The Effects of Repulping Variables on Deinking of Flexographic Inks
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 6-1995 The Effects of Repulping Variables on Deinking of Flexographic Inks Sylvia Ciampa Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Wood Science and Pulp, Paper Technology Commons Recommended Citation Ciampa, Sylvia, "The Effects of Repulping Variables on Deinking of Flexographic Inks" (1995). Master's Theses. 4916. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/4916 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EFFECTS OF REPULPING VARIABLES ON DEINKING OF FLEXOGRAPHIC INKS by Sylvia Ciampa A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Department of Paper and Printing Science and Engineering Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan June 1995 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Raymond L. Janes. Without his valuable suggestions, advice and guidance this study would not have been completed. I also would like to thank Dr. John Crowell for his valuable statistics assistance, Dr. Ellsworth Shriver and Dr. Raja Aravamuthan for their constant encouragement, and John Serafano for his help. Finally I would like to thank my parents for their great support and love. Sylvia Ciampa 11 THE EFFECTS OF REPULPING VARIABLES ON DEINKING OF FLEXOGRAPHIC INKS Sylvia Ciampa, M.S. Western Michigan University, 1995 The effectsof repulping variables (pH, surfactant concentration, time, and temperature) on deinking paper printed with flexographic ink were studied. A series of alcohol ethoxylate surfactants was evaluated. The one with HLB=ll.8 was selected for the majority of the study. pH was the variable that presented the greatest effect on repulping and . deinking. The brightness after repulping and the final brightness after deinking was significantly higher at pH 5 than at pH 9. Paper was repulped for 15, 25, and 40 minutes respectively. Highest brightness after repulping and highest gain in brightness by flotationwas observed after 15 minutes of repulping. No significant differences in deinking efficiency were found between 25 and 40 minutes repulping. A separate study found that most of the ink was rapidly redeposited on or within the fiber structure, with over 80% of the brightness loss occurring during the first 15 minutes of repulping. No significant differences in the units of brightness loss were found between the repulping times of 15 and 30 minutes. Paper which was aged for eight months deinked more easily than three months-aged paper. The improvement was especially significant when no surfactant was added or when a hydrophilic surfactant was used. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .. .. .. .. .. .. ii LIST OF TABLES .......................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................· ..................... i CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1 II. LITERATURE ANALYSIS .............................. 3 Deinking Fundamentals .............................. 3 Pulping or Repulping ............................. 3 Cleaning and Screening . .. .. .. 4 Washing Deinking ............................... 5 Flotation Deinking .............................. 6 Use of Surfactants .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 Flexographic Printing and Inks .. .. .. .. 10 Flexographic Printing Process . .. .. .. 10 Water-Based Flexographic Inks .................... 12 Wetting and Spreading .......................... 13 Deinking of Flexo Printed Papers ..................... 14 Difficulties in Deinking Water-based Flexo Printed Paper ............................. 14 Deinking Papers From Different Printing Processes ................· .............. 18 Ill Table of Contents--Continued CHAPTER Feasibility Studies on Flotation Deinking of Water-Based Inks ............................ 22 III. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND OBJECTIVE .............. 31 IV. EXPERIMENT ...................................... 33 Design ......................................... 33 Materials . .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 Ink ......................................... 33 Paper ....................................... 34 Surfactant ................................... 34 Equipment . .. .. .. .. .. .. 36 Flexographic Press . .. .. .. .. .. 36 Repulper .. .. .. .. .. .. 36 Flotation Cell . .. .. .. .. .. 37 Washer ..................................... 37 Methods ........................................ 37 Variables and Levels ........................... 37 Brightness Pads . .. .. .. .. .. .. 38 Gain in Units of Brightness ...................... 39 Yield ....................................... 39 Improvement in Brightness Due to Reduction in Repulping Time . .. .. .. .. 39 IV Table of Contents--Continued CHAPTER Units of Brightness Loss ......................... 39 Percent of the Total Brightness Loss ................ 40 Rate of Brightness Loss .. .. .. .. 40 Percent Improvement in Brightness Due to Aging . 40 First Phase: Reproducibility of the Process .. 40 Second Phase: Selection of Surfactant . .. .. 40 Third Phase: Study of the Influence of Variables on Deinking ............................. 41 Fourth Phase: Ink Redeposition Versus Repulping Time ............................. 41 Fifth Phase: Influence of Time Lapsed Before Deinking . .. .. .. .. .. 44 V.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .......................... 45 First Phase: Reproducibility of the Process .. .. 45 Second Phase: Selection of Surfactant . .. .. 45 Third Phase: Study of the Influence of Variables on Deinking .. .. .. .. 50 Fourth Phase: Ink Redeposition Versus Repulping Time . .. .. .. .. 64 Fifth Phase: Influence of Time Lapse Before Deinking . .. .. .. .. .. 69 VI. SUMMARY OF RESULTS ............................. 74 VII. CONCLUSIONS ..................................... 76 V Table of Contents--Continued CHAPTER VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY .......... 77 APPENDICES A. Pigment Particle Size . .. .. .. .. .. 78 B. Morden Laboratory "Slush-Maker" Procedure ................ 80 C. Laboratory-Scale Flotation Cell and Laboratory Sidehill Screen . .. .. .. .. .. 82 D. Procedure to Prepare Brightness Pads for Reflectance Testing . .. .. .. .. 85 E. Equations to Calculate Gain in Units of Brightness by ' Flotation and Washing, Yield, Improvement Due to Reduction in Repulping Time, Units of Brightness Loss, Percent of Total Brightness Loss, Rate of Brightness Loss, and Improvement in Brightness Due to Aging .. .. .. .. .. 88 REFERENCES ............................................ 92 VI LIST OF TABLES 1. Requirements for Flotation and for Flexo Printability . .. 8 2. Classification of Surfactant Types and Their Hydrophilic Groups . .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 3. Typical Flexographic Ink Composition . .. .. .. 14 4. Size, Number and Area of Ink Particles Depending on the Printing Process . .. .. .. .. .. 22 5. Composition of the Water-Based Flexo Ink No.1 . .. 34 6. Physical and Chemical Properties of NEODOL Alcohol Ethoxylates . .. .. .. .. .. .. 35 7. Levels of Variables for Repulping . .. .. .. .. .. 38 8. The 24 Factorial Design .. .. .. .. .. .. 42 9. Brightness (Units) Across the System, Standard Deviation Values (STD), and Coefficients of Variation( CV) . .. .. .. .. .. .. 46 10. Brightness Obtained Across the System and the Gain in Units of Brightness for Each Surfactant and No Surfactant at the "Low" Conditions .. .. .. 46 11. Brightness Across the System at the "Low" and "High" Conditions for the Surfactants With HLB=ll.8 and HLB= 14.5 ........................... 52 12. Brightness Across the System, Gain in Brightness Due to Flotation (F) and Washing (W) (Units, % ) and Yield . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 54 13. Estimated Effect of the Variables on Repulping (Units), Gain by Flotation (F) and Gain by Washing (W), and on the Final Brightness . .. .. .. .. 60 vu List of Tables--Continued 14. Estimated Standard Errors of the Effect of the Variables . 60 15. Brightness Across the System, Gain in Units of Brightness by Flotation and Washing, and the Improvement in Units of Brightness When Repulping for 15 Instead of 25Minutes . .. .. .. .. 61 16. Brightness After Repulping and After Infinite Washing, Units of Brightness Loss Due to Ink Redeposition, Percent of Total Brightness Loss, and Rate of Brightness Loss for Inks no. 1 and no. 2 . .. .. 65 17. Brightness Across the System Three and Eight Months After Printing and Gain by Flotation and Washing in Units of Brightness ............................ 69 18. Improvement in Units of Brightness Due to Aging on Repulping, Flotation, Washing, and Final Brightness . .. .. .. .. .. 70 19. Brightness After Repulping Obtained Oven-Drying the Ink at 10 0°C for Different Periods of Time, and Improve ment (Units, % ) Due to 24Hours Drying (Original Ink Concentration = 0.5%) .. .. .. .. 72 20. Brightness (Units) on Both Plate and Filter Side Without or With the Screen . .. .. .. .. .. 90 Vlll LIST OF FIGURES 1. Basic Parameters of Ink for Flotation .. .. .. .. 7 2. A Flexographic Printing Unit . .. .. .. .. 11 3. Brightness Across System . .. .. .. .. .. 15 4. Particle Size Distribution at the Pulper . .. .. .. 16 5. Influence of Flexographic Newsprint .. .. .. .. 17 6. Redeposition Tests Results Showing Brightness Loss Due to Reduction in pH Using 0.25% of SDA-34 .....................................