Kent GA

Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010

__________________________________________________________________________

ESTIMATING BAGASSE PRODUCTION

By
GA KENT
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane
g.kent@qut.edu.au
KEYWORDS: Bagasse, Mass, Production,
Quantity, Insoluble Solids, Ash.
Abstract
Bagasse production is rarely measured directly. While several equations
have been developed to calculate bagasse production from measured
quantities, they all have some limitations. This paper introduces a new
model for calculating bagasse production, based on an insoluble solids
mass balance. The model has been shown to produce an average mass
balance closure error over a crushing season of less than 2% cane. The
model highlights the importance of the insoluble ash content in cane as a
parameter affecting bagasse mass calculations. This parameter is not
routinely measured at many factories. This model is complex compared
with previous models for calculating bagasse mass. As such, it may not be
considered appropriate for implementation at factories. It is considered
useful, however, for validating other methods of measuring bagasse mass
and may serve to help evaluate simpler models.
Introduction
Bagasse is increasingly being considered as the feedstock for production
facilities co-located with raw sugar factories. In the past five years, two major
cogeneration plants have been completed (Trayner, 2008; Palmer et al., 2009) and a
furfural plant is close to completion (Watson and Connors, 2008). To manage the colocated facility, it is necessary to know the quantity of bagasse available. This
information may be needed for the sale of bagasse from one business to the other, for
securing the required amount of alternative feedstocks to meet production
requirements or for estimating the production potential of a bagasse source.
Bagasse production is rarely measured directly. Adcock and Hunter (1963)
described a conveyor weigher at Pioneer Mill. Adkins et al. (1963) compared bagasse
mass measurements from the conveyor weigher with conventional methods and found
differences of 2% to 3%. Other factories have installed belt weighers on bagasse
conveyors with minimal success. Recent improvements in belt weigher technology
have made this approach worthy of consideration again.
The alternative and usual approach to determining bagasse production is to
calculate it from other measured quantities.
This paper reviews existing methods for measuring bagasse production and
presents an alternative method for this purpose.
546

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

Existing methods for measuring bagasse production

The official method of the Australian industry for calculating bagasse mass
(mb) as presented by Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1984) is:
0.95 Fc
mb =
mc
(1)
100 M b Bb

where mc is cane mass, Fc is cane fibre content, Mb is bagasse moisture content and Bb
is bagasse brix content. Although all m parameters are defined as mass in this paper,
they could equally well be defined as mass flow rate. In fact, equation 1 was defined
in Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1984) as mass flow rate.
The denominator 100 M b Bb in equation 1 represents the fibre content of
bagasse (Fb), as defined by Method 5 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001).
The 0.95 factor accounts for the loss of some fibre, most notably into mud.
The advantage of this method of calculating bagasse production is that it is
simple and calculated from routine factory measurements. The brix content of
bagasse is not routinely measured but can be readily calculated from the pol content
of bagasse and either a measured or assumed value for purity of bagasse, as described
by Method 5 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001).
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1984) also presented an alternative
equation:
m
Fc F j j
mc
(2)
mc
mb =
100 M b Bb

where mj is the mass of mixed juice and Fj is the suspended solids content of mixed
juice. The advantage of this method is that it eliminates the empirical 0.95 factor. The
disadvantage of this method is that the additional parameters are not well defined.
Suspended solids in mixed juice is not routinely measured. While mixed juice flow
rate is often measured by a flow meter, it is usually measured after the mixed juice
tank where recycle streams such as filtrate are added.
Wright (2003) presented two variations on equations 1 and 2 (defined in his
paper as equations 3 and 4) which partly overcome the disadvantages listed above.
Muller et al. (1982) likewise presented a variation on equation 2 (defined in their
paper as equation 5). Wright (2003) presented an alternative equation that contained
corrections for mud solids in juice and dirt in cane.
m
Fmff
m F
1
mb =
F jmb j mff + 1 Dc 1 bd mc
Fc
(3)
Fb
Fmfm
mc Fmfm mcd
where Fmff is the fibre content in mud, Fmfm is the mud solids content in mud, Fjmb is
the base mud solids content in mixed juice, Dc is the dirt content in cane and mbd / mcd
547

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

is the proportion of dirt in cane that remains with bagasse. Dirt content in cane is an
additional measurement that is not routinely measured.
A more complete bagasse mass flow model
Introductory remarks
The bagasse mass flow model presented here was designed around routine
measurements made at Condong and Broadwater factories.
Unlike the model of Wright (2003), this model does not require measurements
of dirt content. Instead it requires measurements of ash content. Muller et al. (1982)
took a similar approach but did not use it for measurement of bagasse mass.
Although all model terms are defined in the text of this paper, a complete list
of model terms and their units is attached for convenience at the end of this paper.
Definitions
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001) contains discrepancies in the
definition of fibre. Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1984) defines fibre in terms
of cane as the dry, water-insoluble matter in the cane. This definition applies well to
the measurement of fibre in cane by Method 4A of Bureau of Sugar Experiment
Stations (2001) and to the measurement of fibre in bagasse by Method 5 of Bureau of
Sugar Experiment Stations (2001). This definition, however, does not apply to the
determination of fibre in juice and mud streams by Method 13 of Bureau of Sugar
Experiment Stations (2001), where total insoluble solids are divided into fibre and
mud solids. The measurement equivalent to fibre in cane is total insoluble solids as
measured by Method 14 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001).
For consistency in this paper, insoluble solids is used to equate to fibre as
defined in Method 4A and Method 5 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001)
and total insoluble solids as defined by Method 14 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment
Stations (2001). The terms fibre and mud solids are used as defined in Method 13 and
Method 14 of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001).
Mass balance equations
Assuming no insoluble solids in clarified juice, the following equation
describes an overall insoluble solids mass balance for a raw sugar factory:
*
mcf + mxfa = mbf + mmf

(4)

where mcf is the insoluble solids mass in cane, mbf is the insoluble solids mass in
bagasse and mmf* is the equivalent insoluble solids mass in mud (defined in equation
8). The extra ash term, mxfa, can be considered an error term because it ensures that a
complete mass balance is achieved. It allows for extra insoluble ash added, for
example, as part of the juice liming process.
A similar mass balance equation can be determined for insoluble ash:
mcfa + mxfa = mbfa + mmfa
(5)
548

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

where mcfa is the insoluble ash mass in cane, mbfa is the insoluble ash mass in bagasse
and mmfa is the insoluble ash mass in mud.
Calculating the cane terms
The mass of insoluble solids in cane (mcf) can be determined from:
F
mcf = c mc
(6)
100
Insoluble solids content (Fc) and mass (mc) of cane are both routine
measurements made at Australian raw sugar factories for cane payment purposes.
Condong and Broadwater mills measure the insoluble ash component of cane
(Fca) directly and so the mass of insoluble ash in cane (mcfa) can be calculated from:

mcfa =

Fca
mc
100

(7)

Calculating the mud terms

Equation 4 includes a term called the equivalent mass of insoluble solids in
mud (mmf*) which differs from the measured mass of insoluble solids in mud to
account for the change in state of proteins.
As part of the clarification process, proteins are precipitated and become part
of mud solids in mud.
The standard method for measuring insoluble solids in cane is the can fibre
method, as defined by Method 4A of Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001).
The can fibre process deliberately avoids precipitation of proteins to ensure
that the insoluble solids measurement in cane does not include proteins.
Since proteins are not included in the insoluble solids input to the mass
balance, they also cannot be included in the insoluble solids output from the mass
balance.
The relationship between the equivalent mass of insoluble solids in mud and
the measured mass of insoluble solids in mud (mmf) is given by:
*
mmf
= mmf mmfmp
(8)

where mmfmp is the mass of proteins in mud. The mass of insoluble solids in mud can
be determined from fibre (mmff) and mud solids (mmfm) components:
mmf = mmff + mmfm
(9)
These components can be calculated by the fibre (Fmf) and mud solids (Fmm)
measurements:
Fmf
( 10 )
mmff =
mm
100
549

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

mmfm =

Fmm
mm
100

( 11 )

where mm is the mass of mud.

The mass of protein is not routinely measured but can be estimated as a
proportion (Fmp) of the mass of mud:
Fmp
( 12 )
mmfmp =
mm
100
Parish (1965) reported the protein contents of filter cake from several
countries. The average protein content was 13% dry or about 4% wet for mud
moisture contents of about 70%.
Similar to equation 9, the total mass of insoluble ash in mud can be calculated
from:
mmfa = mmffa + mmfma
( 13 )
where mmffa is the mass of insoluble ash in fibre in mud and mmfma is the mass of
insoluble ash in mud solids in mud. The ash contents of fibre and mud solids are not
routinely measured and so need to be estimated. The mass of insoluble ash in fibre in
mud can be calculated from:
A
( 14 )
mmffa = mff mmff
100
where Amff is the ash content in fibre in mud. Muller et al (1982) reported ash contents
in fibre in cane of 0.13% to 0.36%. Insoluble solids contents were not reported but, if
they were assumed to be between 12% and 15%, the ash content in fibre would have
been between 1.1% and 3.0%. It is assumed that fibre in cane and fibre in mud will
have similar ash contents and so Amff will have a value between 1.1% and 3.0%.
Mud solids are understood to consist largely of dirt, with smaller quantities of
phosphates and proteins. It was assumed that dirt and phosphates consist completely
of ash while proteins were assumed to contain no ash. Consequently:
mmfma = mmfm mmfmp
( 15 )
Calculating the bagasse terms
Condong and Broadwater mills do not directly measure the insoluble ash
content of bagasse but do measure the total ash content of bagasse. To calculate the
mass of insoluble ash in bagasse (mbfa), the mass of soluble ash in bagasse (mbba)
should be subtracted from the total mass of ash (mba):
mbfa = mba mbba
( 16 )
550

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

The mass of total ash in bagasse can be calculated from:

A
mba = b mb
100

( 17 )

where Ab is the total ash content in bagasse and mb is the mass of bagasse. The
soluble ash content of bagasse is not routinely measured. It is, however, a fraction of
the total impurities in bagasse:
A
mbba = bi (mbb mbp )
( 18 )
100
where Abi is the ash content in impurities in bagasse, mbb is the mass of brix in
bagasse and mbp is the mass of pol in bagasse.
Soluble impurities in juice typically consist of relatively equal proportions of
reducing sugars, ash and other organic matter.
Consequently, it is considered reasonable to assume that the soluble ash
component of bagasse is one-third of the soluble impurities component of bagasse
(Abi = 33%).
The mass of pol and brix in bagasse can be calculated from:
P
mbp = b mb
( 19 )
100
mbb =

Bb
mb
100

where Pb is the pol content in bagasse and Bb is the brix content in bagasse.
The mass of bagasse can be calculated from:
100
mb =
mbf
Fb

( 20 )

( 21 )

where Fb is the insoluble solids content in bagasse and mbf is the mass of insoluble
solids in bagasse.
Equations 6 to 21 can be used to calculate all terms in equations 4 and 5
except for mbf and mxfa. Consequently, equations 4 and 5 are two simultaneous
equations with two unknowns and so can be solved to calculate these two quantities.
The solution is:
e
mcf mcfa mmf
+ mmfa
mbf =
A
Ab bi (Bb Pb )
( 22 )
100
1
Fb
551

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

In this equation, mcf, mcfa, mmfe, and mmfa are defined in equations 6, 7, 8 and
13 respectively.
Now that mbf has been determined, mb can be calculated from equation 21.
Testing the model
Closing the mass balance
A good test for the model was how well the mass balance closed. The mass
balance closure could be assessed through the size of the extra ash term, mxfa.
The model was tested using the 2008 weekly results from Condong and
Broadwater factories where cane insoluble solids contents were typically 19% (due to
the deliberate inclusion of some trash with the cane (Kent et al., 2010). Routine
analysis results were used where possible. The three parameters for which no routine
analysis was available were set to the values shown in Table 1.
Table 1Assumed parameter values for testing the mass balance closure.
Symbol
Abi
Amff
Fmp

Parameter
Ash content (soluble) in impurities in bagasse (%)
Ash content in fibre in mud (%)
Protein content in mud (%)

Value
33
2
4

The mass of extra ash, called the error, is shown on a weekly basis for the
2008 season for Condong and Broadwater factories in Figures 1 and 2 respectively. A
horizontal line is shown across each figure to show the mean error (less than 2% of
the total cane crushed). The make-up of this extra ash is not known but it is
considerably larger than the amount of lime added to the process.
5

Error (% cane)

10

15

20

25

Week

Fig. 1Error in insoluble solids balance for Condong factory 2008 season.
552

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________
5

Error (% cane)

10

15

20

25

Week

Fig. 2Error in insoluble solids balance for Broadwater factory 2008 season.

Sensitivity analysis
To gain an understanding of the relative importance of each parameter in the
model on the calculated bagasse mass, a sensitivity analysis was conducted where
each parameter was increased and decreased 10% from the mean weekly value from
Broadwater factorys 2008 season results. The percentage change in the calculated
bagasse mass (from equation 21) is shown in Figure 3.
Moisture content in bagasse
Insoluble solids content in cane
Mass of cane
Insoluble ash content in cane
Ash content in bagasse
Pol content in bagasse
Mass of mud
Fibre content in mud
Purity of bagasse
Ash content in impurities in bagasse
Ash content in fibre in mud
Mud solids content in mud
Protein content in cane
0

10

12

Change in bagasse mass (%)

Fig. 3Effect of a 10% change in the parameter value on calculated bagasse mass.
553

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

The three parameters that have the largest effect on calculated bagasse mass
are the moisture content of bagasse, the insoluble solids content of cane and the mass
of cane. It is noteworthy that the mud solids content in mud and the protein content in
cane have no impact on calculated bagasse mass. It is also fortunate that the other two
parameters that are not routinely measured, the ash content in impurities in bagasse
and the ash content in fibre in mud, have very small impact on calculated bagasse
mass.
In some cases, the total mass of bagasse is of lesser interest than the total mass
of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse, since this component of bagasse is of most
interest for value adding. A second sensitivity analysis was conducted on the mass of
non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse. The mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse
can be calculated from mbf mbfa where mbf, the mass of insoluble solids in bagasse,
is calculated from equation 22 and mbfa, the mass of insoluble ash in bagasse, is
calculated from equation 16. The percentage change in the calculated mass of non-ash
insoluble solids in bagasse is shown in Figure 4.

Insoluble solids content in cane

Mass of cane
Insoluble ash content in cane
Mass of mud
Fibre content in mud
Ash content in fibre in mud
Moisture content in bagasse
Ash content in bagasse
Pol content in bagasse
Purity of bagasse
Ash content in impurities in bagasse
Mud solids content in mud
Protein content in cane
0

10

12

Change in mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse (%)

Fig. 4Effect of a 10% change in the parameter value on

calculated mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse

Figure 4 shows that there are considerably less parameters that impact on the
calculated mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse than on the total mass of
bagasse. Most notably, the moisture, ash and pol contents in bagasse, the purity of
bagasse and the ash content in impurities in bagasse have no impact on the calculated
mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse. The impact of the remaining parameters
is the same on the mass of non-ash insoluble solids in bagasse as it is on the total
mass of bagasse.
554

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

A sensitivity analysis was also conducted to determine the impact of the

factors on the error in the mass balance. Again the mean weekly values from
Broadwater factorys 2008 season were used. The results are shown in Figure 5.

Mud solids content in mud

Insoluble ash content in cane
Ash content in bagasse
Insoluble solids content in cane
Moisture content in bagasse
Mass of cane
Mass of mud
Protein content in cane
Purity of bagasse
Ash content in impurities in bagasse
Fibre content in mud
Pol content in bagasse
Ash content in fibre in mud
0

10

12

14

Change in mass balance error (%)

Fig. 5Effect of a 10% change in the parameter value on the mass

balance error (% cane).

Two of the parameters that have the largest impact on the mass balance error,
the mud solids content in mud and the mass of mud, are not particularly well
measured and may well be responsible for at least some of the error. It is fortunate
that these parameters have much less impact on the calculated mass of bagasse
values.
Discussion
The parameter that has the third largest impact on the mass of non-ash
insoluble solids in bagasse is the insoluble ash content of cane. This parameter also
has the fourth largest impact on the total mass of bagasse. Although this parameter is
routinely measured at Condong and Broadwater factories, it is not routinely measured
at many other Australian factories. It is, however, an important parameter for
calculating bagasse quantities.
It is noted that the simplest bagasse mass equation, presented in equation 1,
contains the three highest impact parameters and as such does capture most of the
variability in the bagasse mass calculation. To determine whether the 0.95 factor in
the equation is appropriate, bagasse mass by equation 1 was divided by bagasse mass
by equation 21 for each week of the 2008 season at Condong and Broadwater
factories. The results are shown in figures 6 and 7. The results show that equation 1
calculated bagasse mass within 2% over the season at both factories but was
substantially overestimating production in the early weeks for Broadwater. Adding a
555

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

mud term, such as in equation 4 of Wright (2003) may make a significant

improvement.

Bagasse mass calculation ratio

1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8
5

10

15

20

25

Week

Fig. 6Ratio of bagasse mass by equation 1 to bagasse mass by

equation 21 for Condong factory 2008 season.

Bagasse mass calculation ratio

1.2

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8
0

10

15

20

25

Week

Fig. 7Ratio of bagasse mass by equation 1 to bagasse mass by

equation 21 for Broadwater factory 2008 season.
556

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

Conclusions
The insoluble solids mass balance model presented in this paper is useful for
calculating bagasse production from routine factory data and has been shown to
produce an average mass balance closure error over a crushing season of less than 2%
of the total cane crushed.
The model highlights the importance of the insoluble ash content in cane as a
parameter affecting bagasse mass calculations. While this parameter is routinely
measured at Condong and Broadwater factories, it is not measured at many other
factories.
While this model has been shown to perform reasonably well at closing the
insoluble solids mass balance, it has not been tested against true bagasse mass
measurements for confirmation of its accuracy at measuring bagasse mass.
This model is complex, compared with previous models for calculating
bagasse mass. As such, it may not be considered appropriate for implementation at
factories. It is considered useful, however, for validating other methods of measuring
bagasse mass and may serve to help evaluate simpler models.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges Sunshine Electricity Management Pty Ltd for
providing the incentive to develop the model and New South Wales Sugar Milling
Co-operative Ltd for permission to publish the Condong and Broadwater factory data.
The author also acknowledges the staff of New South Wales Sugar Milling Cooperative Ltd, particularly Mr Greg Petersen, who reviewed the model and
participated in discussions regarding its accuracy.
REFERENCES

Adcock WN, Hunter RK (1963) The operation of a bagasse weigher. Proceedings of

the Queensland Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 30, 207211.
Adkins BG, Claire AG, Crouther KW (1963) The determination of bagasse weight.
Proceedings of the Queensland Society of Sugar Cane Technologists
30, 213-218.
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1984) The standard laboratory manual for
Australian sugar mills. Volume 1. Principles and practices.
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (2001) The standard laboratory manual for
Australian sugar mills. Volume 2. Analytical methods and tables.
Kent, GA, Moller DJ, Scroope PD, Broadfoot R (2010) The effect of whole crop
processing on sugar recovery and sugar quality. Proceedings of the Australian
Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 32, (These Proceedings).
Muller RL, Player MR, Wise MB (1982) Bagasse transport and storage for the
Pioneer cogeneration plant. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar
Cane Technologists 4, 19.
Palmer C, Farrell RM, Hurt J (2009) The development of cogeneration projects at
Condong and Broadwater mills. Proceedings of the Australian Society of
Sugar Cane Technologists 31, 400409.
557

Kent GA
Proc Aust Soc Sugar Cane Technol Vol 32 2010
__________________________________________________________________________

Parish DH (1965) The use of protein in sugar cane as an animal feed. Proceedings of
the International Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 12, 18571864.
Trayner P (2008) Bagasse transport and storage for the Pioneer cogeneration plant.
Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists
30, 437-448.
Watson LJ, Connors CG (2008) Furfural a value adding opportunity for the
Australian sugar industry. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar
Cane Technologists 30, 429436.
Wright PG (2003) The effect of dirt on bagasse quantity and heating value.
Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technologists 25, (CDROM) 11 pp.
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Symbol
Ab
Abi
Amff
Bb
Dc
Fb
Fc
Fca
Fj
Fjmb
Fmf
Fmm
Fmp
Mb
mb
mba
mbb
mbba
mbd
mbf
mbfa
mbp
mc
mcd
mcf
mcfa
mj
mm
mmf*
mmf
mmfa
mmff
mmffa
mmfm
mmfma
mmfmp
mxfa
Pb

Parameter
Ash content in bagasse (%)
Ash content (soluble) in impurities in bagasse (%)
Ash content in fibre in mud (%)
Brix content in bagasse (%)
Dirt content in cane (%)
Insoluble solids content in bagasse (%)
Insoluble solids content in cane (%)
Insoluble ash content in cane (%)
Suspended (insoluble) solids content in mixed juice (%)
Base mud solids content in mixed juice (%)
Fibre content in mud (%)
Mud solids content in mud (%)
Protein content in mud (%)
Moisture content in bagasse (%)
Mass of bagasse (t)
Mass of ash in bagasse (t)
Mass of brix in bagasse (t)
Mass of soluble ash in bagasse (t)
Mass of dirt in bagasse (t)
Mass of insoluble solids in bagasse (t)
Mass of insoluble ash in bagasse (t)
Mass of pol in bagasse (t)
Mass of cane (t)
Mass of dirt in cane (t)
Mass of insoluble solids in cane (t)
Mass of insoluble ash in cane (t)
Mass of mixed juice (t)
Mass of mud (t)
Equivalent mass of insoluble solids in mud (t)
Mass of insoluble solids in mud (t)
Mass of insoluble ash in mud (t)
Mass of fibre in mud (t)
Mass of ash in fibre in mud (t)
Mass of mud solids in mud (t)
Mass of ash in mud solids in mud (t)
Mass of protein in mud solids in mud (t)
Mass of extra insoluble ash (t)
Pol content of bagasse

558