Third Edition of the Chemical Control Committee of J.A.S.T. April 1983. Factory Recovery Index (F.R.I. ) = Tonne 96 0 Sugar Calculated Made x 100 Tonne J.R.C.S Core
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS DIFFERENCES IN SUGAR POL % ANALYTICAL RESULTS AT THE FACTORIES COMPARED TO S.I.R.I. 99 98.9 98.8 98.97 98.7 98.6 98.89 98.85 98.84 98.75 Factory Sugar Pol % 98.5 98.4 98.77 98.71 98.4 98.44 98.79 98.98 98.69 S.I.R.I. Sugar Pol % 98.3 98.2 98.1 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED DIFFERENCES IN SUGAR MOISTURE % ANALYTICAL RESULTS AT THE FACTORIES COMPARED TO S.I.R.I. 0.5 0.45 0.47 0.4 0.35 0.49 0.3 0.34 0.38 0.25 0.4 Factories Sugar Moisture % S.I.R.I. Sugar Moisture % 0.2 0.15 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.24 0.3 0.32 0.1 0.3 0.05 0 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED EFFECTS OF SUGAR PURITY VALUES CALCULATED USING THE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FROM SUGAR FACTORIES AND S.I.R.I 99.4 99.3 99.2 99.1 99 98.9 98.8 99.11 99.21 99.11 99.34 98.9 99.14 99.27 99.13 Sugar Purity Calculated from Factories Sugar Pol % and Moisture % Analyses Sugar Purity Calculated from S.I.R.I. Sugar Pol % and Moist. % Analyses 98.7 98.6 98.74 99.09 99.22 99.01 98.5 98.4 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED DIFFERENCES IN S.I.R.I. FINAL MOLASSES REFRACTOMETER PURITY VERSUS FACTORIES RESULTS NOTE ONLY TWO FACTORIES ARE REPORTING REFRACTOMETER PURITY 40 35 35.36 36.49 30 25 20 32.26 32.69 36.54 35.92 36.4 37.55 28.07 34.8 35.07 Factories Final Molasses Purity S.I.R.I. Final Molasses Refractometer Purity 15 10 31.87 5 0 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED DIFFERENCES IN 96 0 SUGAR CALCULATED VALUES USING S.I.R.I. SUGAR POL %, MOIST. % AND FINAL MOLASSES REFRACTOMETER PURITY COMPARED WITH THAT REPORTED BY FACTORIES 41,778 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 31,099 28,746 41,683 22,039 31,031 16,163 28,680 16,126 22,079 Factory A Factory B Factory C Factory D Factory E Factories Calculated Tonne 96 Deg. Sugar as stated in S.I.R.I. Report Calculated 96 Deg. Sugar Based on S.I.R.I.Pol %, Moist % and Refractometer Final Molasses Purity
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED REVENNUE INCREASE (+) /DECREASE ( ) USING TONNE 96 0 SUGAR CALCULATED WITH S.I.R.I. SUGAR POL %, MOIST. % AND FINAL MOLASSES REFRACTOMETER PURITY AND COMPARING WITH FACTORY REPORTED Factories Factories Calculated Tonne 96 0 Sugar as stated in S.I.R.I. Report Calculated 96 0 Sugar Based on S.I.R.I.Sugar Pol %, Moisture % Final Molasses Tonne 96 0 Sugar Difference Price per Tonne 96 Deg. Sugar $36,000JD Revenue Gain + Less In Million JD Refractometer Purity Factory A 31,031 31,099 + 68 +2.45 Factory B 16,126 16,163 +37 +1.33 Factory C 41,683 41,778 +95 +3.42 Factory D 28,680 28,746 +66 +2.38 Factory E 22,079 22,039 40 1.44 Industry 139,599 139,864 +265 +9.54
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED DIFFERENCES IN F.R.I. VALUES USING TONNE 96 0 SUGAR CALCULATED WITH S.I.R.I. SUGAR AND FINAL MOLASSES ANALYSES VALUES AND COMPARING WITH THAT REPORTED BY FACTORIES 100 95 Factory Reported F.R.I. 90 97.97 98.18 96.11 85 92.8 89.59 Calculated F.R.I. Using 96 Deg. Sugar Evaluated from S.I.R.I. Sugar Pol %, Moist. % and Refractometer Purity 87.82 92.59 96.28 89.42 80 87.62 75 80.21 80.39 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED COMPARISON OF S.I.R.I. FINAL MOLASSES PURITY HYDROMETER WITH REFRACTOMETER 40 35 30 25 20 15 30.55 32.69 33.89 35.92 35.62 36.49 35 37.55 26.87 28.07 33.56 35.07 S.I.R.I. Final Molasses Hydrometer Purity S.I.R.I. Final Molasses Refractometer Purity 10 5 0 Factory 'A' Factory 'B' Factory 'C' Factory 'D' Factory 'E' Industry
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED EFFECTS OF TONNE 96 0 SUGAR CALCULATED VALUES USING S.I.R.I. REFRACTOMETER AND HYDROMETER FINAL MOLASSES PURITIES AND FACTORIES SUGAR POL % AND MOIST. % 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 41,721 31,046 28,722 41,704 22,036 31,014 16,119 28,682 16,101 22,024 Factory A Factory B Factory C Factory D Factory E Calculated Tonne 96 Deg. Sugar with S.I.R.I. Hydrometer Purity and Factories Sugar Pol % and Moist. % Calculated Tonne 96 Deg. Sugar with S.I.R.I. Refractometer Final Molasses Purity and Factories Sugar Pol % and Moist. %
SECTION 2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS CONTINUED TABULATION OF THE INDUSTRY TONNE 96 0 SUGAR CALCULATED WITH S.I.R.I. SUGAR AND FINAL MOLASSES RESULTS COMPARED WITH THAT FROM THE FACTORIES SHOWING INCREASE / DECREASE Details of Analytical Results used in Recalculation of Figures for the Industry Industry Calc. Tonne 96 0 Sugar with S.I.R.I. Analyses Industry Tonne 96 0 Sugar Reported by Factories Tonne Increase (+) / Decrease ( ) Total Tonne 96 0 Sugar recalculated using S.I.R.I. Pol % Total Tonne 96 0 Sugar recalculated using S.I.R.I. Moist. % 139,798 139,599 + 199 139,713 139,599 + 114 Total Tonne 96 0 Sugar recalculated using S.I.R.I. Refractomter Purity 139,686 139,599 + 87 Total Tonne 96 0 Sugar recalculated using S.I.R.I. Hydrometer Purity 139,582 139,599 17
SECTION 3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AT THE VARIOUS SUGAR FACTORIES COMPARED WITH THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS SUGAR POL% DETERMINATION AT THE VARIOUS FACTORIES COMPARED TO THE INDUSTRY STANDARD Factories Sugar Pol Determination Industry Standard Factory A JAST Manual Method, Celite Filter Aid NIR Pol Reading Factory B JAST Manual Method,Octopol Reagent NIR Pol Reading Factory C JAST Manual Method,Dry Lead Reagent NIR Pol Reading Factory D JAST Manual Method, Octopol Reagent NIR Pol Reading Factory E JAST Manual Method,Celite Filter Aid NIR Pol Reading S.I.R.I. JAST Manual Method,Celite Filter Aid NIR Pol Reading Compliant Non Compliant Non Compliant Non Compliant Compliant Compliant
SECTION 3 CONTINUED ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AT THE VARIOUS SUGAR FACTORIES COMPARED WITH THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS SUGAR MOISTURE % DETERMINATION AT THE VARIOUS FACTORIES COMPARED TO THE INDUSTRY STANDARD Factories Sugar Moisture Determination Industry Standard Factory A JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant Factory B JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant Factory C JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant Factory D JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant Factory E JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant S.I.R.I. JAST Manual Method Oven Compliant
SECTION 3 CONTINUED ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AT THE VARIOUS SUGAR FACTORIES COMPARED WITH THE INDUSTRY STANDARDS FINAL MOLASSES PURITY DETERMINATION AT THE VARIOUS FACTORIES COMPARED TO THE INDUSTRY STANDARD Factories Final Molasses Purity Determination Industry Standard Factory A Hydrometer Purity Non Compliant Factory B Hydrometer Purity Non Compliant Factory C Refractometer Purity Compliant Factory D Hydrometer Purity Non Compliant Factory E Refractometer Purity Compliant S.I.R.I. Refractometer/Hydrometer Compliant
SECTION 4 SUGGESTIONS 1. Standardize the entire Industry analytical equipment, apparatuses, filter aid and procedure for Sugar Pol % determination. 2. Standardize the entire Industry analytical equipment, apparatuses, filter aid and procedure for Final Molasses Refractometer Purity determination. 3. Enforce the Industry Standard of Refractometer Purity methodology for Final Molasses determination. 4. Implement in the Industry where it is not in place the recording of three numerical digits after the decimal for Refractometer Final Molasses Purity, Sugar Pol %, Moisture %, F.R.I. And Tonne 96 0 Sugar. See the following tabulation.
Factories SECTION 4 SUGGESTIONS CONTINUED Factories Calculated Tonne 96 0 Sugar as stated in S.I.R.I. Report Calculated 96 0 Sugar Based on S.I.R.I.Sugar Pol %, Moisture % Final Molasses Refractometer Purity Factory A 31,031 31,099 Factory B 16,126 16,163 Factory C 41,683 41,778 Factory D 28,680 28,746 Factory E 22,079 22,039 Industry 139,599 Cal. Value =139,864 Added Value= 139,825 5. Revise the Manual of Analytical Methods for use in the Control Laboratories of Raw Sugar Factory. The Second edition was in 1965 with the third 1983, twenty eight years ago. 6. S.I.R.I. to consider accommodating Collaborative Refractomter Final Molasses Analyses if practically possible. Frequency every crop can be benched marked similar to the present procedure employed for cane and sugar.
SECTION 4 CONCLUSION With the application of the Industry Standard Technological Information, Scientific Data and Mathematical Calculations the analytical results of Sugar Pol %, Moisture % and Final Molasses Refractometer Purity all have varying effects on the calculated values of Tonne 96 0 Sugar and F.R.I. For the 2011 crop this study shows that the analytical variance with Sugar Pol % having the most significant effect on the Tonne 96 0 Sugar Calculated Value at +199 Tonne. The Moisture % was second at +114 Tonne while the Refractometer Final Molasses Purity having the least effects at +87 Tonne. These values ultimately impacts on dollar value for the revenue earned. The Standard Refractometer Final Molasses Purity Value shows a plus one hundred and four (+104) Tonne 96 0 Sugar for the Industry compared to that derived using the Hydrometer Purity in the formula and is advantageous for the remainder of Factories to comply with that standard. TheF.R.I.valuewasaffectedbythevariationofrecalculatedamountof96 0 Sugar and was between + 0.17 to + 0.21 %. By observing standard operating procedures with analytical methodologies, standard statistical procedures for data evaluation, instrumentation validation, reagent/materials certification, analyst certification, laboratories facilities certification and sample tracking will guarantee Factories Laboratory and S.I.R.I. Laboratory producing comparable sugar and final molasses analytical results with negligible and highly acceptable levels of effects in the calculation of tonne 96 o sugar and F.R.I.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Thanks to the Director of Worthy Park Factory for allowing me time to do this paper. Grateful to members of S.I.R.I. S Statistical, Analytical and Technology Departments and my Wife and Son for their respective assistances. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION NOTATION THERE ARE ONLY TWELVE HARD COPIES OF THIS PAPER PRINTED IF THERE IS ANYONE THAT IS INTERESTED IN A COPY PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR E MAIL ADDRESS AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY WILL BE AVAILABLE IN YOUR MAIL BOX EARLY SUNDAY MORNING.