Search Images Maps Play YouTube News Gmail Drive More »
Sign in
Screen reader users: click this link for accessible mode. Accessible mode has the same essential features but works better with your reader.

Patents

  1. Advanced Patent Search
Publication numberUS20030010458 A1
Publication typeApplication
Application numberUS 10/164,100
Publication dateJan 16, 2003
Filing dateJun 5, 2002
Priority dateJun 6, 2001
Also published asCA2447523A1, CA2447523C, CN1250461C, CN1538940A, DE60238398D1, EP1392609A1, EP1392609B1, US7172677, US20040256070, WO2002098802A1
Publication number10164100, 164100, US 2003/0010458 A1, US 2003/010458 A1, US 20030010458 A1, US 20030010458A1, US 2003010458 A1, US 2003010458A1, US-A1-20030010458, US-A1-2003010458, US2003/0010458A1, US2003/010458A1, US20030010458 A1, US20030010458A1, US2003010458 A1, US2003010458A1
InventorsJacob Owen Thompson, Sheldon Phillip Verrett, Steven John Severtson, Jeremy Loy
Original AssigneeJacob Owen Thompson, Sheldon Phillip Verrett, Steven John Severtson, Loy Jeremy E.
Export CitationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet
Method for inhibiting calcium salt scale
US 20030010458 A1
Abstract
Compositions and method for improving inhibition of calcium salt scale formation under the conditions found in chemical pulp processes in which an effective amount of selected phosphonates or phosphonate blends is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process during the digestion stage. The compositions and method are especially well suited for use in the Kraft pulping process.
Images(33)
Previous page
Next page
Claims(95)
What is claimed is:
1. A scale inhibiting composition for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in alkaline aqueous mixtures of chemical pulping processes, wherein said composition is added to the digester of said chemical pulping process, said composition comprising an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate selected from compounds having the formula:
X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),
compounds having the formula:
amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),
or mixtures thereof;
wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′;
with the proviso that when said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
2. The composition of claim 1 wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen or an alkali metal.
3. The composition of claim 2 wherein M is sodium or potassium when M is an alkali metal.
4. The composition of claim 1 wherein X is independently selected from—CH2PO3M2 or R.
5. The composition of claim 4 wherein at least one of X is R and R is—(CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6 and X′ is independently selected from R or —CH2PO3M2.
6. The composition of claim 4 wherein each X is R and R is —(CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6 and X′ is independently selected from R or —CH2PO3M2.
7. The composition of claim 1 wherein Y is —PO3M2.
8. The composition of claim 7 wherein R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 5 carbon atoms.
9. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is at least one phosphonate of formula (I).
10. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is at least one phosphonate of formula (II).
11. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is at least one amine oxide of phosphonates of formula (I).
12. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (I).
13. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II).
14. The composition of claim 1 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (II).
15. The composition of claim 9 wherein said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3 and the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 500 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
16. The composition of claim 10 wherein said phosphonate is CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.
17. The composition of claim 16 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 200 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
18. The composition of claim 9 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
19. The composition of claim 18 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
20. The composition of claim 9 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2.
21. The composition of claim 20 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 150 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
22. The composition of claim 9 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 and the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
23. The composition of claim 9 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2.
24. The composition of claim 23 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
25. The composition of claim 12 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of: (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2—N(CH2PO3M2)2, and a second phosphonate selected from N(CH2PO3M2)3, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
26. The composition of claim 25 wherein said second phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
27. The composition of claim 25 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
28. The composition of claim 25 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 80 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
29. The composition of claim 25 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
30. The composition of claim 12 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
31. The composition of claim 30 wherein the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
32. The composition of claim 12 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 and a second phosphonate selected from (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or N(CH2PO3M2)3.
33. The composition of claim 32 wherein said second phosphonate is selected from (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
34. The composition of claim 32 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
35. The composition of claim 13 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of a first phosphonate selected from (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and a second phosphonate selected from CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.
36. The composition of claim 35 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
37. The composition of claim 35 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2Ch2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 500 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
38. The composition of claim 35 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
39. The composition of claim 35 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 150 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
40. The composition of claim 12 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 100 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
41. The composition of claim 12 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of N(CH2PO3M2)3 and (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2Ch2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
42. The composition of claim 1 wherein the pH of said alkaline aqueous mixture is at least 9.
43. A method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in chemical pulping processes comprising adding an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate to the alkaline aqueous mixture in the digester of said chemical pulping process, wherein said at least one phosphonate is selected from compounds having the formula:
X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),
compounds having the formula:
amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),
or mixtures thereof;
wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′;
with the proviso that when said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
44. The method of claim 43 wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen or an alkali metal.
45. The method of claim 44 wherein M is sodium or potassium when M is an alkali metal.
46. The method of claim 43 wherein X is independently selected from —CH2PO3M2 or R.
47. The method of claim 46 wherein at least one of X is R and R is —(CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6 and X′ is independently selected from R or —CH2PO3M2.
48. The method of claim 46 wherein each X is R and R is —(CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6 and X′ is independently selected from R or —CH2PO3M2.
49. The method of claim 43 wherein Y is —PO3M2.
50. The method of claim 47 wherein R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 5 carbon atoms.
51. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is at least one phosphonate of formula (I).
52. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is at least one phosphonate of formula (II).
53. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is at least one phosphonate of formula (III).
54. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (I).
55. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II).
56. The method of claim 43 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (II).
57. The method of claim 51 wherein said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3 and the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 500 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
58. The method of claim 52 wherein said phosphonate is CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.
59. The method of claim 58 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 200 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
60. The method of claim 51 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
61. The method of claim 60 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
62. The method of claim 51 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2.
63. The method of claim 61 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 150 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
64. The method of claim 51 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 and the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
65. The method of claim 51 wherein said phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2.
66. The method of claim 65 wherein the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
67. The method of claim 54 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of: (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2—N(CH2PO3M2)2, and a second phosphonate selected from N(CH2PO3M2)3, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
68. The method of claim 67 wherein said second phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
69. The method of claim 67 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
70. The method of claim 67 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 80 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
71. The method of claim 67 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
72. The method of claim 54 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.
73. The method of claim 72 wherein the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
74. The method of claim 54 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 and a second phosphonate selected from (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or N(CH2PO3M2)3.
75. The method of claim 74 wherein said second phosphonate is selected from (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
76. The method of claim 74 wherein said second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
77. The method of claim 55 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of a first phosphonate selected from (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and a second phosphonate selected from CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.
78. The method of claim 77 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
79. The method of claim 77 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N-(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 500 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
80. The method of claim 77 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
81. The method of claim 77 wherein said first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 150 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
82. The method of claim 54 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 and N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 100 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
83. The method of claim 54 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of N(CH2PO3M2)3 and (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
84. The method of claim 43 wherein said chemical pulping process is a Kraft process.
85. The method of claim 84 wherein calcium salt scale is inhibited in the digester.
86. The method of claim 84 wherein calcium salt scale is inhibited in the brown stock washing area.
87. The method of claim 84 wherein calcium salt scale is inhibited in the black liquor recovery area.
88. The method of claim 43 wherein said calcium salt is calcium carbonate or calcium sulfate.
89. The method of claim 88 wherein said calcium salt is calcium carbonate.
90. The method of claim 43 wherein the pH of said alkaline aqueous mixture is at least 9.
91. A method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a chemical pulping process having a sufficient quantity of available calcium cations and anions selected from carbonate and sulfate susceptible to form said calcium salt scale, comprising admixing an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate with said aqueous system in the digester of said chemical pulping process maintained in a temperature range to inhibit calcium salt scale formation; and wherein said phosphonate is selected from compounds having the formula:
X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),
compounds having the formula:
amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),
or mixtures thereof;
wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′; with the proviso that when said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
92. A method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process comprising:
(a) determining the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester,
(b) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by said selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time, temperature and pressure, and the aqueous digester composition,
(c) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in said selected chemical pulping process when said phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in said selected chemical pulping process based on steps (a) and (b), and
(d) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in said selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process;
wherein said selected phosphonate composition is at least one phosphonate selected from compounds having the formula:
X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),
compounds having the formula:
amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),
or mixtures thereof;
wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′;
with the proviso that when said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
93. A method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process comprising:
(a) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by said selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time, temperature and pressure, and the aqueous digester composition,
(b) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in said selected chemical pulping process when said phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in said selected chemical pulping process based on step (a) and the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester, and
(c) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in said selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process;
wherein said selected phosphonate composition is at least one phosphonate selected from compounds having the formula:
X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),
compounds having the formula:
amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),
or mixtures thereof;
wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′;
with the proviso that when said phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of said phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
94. The composition of claim 13 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of N(CH2PO3M2)3, and CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 500 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
95. The method of claim 55 wherein said phosphonate is a mixture of N(CH2PO3M2)3, and CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2, and the amount of said mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 500 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to said digester.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

[0001] This application is a nonprovisional application which claims the priority of prior provisional application serial No. 60/296,316, entitled “Method for Inhibiting Calcium Salt Scale,” filed Jun. 6, 2001, which is hereby incorporated by reference into this application.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

[0002] This invention relates to compositions and methods for inhibiting scale formation in aqueous alkaline systems of chemical pulping processes. More particularly, this invention relates to compositions and methods for inhibiting formation, deposition and adherence of calcium salt scale deposits in chemical pulping process equipment.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0003] Paper is widely used worldwide in commerce and in homes and has a variety of uses. Pulp making is thus carried out on a large industrial scale worldwide to produce sufficient quantities of paper. Accordingly it is highly desirable that such pulp making operations be carried out in a cost effective, efficient operation with minimum manufacturing equipment downtime and minimum periods of reduced pulp making process equipment efficiency.

[0004] The basic steps in industrial pulp making are to convert plant fiber into chips, convert chips into pulp, (optionally) bleach the pulp, wash the pulp, and transform the pulp into suitable paper which can be used in paper products such as writing paper, newsprint and paper for documents.

[0005] Typically, several chemical pulping processes are used in industrial pulp making operations. Well known industrial alkaline chemical pulping processes include the Kraft (or sulfate), soda and alkaline sulfite processes. The Kraft process makes the strongest fibers of any pulp producing process and is the most commonly used pulp making process in part due to its efficient recovery process for the cooking chemicals. While the present invention has applicability to any of the above alkaline chemical pulping processes, it is particularly useful with the Kraft process and, as such, the Kraft process is described in more detail below.

[0006] Initially, suitable trees are harvested, debarked and then chipped into suitable size flakes or chips. These wood chips are sorted with the small and the large chips being removed. The remaining suitable wood chips are then charged to a digester (which is a vessel or tank for holding the chips and an aqueous digesting composition, such tanks can be designed for either batch or continuous operation).

[0007] Illustratively, in a batch type digester, wood chips and a mixture of “weak black liquor,” the spent liquor from a previous digester cook, and “white liquor,” a solution of sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide, that is either fresh or from the chemical recovery plant, is pumped into the digester. In the cooking process lignin, which binds the wood fiber together, is dissolved in the white liquor forming pulp and black liquor.

[0008] The digester is sealed and the digester composition is heated to a suitable cook temperature under high pressure. After an allotted cooking time at a particular temperature and pressure (H-factor) in the digester, the digester contents (pulp and black liquor) are transferred to a holding tank. The pulp in the holding tank is transferred to brown stock washers while the liquid (black liquor formed in the digester) is sent to the black liquor recovery area, i.e. black liquor evaporators. The black liquor is evaporated to a high solids content, usually 60-80% solids, using a multiple effect evaporator, for example. The higher the solids content, the more difficult it is to pump the black liquor and the more scale problems the pulp mill will have. One of the most troublesome is calcium carbonate scale which forms in various areas of the pulp mill, including the digester, the black liquor evaporator area, and the brown stock washing area.

[0009] Most commercial paper mills use multiple effect evaporators (MEE) as the black liquor evaporators. These evaporators generally range from four to eight effects in length. Generally, undesirable calcium carbonate scaling occurs in only one or two effects. Currently, most mills do not use any scale inhibitor but rather contend with the scale problem by shutting down the black liquor evaporator section and washing out the calcium carbonate scale with hot acid, i.e. acid cleaning. This hot acid boil out adversely affects papermill production and is a concern because the acid used is corrosive to mill piping and equipment.

[0010] The Kraft cook is highly alkaline, usually having a pH of 10 to 14, more particularly 12 to 14. The digester composition contains a large amount of sodium sulfide, which is used as an accelerant to increase the delignification rate of the cook. This works to release the lignin in the wood chips and thus the cellulose becomes available as pulp.

[0011] The combination of operating conditions in the Kraft process is conducive to scale formation and deposition and increases the propensity of the calcium carbonate scale to form, deposit and adhere to metallic and other surfaces within which it comes in contact. Under such process conditions, calcium present in the water and leached from the wood in the Kraft process can react with carbonate and produce rather rapid scaling with the deposition of calcium carbonate scale. Such scale is frequently deposited in the digester, piping, heat exchangers etc., all of which have surfaces on which the calcium carbonate can deposit and adhere. Such deposition builds up over time and can result in undesirable premature shutdowns downstream on the pulp making manufacturing line to remove scale deposits by hot acid washing.

[0012] Several patents and a technical article disclose problems of scaling. In “An Effective Sequestrant For Use In Controlling Digester Scale,” R. H. Windhager, Paper Trade Journal, pp. 42-44, Nov. 5, 1973, the use of small quantities of mono-aminomethylene phosphonic acid (ATMP) as a calcium carbonate scale inhibitor in a digester to inhibit scale deposition from the digester cooking liquor is disclosed.

[0013] U.S. Pat. No. 4,799,995 (issued to Druce K. Crump et al. on Jan. 24, 1989) discloses that inhibition of calcium scale under conditions found in pulp digesters has been accomplished by employing mixtures of polyamino(polyalkylenephosphonic) acids with non-ionic surfactants added to the pulp liquor. This U.S. patent also discloses that phosphonates such as nitrilotris(methylenephosphonic acid) (“NTMP” or “ATMP”), 1-hydroxyethane-1,1-diphosphonic acid (“HEDP”) and sodium 1-hydroxyethane-1,1-diphosphonate (“NaHEDP”) are said to have been commonly used to control scale. However, the '995 patent discloses that the use of HEDP in black liquor actually promoted scale and use of diethylenetriamine penta(methylenephosphonic acid) (“DTPMP”) in black liquor without the presence of a nonionic surfactant resulted in only limited scale reduction. While the '995 patent discloses the use of nonionic surfactants to improve scale reduction, it is preferred to avoid the use of surfactants in chemical pulp processes, particularly in the digester. The compositions of the present invention when added to an alkaline chemical pulp process digester are effective at inhibiting calcium salt scale in chemical pulp processes without the need for a nonionic surfactant.

[0014] Canadian Patent No. 1,069,800 (Philip S. Davis et al., Jan. 15, 1980) discloses the addition of blends of organophosphonates, e.g. 1-hydroxyethylidene-1,1-diphosphonic acid (HEDP), with amino-organo phosphonates, e.g. amino tri(methylenephosphonic acid) (AMP), ethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid) (EDTPA) and hexamethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid) (HMDTA), to black liquor to reduce calcium carbonate scale in a black liquor evaporator system at a pH above 9. This patent also discloses that use of individual (single) phosphonates, instead of the disclosed blends, were not effective at a pH above 9 to inhibit calcium carbonate crystallization.

[0015] U.S. Pat. No. 4,851,490 (issued to Fu Chen et al. on Jul. 25, 1989) discloses water soluble polymers containing hydroxyalkyleneaminoalkylene phosphonate functions which are said to have utility as deposit control agents effective in a number of water systems such as cooling, boilers, conversion coating, paper and pulp processing and gas scrubbing.

[0016] U.S. Pat. No. 5,534,157 (issued to Craig D. Iman et al. on Jul. 9, 1996) discloses a method for inhibiting the formation, deposition and adherency of scale-forming salts in process waters at high pH utilizing polyether polyamine methylene phosphonates. At column 4, lines 35-51 thereof, this U.S. patent discloses that inhibitors such as HEDP and ATMP are useless as scale inhibitors at alkaline pH conditions.

[0017] U.S. Pat. No. 5,562,830 (issued to Davor F. Zidovec et al. on Oct. 8, 1996) discloses a method of inhibiting corrosion and scale formation and deposition in aqueous systems by adding a combination of a polyepoxysuccinic acid or salts thereof and a phosphonocarboxylic acid or salts thereof.

[0018] U.S. Pat. No. 5,552,018 (issued to Johan Devenyns on Sep. 3, 1996) discloses a process in which a peroxyacid is employed to improve the selectivity of the delignification of a chemical paper pulp that has already undergone a delignifying treatment in the presence of chemical reagents, i.e. a Kraft cook. Phosphonates are disclosed as stabilizers in this process.

[0019] Despite the aforementioned patents and technical article, enhanced methods and compositions for inhibiting the formation, deposition and adherence of scale to metallic surfaces particularly in commercial chemical pulp processing equipment is highly desired.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0020] It is an object of this invention to provide a composition for inhibiting the formation, deposition and adherence of calcium salt scale to metallic and other surfaces in the equipment, vessels and/or piping of a chemical pulp process facility. It is yet another object of this invention to provide a method for inhibiting the formation, deposition and adherence of calcium salt scale to surfaces in the equipment, vessels and/or piping of a chemical pulp process facility.

[0021] These and other objects are achieved in the invention which is described in more nonlimiting detail hereinafter.

[0022] According to the invention, a scale inhibiting composition for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in alkaline aqueous mixtures of chemical pulping processes is provided, wherein the composition is added to the digester of a chemical pulping process, the composition comprising an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate selected from compounds having the formula:

X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),

[0023] compounds having the formula:

[0024] amine oxides of the phosphonates of formula (I), or mixtures thereof; wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′; with the proviso that when the phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0025] Further according to the invention, a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in chemical pulping processes is provided comprising admixing an effective scale inhibiting amount of the above composition with the alkaline aqueous mixture in the digester of the chemical pulping process.

[0026] Still further according to the invention, a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a chemical pulping process having a sufficient quantity of available calcium cations and anions selected from carbonate and sulfate to form said calcium salt scale is provided, comprising admixing an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate with the aqueous system in the digester of the chemical pulping process maintained in a temperature range to inhibit calcium salt scale formation, wherein the at least one phosphonate is as defined above.

[0027] Still further according to the invention, a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process is provided comprising: (a) determining the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester, (b) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by said selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time and temperature, and the aqueous digester composition, (c) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in the selected chemical pulping process when the phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process based on steps (a) and (b), and (d) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process; wherein the selected phosphonate composition is as defined above.

[0028] Still further according to the invention, a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process is provided comprising: (a) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by the selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time and temperature, and the aqueous digester composition, (b) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in the selected chemical pulping process when said phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process based on step (a) and the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester, and (c) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process; wherein the selected phosphonate composition is as defined above.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0029] Not Applicable

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0030] A first embodiment of the invention relates to a scale inhibiting composition for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in alkaline aqueous mixtures of chemical pulping processes, wherein the composition is added to the digester of a chemical pulping process, the composition comprising an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate selected from compounds having the formula:

X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),

[0031] compounds having the formula:

[0032] amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I), or mixtures thereof; wherein M is independently selected from hydrogen, alkali metal, alkaline earth metal or ammonium, X is independently selected from H, R, or —CH2PO3M2 wherein R is an alkyl group or —NX2 substituted alkyl group having 2 to 6 carbon atoms, R′ is an alkyl group having 1 to 17 carbon atoms and R′ is optionally branched and optionally unsaturated, and Y is selected from —PO3M2, H or R′; with the proviso that when the phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0033] In the phosphonates of the invention, M is preferably hydrogen or alkali metal, and the alkali metal is preferably sodium and potassium, X is preferably R or —CH2PO3M2, Y is preferably —PO3M2, and R′ is preferably an alkyl group having 1 to 5 carbon atoms.

[0034] Examples of suitable phosphonates include, but are not limited to, the phosphonates in Table 1 below. Table 1 below provides formulas for representative phosphonates of formulas (I) and (II). The phosphonates in Table 1 are available from Solutia Inc., 575 Maryville Centre Drive, St. Louis, Mo. under the trademark Dequest® phosphonates and are identified by their Dequest® phosphonate product number.

TABLE 1
Dequest
Product
No. Formula X (or Y) R (or R′) n X′ M
2000 I 2 —CH2PO3M2 6 H
2006 I 2 —CH2PO3M2 5 Na, 1 H
2010 II —PO3M2 —CH3 4 H
2016 II —PO3M2 —CH3 4 Na
2041 I 1 R, —(CH2)nNX′2 2 2 —CH2PO3M2 8 H
1 —CH2PO3M2
2046 I 1 R, —(CH2)nNX′2 2 2 —CH2PO3M2 5 Na, 3 H
1 —CH2PO3M2
2054 I 1 R, —(CH2)nNX′2 6 2 —CH2PO3M2 6 K, 2 H
1 —CH2PO3M2
2060 I 2 R —(CH2)nNX′2 2, 2 4 —CH2PO3M2 10 H 
2066 I 2 R —(CH2)nNX′2 2, 2 4 —CH2PO3M2 7 Na, 3 H

[0035] The formulas and corresponding names of the Dequest phosphonates listed in Table 1 are shown below.

[0036] Dequest 2000—amino-tris(methylenephosphonic acid)

[0037] N(CH2PO3H2)3

[0038] Dequest 2006—sodium salt of amino-tris(methylenephosphonic acid)

[0039] Na5H[N(CH2PO3)3]

[0040] Dequest 2010—1-hydroxyethylidene (1,1-diphosphonic acid)

[0041] CH3C(OH)(PO3H2)2

[0042] Dequest 2016—sodium salt of 1-hydroxyethylidene (1,1-diphosphonic acid)

[0043] Na4[CH3C(OH)(PO3)2]

[0044] Dequest 2041—ethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid)

[0045] H8[(O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3)2]

[0046] Dequest 2046—ethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid), pentasodium salt

[0047] Na5H3[(O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3)2]

[0048] Dequest 2054—[1,6-hexanediylbis[nitrilobis(methylene)]]tetrakis-phosphonic acid, potassium salt

[0049] K6H2[(O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3)2]

[0050] Dequest 2060—diethylenetriamine-penta(methylenephosphonic acid) (H2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3H2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3H2)2

[0051] Dequest 2066—sodium salt of diethylenetriamine-penta(methylenephosphonic acid)

[0052] Na7H3[(O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3)2]

[0053] Another preferred phosphonate of formula (I) is the compound N,N′-bis(3-aminopropyl)ethylenediamine-hexa(methylenephosphonic acid), or a salt thereof wherein the salt is sodium, potassium, ammonium, and the like. When the compound is the sodium salt, the compound has the formula NaxHy[(O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3)CH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3)2]; wherein x+y is 12, and is designated herein as 4NHMP. This compound can be prepared according to the procedure disclosed in Example 1 of U.S. Pat. No. 5,261,491, which is herein incorporated by reference.

[0054] One preferred phosphonate of formula (I) is a phosphonate wherein at least one of X is R and R is (CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6, preferably 2 to 4, and X′ is independently selected from R or CH2PO3M2. Another preferred phosphonate of formula (I) is a phosphonate wherein each X is R and R is (CH2)nNX′2, wherein n is an integer from 2 to 6, preferably 2 to 4, and X′ is independently selected from R or CH2PO3M2.

[0055] A more preferred phosphonate of formula (I) is a phosphonate selected from:

[0056] (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)3N(CH2PO3M2)(CH2)2N(CH2PO3M2)(CH2)3N(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.

[0057] A preferred phosphonate of formula (II) is a phosphonate wherein Y is PO3M2 and R is alkyl of 1 to 5 carbons. A more preferred phosphonate of formula (II) is a phosphonate wherein Y is PO3M2 and R is methyl.

[0058] A preferred amine oxide of the phosphonate of formula (I) is O←+N—(CH2PO3M2)3.

[0059] Blends of at least two phosphonates independently selected from the phosphonates of formulas (I), (II) and (III) may be used according to the invention. It is currently preferred to use a blend of two phosphonates, with a blend of a phosphonate of formula (I) with either a phosphonate of formula (I) or formula (II) being more preferred, and a blend of two phosphonates of formula (I) being most preferred. The composition of the blends can vary over a wide range with the percentage of each component ranging broadly from 1 to 99 wt. %, provided each phosphonate is present in an amount of at least about 1 wt. %. Preferably, each phosphonate is present in an amount of at least about 10 wt. %. In the case of a two component blend, each phosphonate is present preferably in an amount of about 10 to about 90 wt. %, and more preferably in an amount of about 20 to about 80 wt. %.

[0060] A series of blends of phosphonates which may be used according to the invention were prepared for testing. The blends were prepared as concentrates having 30% total active acid content and were then diluted to the desired concentration for use. These blends (as described below) were tested as calcium salt scale inhibitors in a simulated Kraft cook according to the procedure described in the Examples. The weight ratios of these various blends are shown in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2
WEIGHT RATIO OF
RESPECTIVE
PRODUCT NO. - BLEND BLEND OF PHOSPHONATES
OF PHOSPHONATES PHOSPHONATES IN BLEND
Product 78 D2006/D2066 50/50
Product 79 D2000/D2054 50/50
Product 80 D2006/4NHMP 50/50
Product 81 D2010/D2066A 50/50
Product 82 D2010/D2054 50/50
Product 83A D2016/4NHMP  70/301
Product 83B D2016/4NHMP  25/751
Product 84 D2054/4NHMP 50/50
Product 85 D2010/D2000 50/50
Product 86 4NHMP/D2066A 50/50
Product 87 D2054/D2066A 50/50
Product 94 D2046/D2006 50/50
Product 95 D2046/D2016 60/40
Product 96 D2046/D2054 60/40
Product 97 D2046/D2066A 50/50
Product 98 D2046/4NHMP 60/40

[0061] The preferred blends for use in the invention are blends of a phosphonate selected from N,N′-bis(3-aminopropyl)ethylenediamine-hexa(methylenephosphonic acid), [1,6-hexanediylbis[nitrilobis(methylene)]]tetrakis-phosphonic acid, ethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid), diethylenetriamine-penta(methylenephosphonic acid), or salts thereof with a phosphonate selected from the phosphonates of formulas (I) or (II). More preferred are blends of phosphonates selected from N,N′-bis(3-aminopropyl)ethylenediamine-hexa(methylenephosphonic acid), [1,6-hexanediylbis[nitrilobis(methylene)]]tetrakis-phosphonic acid, ethylenediamine tetra(methylenephosphonic acid), diethylenetriaminepenta(methylenephosphonic acid) or salts thereof with another phosphonate selected from the phosphonates of formulas (I) and blends of N,N′-bis(3-aminopropyl)ethylenediamine-hexa(methylenephosphonic acid) or salts thereof with a phosphonate selected from the phosphonates of formula (II).

[0062] An effective amount of phosphonate or mixtures of phosphonates is employed in making and using the scale inhibiting composition of this invention. That effective amount depends on the particular phosphonate(s) employed in practicing this invention and other factors including, but not limited to, the digester composition, the operating conditions (i.e. H-factor) of the digester, the composition and operating conditions in the brown stock washing area and black liquor recovery area, as well as other factors and conditions known to those of ordinary skill in the art. Selection of the effective amount of phosphonate will be readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art after reading this specification.

[0063] The scale inhibiting composition of the invention include, but are not limited to, at least one phosphonate of formula (I), at least one phosphonate of formula (II), at least one amine oxide of a phosphonate of formula (I), a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (I), a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) or an amine oxide of a phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II), a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one amine oxide of a phosphonate of formula (I), or a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (II). Preferably, the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is at least one phosphonate of formula (I), a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (I), or a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II).

[0064] When the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is at least one phosphonate of formula (I), the phosphonate(s) and the effective scale inhibiting amount of each is as follows.

[0065] As used herein, the ppm usage level of scale inhibitor is based on the weight of total liquor charged with the liquor assumed to have a density of 1 g/mL.

[0066] When the phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the effective scale inhibiting amount of phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 500 to about 1000 ppm, and preferably about 600 to about 800 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0067] When the phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the effective amount of the phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 20 to about 500 ppm, and more preferably about 30 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0068] When the phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, the effective amount of the phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 150 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 200 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0069] When the phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the effective amount of phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 40 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0070] When the phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2, the effective amount of phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 20 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0071] The preferred phosphonates of formula (I) are (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2, or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2M—(CH2PO3M2)2, more preferably (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2, and most preferably (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2.

[0072] When the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is at least one phosphonate of formula (II), the phosphonate is preferably CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2 and the effective scale inhibiting amount of phosphonate on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 200 ppm, preferably about 30 to about 100 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0073] When the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is at least one amine oxide of a phosphonate of formula (I), the effective scale inhibiting amount of amine oxide is the amount on an active acid basis that is equivalent to the effective amount of the corresponding phosphonate of formula (I).

[0074] When the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is a mixture of at least two phosphonates of formula (I), the phosphonate(s) and the effective scale inhibiting amount of each is as follows.

[0075] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2—N(CH2PO3M2)2, the second phosphonate is preferably selected from N(CH2PO3M2)3, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2. When the second phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 200 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 30 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 80 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 300 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 10 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 30 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0076] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the second phosphonate is preferably selected from (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or (CH2PO3M2)3. When the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 50 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 40 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0077] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the second phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 100 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0078] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the second phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 100 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 500 to about 600 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0079] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, and the second phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 50 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 150 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0080] The preferred blends of at least two phosphonates of formula (I) are blends of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2—N(CH2PO3M2)2 with N(CH2PO3M2)3, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 or blends of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 with (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, or N(CH2PO3M2)3.

[0081] The most preferred blends of at least two phosphonates of formula (I) are blends of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)—CH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2 with N(CH2PO3M2)3, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, or (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2.

[0082] When the scale inhibiting composition of the invention is a mixture of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II), the phosphonate(s) and the effective scale inhibiting amount of each is as follows.

[0083] When the blend is a mixture of a first phosphonate of formula N(CH2PO3M2)3, and the second phosphonate of formula CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 500 ppm, preferably about 50 to about 300 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0084] Preferred blends are mixtures of a first phosphonate selected from (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2 or (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, and a second phosphonate selected from CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.

[0085] When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 30 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 20 to about 500 ppm, preferably about 20 to about 150 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2N(CH2)6N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 150 ppm, preferably about 40 to about 80 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester. When the first phosphonate is (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)2, the amount of the mixture on an active acid basis is about 30 to about 1000 ppm, preferably about 50 to about 500 ppm, based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0086] The most preferred blends of at least one phosphonate of formula (I) and at least one phosphonate of formula (II) are blends of (M2O3PCH2)2NCH2CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2N(CH2PO3M2)CH2CH2CH2N—(CH2PO3M2)2 and CH3C(OH)(PO3M2)2.

[0087] A second embodiment of the invention relates to a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in chemical pulping processes comprising adding an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate to the alkaline aqueous mixture in the digester of the chemical pulping process, wherein the at least one phosphonate is selected from compounds having the formula:

X2NCH2PO3M2  (I),

[0088] compounds having the formula:

[0089] amine oxides of phosphonates of formula (I),

[0090] or mixtures thereof;

[0091] wherein M, X, R, R′ and Y are as defined above; with the proviso that when the phosphonate is N(CH2PO3M2)3, the amount of the phosphonate on an active acid basis is greater than 25 ppm based on the weight of total liquor charged to the digester.

[0092] Further according to the second embodiment of the invention, the invention is also a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a chemical pulping process having a sufficient quantity of available calcium cations and anions selected from carbonate and sulfate susceptible to form said calcium salt scale, comprising admixing an effective scale inhibiting amount of at least one phosphonate with the aqueous system in the digester of the chemical pulping process maintained in a temperature range of about 110° C. to about 180° C., preferably about 150° C. to about 175° C., to inhibit calcium salt scale formation, wherein the phosphonate is as described above.

[0093] In the practice of the method of this invention in a chemical pulping process, e.g. a Kraft process, the aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention is admixed with an alkaline, aqueous composition in the digester. The aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention can be added to the digester using any conventional means known to those of ordinary skill in the art. In addition, the aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention can be added directly to the digester composition or it can be introduced into one of the aqueous feed compositions being charged to the digester prior to charging of that aqueous feed composition. The pH in the digester of an alkaline chemical pulping process is at least 9. In the case of a Kraft process, the pH in the digester is preferably about 10 to about 14, and more preferably about 12 to about 14. The aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention can be added in a batch digester in any conventional manner known to one of ordinary skill in the art. For example, in a batch digester operation, the addition of the aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention can be a bulk addition at the beginning of the digester cook cycle or during the digester cook cycle, or it can be added in multiple charges throughout the digestion cycle or continuously throughout the digester cook cycle. It is currently preferred to add the aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention as a bulk charge at or near the beginning of the digester cook cycle. In the case of a continuous digester operation, the addition of the aqueous phosphonate composition of the invention will typically be added continuously to maintain the effective concentration of phosphonate.

[0094] The amount of a scale inhibiting composition of this invention employed is an effective amount which is that amount that is sufficient to provide an effective scale inhibiting concentration of phosphonate in the digester over time at which the formation, deposition and adherence of calcium salt scale, particularly calcium carbonate or calcium sulfate scale, is satisfactorily inhibited in the digester, brown stock washers and/or black liquor recovery area. One of ordinary skill in the art using this invention will know the acceptable level of calcium salt scale in the digester, brown stock washing area, and black liquor recovery area of the particular chemical pulping facility, and will be able to readily select an appropriate phosphonate and concentration for addition to the digester to achieve the desired scale inhibition for the required time based on the disclosure of this specification. It will be apparent to those of skill in the art after reading this specification that many factors of the type which have been mentioned herein and others, will determine the amount of the phosphonate of the invention needed to achieve the desired inhibition. The determination of these amounts is within the ordinary skill of the artisan in this field without undue experimentation considering the direction provided herein.

[0095] A third embodiment of the invention relates to a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process comprising (a) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by the selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time, temperature and pressure, and the aqueous digester composition, (b) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in the selected chemical pulping process when the phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process based on step (a) and the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester, and (c) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process; wherein the selected phosphonate composition is as defined above for this invention.

[0096] A fourth embodiment of the invention relates to a method for inhibiting calcium salt scale formation in an aqueous system in a selected chemical pulping process comprising (a) determining the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester, (b) identifying the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by the selected chemical pulping process based on the process operating conditions of time, temperature and pressure, and the aqueous digester composition, (c) selecting the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in the selected chemical pulping process when the phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process based on steps (a) and (b), and (d) admixing the selected phosphonate composition with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process during the digestion stage of the chemical pulping process; wherein the selected phosphonate composition is as defined above for this invention.

[0097] In the third and fourth embodiments of the invention, the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles of phosphonate concentration and process temperature as a function of time for phosphonate compositions admixed with the aqueous digester composition in a chemical pulping process digester can be determined by conducting laboratory experiments, such as described herein, or by conducting larger scale testing. As each chemical pulping process will vary depending on the type of wood being processed, the specific operating conditions used, the composition in the digester, and the like, the specific phosphonate or phosphonate blend and the required use concentration of same necessary to achieve the desired scale inhibition will be dependent upon the specific chemical pulping process. By utilizing the calcium salt scale inhibition profiles in conjunction with the calcium salt scale inhibition capability required by the selected chemical pulping process based on its process operating conditions of time, temperature and pressure, and the aqueous digester composition, one of ordinary skill in the art may select the appropriate phosphonate composition and phosphonate use concentration to effectively inhibit calcium salt scale formation in the selected chemical pulping process when the phosphonate is admixed with the aqueous digester composition in the selected chemical pulping process.

[0098] The invention is further described in the following Examples which are not intended to limit or restrict the invention. Unless otherwise indicated all quantities are expressed in weight.

EXAMPLES

[0099] A Kraft cook test was employed in the following examples and illustrates the use of the compositions of this invention in the process of this invention. In carrying out these tests, samples were taken of a composition of the digester at selected times during the cook. The concentration of total calcium and inhibited calcium were determined analytically using Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AA). The general procedure described below was followed. Additionally, the tests were generally carried out at inhibitor levels of 10, 50, 100 and 500 parts per million (ppm) active acid based on the amount of total liquor charged to the digester, for each phosphonate composition tested, and also with no inhibitor present.

[0100] As used herein, the active acid level is that amount of free acid which is equimolar to the amount of phosphonate that was actually added. Unless otherwise specified, use of “%” is on a weight basis.

Kraft Cook Test

[0101] The Kraft Cook Test used herein was developed to gauge the performance of scale inhibition of compositions of this invention in a simulated digester composition wherein calcium is slowly extracted from the wood chips into the Kraft system. The test was a standard Kraft cook with a 5:1 liquor to wood ratio in a MK Systems Inc. minimill laboratory digester. The digester aqueous composition temperature was ramped from ambient temperature to 180° C. in one hour and then maintained at 180° C. for an additional one to two hours. Samples were taken from the digester using a liquid cooled extractor at various time intervals under high pressure and temperature during the cook to monitor calcium concentrations by AA as described in the “Monitoring Calcium Release During Kraft Cook” section below.

[0102] Drying of Wood Chips:

[0103] Pine wood chips were passed through a 12.5 mm slotted screen, with the small pins being removed.

[0104] The chips were sorted by hand to remove any bark or knots, and the wood chips dried at 110° C. for 12 hours. This was done to reduce variability with moisture and extractives. The wood chips were stored in a container with desiccant and allowed to cool to room temperature.

[0105] Preparation of White Liquor/Charge of Digester:

[0106] A liquor to wood ratio of 5:1 was prepared with 18.5% effective alkali, having a 25% sulfidity and 5 grams per liter of sodium carbonate. The sodium carbonate introduced into the white liquor was representative of that which is typically carried over in the recovery process in a Kraft mill.

[0107] The charge of phosphonate employed was based upon the weight of total liquor charged to the digester to give the desired equivalent ppm of active acid in the digester.

[0108] White liquor was prepared according to the following procedure. Approximately 2 liters of double-deionized water were transferred to a 4 liter volumetric flask. 322.99 g of 50% sodium hydroxide, 163.76 g Na2S.9H2O, and 20.0 g anhydrous sodium carbonate were added to the 4 liter flask and dissolved, enough inhibitor was added to reach the desired concentration, and double deionized water added to fill to the mark.

[0109] Prior to running the test, the digester was acid cleaned using a 10% sulfuric acid solution to remove any existing deposits. After the acid cleaning, the digester was rinsed with distilled water.

[0110] 800 grams of dried Pine wood chips, prepared as described above, were added to the wood chip holder. White liquor (4L) and wood chips were transferred to the digester and the initial temperature and time recorded.

[0111] Monitoring Calcium Release During Kraft Cook:

[0112] A 5-mL sample was taken for AA analysis and the heating sequence in the digester was initiated.

[0113] (The AA analysis is done by atomic absorption by flame photometry using a Perkin Elmer model 100 spectrometer; see generally, Instrumental Methods of Analysis, Hobart H. Willard, Lynn L. Merritt, Jr.; John A Dean, 4th Edition, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. August 1965)

[0114] Quantitatively one milliliter (mL) of the sample was transferred to a centrifuge tube with 5 mL of 4% HCl solution and AA was used to determine the calcium content of the sample, i.e. Total Calcium. The remaining sample was drawn into a 10 mL syringe and filtered through a 0.45-μm syringe filter. Quantitatively one mL of the filtrate was transferred to a centrifuge tube with 5 mL of 4% HCl solution and AA was used to determine the calcium content of the filtrate, i.e. Inhibited Calcium.

[0115] Every 15 minutes for the length of the test, e.g. approximately 2-4 hours, the liquor in the condenser line was purged, a temperature measurement was made, and a 5 mL liquor sample was pulled. The AA analysis procedure as described above was then repeated. At the end of the test, the calcium content and temperature data were plotted versus time.

[0116] Each example below was carried out according to the general procedure recited above. In most examples, the phosphonates were tested at four concentration levels. All levels are given in parts per million phosphonate on an active acid basis by weight total liquor.

[0117] Except as specified herein, chemicals used in the examples were obtained from Fisher Scientific. Dequest phosphonates, used individually and in blends in the examples, were obtained from Solutia Inc. (St. Louis, Mo.). 4NHMP was prepared according to the procedure described herein.

[0118] Tables 3-96 hereinafter following provide the data for a series of test runs performed on the digester at various levels of phosphonates and mixtures of phosphonate. The phosphonate or blend tested are identified by product name (as defined in Tables 1 and 2 herein) in the header of each Table below. The temperature is in degrees Celsius. Parts per million (ppm) of calcium is in parts per million by weight based on total liquor.

Example 1

[0119] Dequest 2006 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 4-7 below. In addition, a control experiment with no added inhibitor was run and the results are given below in Table 3. The data in Table 3 can be used as the control for Examples 1-8.

TABLE 3
Kraft Cook with no Inhibitor
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 17.1 16.6 88
30 37.4 36 133
45 19.4 15 168
60 4.6 2.5 180
75 1.6 0.8 180
90 0.4 0 180
105 0 0 180

[0120]

TABLE 4
500 ppm Dequest 2006
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 20.6 20.9 82
30 37.8 38.2 132
45 53 53 170
60 61.8 59.7 180
75 68.5 66.4 180
90 71.2 71.9 180
105 72.6 71.7 180
120 70.9 64.8 180
150 47.4 47.5 180
180 30.7 31.4 180
240 32.8 22.1 180

[0121]

TABLE 5
100 ppm Dequest 2006
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 19.4 19.9 86
30 36.8 36.2 130
45 49.4 48.5 170
60 61.1 55.3 180
75 60.9 58.9 180
90 22.8 17.4 180
105 12.5 14. 180
120 12 10.7 180
135 9.8 9.5 180
150 6.8 8 180
180 6.6 7 180

[0122]

TABLE 6
50 ppm Dequest 2006
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 15 14.9 84
30 29.1 29 132
45 39.2 37.6 171
60 54.4 51 180
75 46.2 39.1 180
90 21.9 16.4 180
105 15.4 13.7 180
120 11.8 11.1 180
135 9.2 9.2 180
150 8.9 7.6 180
180 7.6 6.8 180

[0123]

TABLE 7
10 ppm Dequest 2006
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 10.1 10.1 88
30 22.7 22.1 134
45 34.5 32.3 174
60 25 13.1 180
75 13.4 5.7 180
90 8.1 5 180
105 6.9 4.7 180
120 6.1 4.4 180

[0124] The data of Example 1 demonstrates that a use level of 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to lower use levels or the use of no inhibitor. The data also suggests that a Dequest 2000 and Dequest 2006 use range of about 500 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 2

[0125] Dequest 2016 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 8-11 below.

TABLE 8
500 ppm Dequest 2016
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 13.3 13.2 90
30 12.2 6.4 138
45 4.7 3.7 172
60 4.3 4 180
75 5.1 5 180
90 5.5 5.2 180
120 5.5 6.2 180
240 6.5 7.2 180

[0126]

TABLE 9
100 ppm Dequest 2016
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 12.2 11.9 81
30 22.9 22.4 131
45 32.2 32.7 169
60 44 43.9 180
75 54.1 54.7 180
90 59 57.5 180
105 57.9 55.4 180
120 56.4 56.7 180
135 52 48.9 180
150 51.2 48.2 180
180 25.4 21.8 180

[0127]

TABLE 10
50 ppm Dequest 2016
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 13.9 13.3 80
30 28.5 27.7 131
45 40.9 40.7 165
60 64.6 63.3 180
75 80.5 80.6 180
90 85.7 85.9 180
105 89.6 87.9 180
120 88.5 87.8 180
150 84.5 84 180

[0128]

TABLE 11
10 ppm Dequest 2016
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 8.7 8.1 82
30 18.9 18.3 130
45 33.4 32.8 162
60 42 41.7 180
75 39.6 38.4 180
90 22.5 16.8 180
105 13 8.5 180
120 10 6.4 180
135 7.9 5.4 180

[0129] The data of Example 2 demonstrates that use levels of 100 and 50 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to use levels of 10 and 500 ppm or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 2010 and Dequest 2016 use range of about 20 to about 200 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 3

[0130] Dequest 2054 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 12-15 below.

TABLE 12
500 ppm Dequest 2054
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 13.4 13.9 82
30 27.8 27.4 120
45 42.8 42.5 160
60 52.5 51 180
75 62.9 61.3 180
90 69.1 67.5 180
105 69.6 69.8 180
120 70.5 69.2 180
150 67.9 67.2 180
180 65.2 64.9 180
240 58.7 57.4 180

[0131]

TABLE 13
100 ppm Dequest 2054
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 9.6 9 88
30 18.8 19.1 133
45 32.5 32.1 168
60 47.6 45.8 180
75 61.8 61.8 180
90 66.1 57 180
105 68.9 67.2 180
120 64.6 64.9 180
135 61.2 60.6 180
150 51.3 50.5 180
180 27.5 26.9 180

[0132]

TABLE 14
50 ppm Dequest 2054
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 16.2 16.1 82
30 30 29.3 128
45 41.9 41.5 160
60 61.1 57.8 184
75 66.2 63.4 180
90 56.9 47 180
105 27.1 20.6 180
120 14.8 11.1 180
135 10.6 9 180
150 7.5 7.3 180
180 5.3 5.3 180

[0133]

TABLE 15
10 ppm Dequest 2054
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0.9 0.5 25
15 12.3 12.1 82
30 26.5 26.5 128
45 40.3 37.8 160
60 38.2 34.5 184
75 15.3 10.9 180
90 8.4 7.9 180
105 6 5.6 180
120 4.5 4.1 180
135 3.5 3.5 180
150 2.7 2.5 180
180 2.5 1.5 180

[0134] The data of Example 3 demonstrates that a use level of 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to 10, 50 and 100 ppm use levels or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 2054 use range of about 150 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 4

[0135] Dequest 2060S was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 16-18 below.

TABLE 16
100 ppm Dequest 2060S
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 1.2 0.6 90
30 9.3 8.7 139
45 25.7 26.3 174
60 39.7 40.3 180
75 56.1 55.5 189
90 65.4 63.1 186
105 68.9 60.2 182
120 76 74.2 180
150 74.2 63.1 180
180 53.2 45.6 180

[0136]

TABLE 17
50 ppm Dequest 2060S
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 4.4 4 82
30 20 19 134
45 41 38.8 165
60 61.5 60.5 180
75 82.7 74.7 180
90 91.3 84.2 180
105 88.8 85.6 180
120 87 78.9 180
150 71.4 67.6 180
180 50.6 41 180

[0137]

TABLE 18
10 ppm Dequest 2060S
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7.2 3.9 79
30 21.3 19.9 134
45 41.2 41.2 176
60 64 60.5 180
75 70.9 70 180
90 61 59.2 180
105 52 51.2 180
120 42.6 38.4 180

[0138] The data of Example 4 demonstrates that use levels of 50 and 100 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to a 10 ppm use level or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 2060S use range of about 30 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 5

[0139] Dequest 2066 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 19-22 below.

TABLE 19
500 ppm Dequest 2066
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 21.3 21.2 84
30 36.6 36.6 134
45 52.5 51.4 170
60 62.8 62.2 180
75 70 69 180
90 72.8 72.8 180
105 75.2 75.3 180
120 76.7 76.7 180
150 76 75.3 180
180 74.3 74.3 180
240 69.8 68.5 180

[0140]

TABLE 20
100 ppm Dequest 2066
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 15.9 15.4 86
30 30.4 29.4 130
45 40.8 40.8 168
60 53.8 52.8 180
75 60.1 59.9 180
90 63.4 60.3 180
105 59.4 57.2 180
120 63 61.7 180
135 58.2 56.2 180
150 55 43.4 180
180 40.9 39.2 180

[0141]

TABLE 21
50 ppm Dequest 2066
Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Time, Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
0 0 0 24
15 17 16.7 84
30 33.9 32.8 130
45 48.8 48.2 171
60 62.2 60.2 180
75 73.8 65 180
90 76.9 67.4 180
105 75.5 65.7 180
120 70.8 67.2 180
135 65.7 64 180
150 61.1 60.1 180
180 43.8 37.9 180

[0142]

TABLE 22
10 ppm Dequest 2066
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 10.2 4.6 84
30 20.8 20.7 134
45 32.7 31.8 170
60 40.5 40.3 180
75 41.8 40 180
90 33.8 31.8 180
105 24.6 22.3 180
120 16.5 13.9 180
150 9.5 7.4 180

[0143] The data of Example 5 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to a 10 ppm use level or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 2066 use range of about 30 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 6

[0144] 4NHMP was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 23-26 below.

TABLE 23
500 ppm 4NHMP
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 19.7 19.2 84
30 37.6 37.6 132
45 63.3 61.9 170
60 82.5 80.1 180
75 89.5 89.1 180
90 94.4 93.2 180
105 99.7 96.2 180
120 101.8 99.1 180
150 107 106.4 180
180 102.8 101 180
240 98.7 96.2 180

[0145]

TABLE 24
100 ppm 4NHMP
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 13.8 13.8 84
30 29 27.8 132
45 54.1 53.5 170
60 72.2 72.6 180
75 84.5 83.6 180
90 96.5 93 180
105 100.2 98.2 180
120 100.8 97 180
150 94.5 93.6 180
180 86 85.3 180

[0146]

TABLE 25
50 ppm 4NHMP
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 14.8 14.6 82
30 30.6 30.1 130
45 57.7 54.1 165
60 75 72.9 180
75 89.8 86.5 180
90 96.5 94.1 180
105 101.2 99.3 180
120 102.8 100 180
150 97.2 97.1 180
180 86.1 86.5 180

[0147]

TABLE 26
10 ppm 4NHMP
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 18 12 84
30 36 30 134
45 60 54 180
60 72 72 180
90 78 78 180
105 72 72 180
120 60 60 180
150 48 48 180
180 36 36 180

[0148] The data of Example 6 demonstrates that use levels of 10, 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a 4NHMP use range of about 10 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 7

[0149] Dequest 6004 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 27-30 below.

TABLE 27
500 ppm Dequest 6004
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 26.1 25.1 82
30 38.6 38.6 132
45 53.5 41 169
60 50.6 41.2 180
75 52.2 47.9 180
90 53.5 50.8 180
105 53.8 52.9 180
120 53.5 53.5 180
150 54.5 49.1 180
180 53.1 52.1 180
210 52.3 51.2 180

[0150]

TABLE 28
100 ppm Dequest 6004
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 15.6 15.6 84
30 32.4 32 132
45 45.1 37.5 172
60 52.6 45.8 180
75 59.1 51 180
90 36.6 28.7 180
105 25.9 22.4 180
120 18.8 15.6 180
150 13.8 11.9 180
180 10.7 9.2 180

[0151]

TABLE 29
50 ppm Dequest 6004
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 11.6 11.4 84
30 27.7 27.8 132
45 55.5 52.3 170
60 77.1 70.7 180
75 70.5 58.8 180
90 50.7 39.9 180
105 34.5 24.9 180
120 28 15.6 180
150 19.4 12.3 180
180 17.1 8.1 180

[0152]

TABLE 30
10 ppm Dequest 6004
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 24
15 11 10.4 84
30 26.1 24.9 134
45 51.3 50.7 168
60 32.1 20.3 180
75 22.8 10.1 180
90 21.2 9.6 180
105 18.2 8.4 180
120 16.5 7.8 180

[0153] The data of Example 7 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 6004 use range of about 50 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 8

[0154] Dequest 2046 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 31-34 below.

TABLE 31
10 ppm Dequest 2046
Inhibited
Time, minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 60 176
75 66 60 176
90 54 54 176
105 42 42 176
120 36 36 176
150 30 30 176
180 30 24 176

[0155]

TABLE 32
50 ppm Dequest 2046
Inhibited
Time, minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 36 36 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 60 176
75 72 72 176
90 72 72 176
105 78 78 176
120 78 72 176
150 60 60 176
180 54 48 176

[0156]

TABLE 33
100 ppm Dequest 2046
Inhibited
Time, minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 66 176
75 72 72 176
90 72 72 176
105 78 72 176
120 78 72 176
150 72 66 176
180 60 60 176

[0157]

TABLE 34
500 ppm Dequest 2046
Inhibited
Time, minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 30 30 82
30 42 42 130
45 60 60 168
60 78 78 178
75 90 90 178
90 102 102 178
105 108 108 178
120 114 108 178
150 120 114 178
180 120 114 178

[0158] The data of Example 8 demonstrates that use levels of 10, 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a Dequest 2046 use range of about 10 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Phosphonate Blends

[0159] A series of blends of phosphonates were made and then tested as calcium carbonate scale inhibitors in a digester according to the procedure described above. The compositions of these various blends are shown in Table 2 above.

Example 9

[0160] A control with no inhibitor was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section. The results are given in Table 35 below and can be used as a control for Examples 10-25.

TABLE 35
Kraft Cook with no Inhibitor
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 11.5 10.9 82
30 24.8 23.4 128
45 39 38.2 163
60 16.6 14.9 180
75 12.9 10.3 180
90 10.3 6.7 180
105 9.2 7.8 180
120 8.4 7.8 180

Example 10

[0161] Blend 78 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 36-39 below.

TABLE 36
500 ppm Blend 78
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 16 16 80
30 48 48 124
45 78 78 164
60 96 96 176
75 114 114 176
90 114 114 176
105 120 120 176
120 126 120 176
150 126 120 176
180 126 120 176

[0162]

TABLE 37
100 ppm Blend 78
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 3.3 2.6 82
30 18.8 19.9 128
45 29.7 28.6 163
60 46 43.1 180
75 57.6 53.6 180
90 71.3 67 180
105 73.2 67 180
120 76.4 69.5 180
150 56.8 53.6 180
180 38.8 32.6 180

[0163]

TABLE 38
50 ppm Blend 78
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 11.2 11.2 82
30 27.2 28.1 128
45 51.4 50.4 163
60 67.1 69.1 180
75 85.6 82.4 180
90 80.8 79.2 180
105 82.1 78.2 180
120 72.5 67.7 180
150 55.9 53 180
180 35.2 33.5 180

[0164]

TABLE 39
10 ppm Blend 78
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7.8 7.4 82
30 29.5 28.7 128
45 60.4 57.2 163
60 84.4 80.4 180
75 68.8 60.8 180
90 41.9 32.3 180
105 29.5 19.5 180
120 23.4 15.8 180
150 18.3 12.6 180
180 15.1 10.3 180

[0165] The data of Example 10 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2000 or 2006 and Dequest 2066 or 2060 in the use range of about 50 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 11

[0166] Blend 79 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 40-43 below.

TABLE 40
500 ppm Blend 79
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 80
30 48 48 124
45 72 72 166
60 90 90 180
75 102 96 180
90 108 102 180
105 114 102 180
120 108 102 180
150 96 90 180
180 84 72 180

[0167]

TABLE 41
100 ppm Blend 79
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7 5.4 82
30 20.3 19.6 128
45 42.6 41.9 163
60 62.2 57.2 180
75 78.1 69.8 180
90 89.7 82.1 180
105 93.7 78.8 180
120 93.1 81.5 180
150 68.5 45.9 180
180 44.4 31.3 180

[0168]

TABLE 42
50 ppm Blend 79
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 9.3 9.1 82
30 22.9 22.6 128
45 52.4 49.5 163
60 74.7 69.6 180
75 85.1 78.3 180
90 86.4 79.3 180
105 74.1 62.4 180
120 57.6 42.4 180
150 33.9 22.9 180
180 25.6 17.4 180

[0169]

TABLE 43
10 ppm Blend 79
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 11.2 11.2 82
30 24.4 23.7 128
45 51.2 45.1 163
60 61.2 55.1 180
75 40.2 15. 180
90 24.1 9.5 180
105 16.3 6.3 180
120 10.5 6.3 180
150 6.6 3.7 180
180 2.7 2.1 180

[0170] The data of Example 11 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2000 or 2006 and Dequest 2054 in the use range of about 50 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 12

[0171] Blend 80 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 44-47 below.

TABLE 44
500 ppm Blend 80
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 80
30 42 42 124
45 72 72 164
60 90 90 179
75 102 102 180
90 108 108 180
105 114 108 180
120 114 102 180
150 114 96 180
180 108 90 180

[0172]

TABLE 45
100 ppm Blend 80
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 12.9 11.7 86
30 31.2 29.3 132
45 61 58.7 168
60 89.2 83.8 179
75 104.8 103.7 180
90 113.6 109.8 180
105 112.8 101.7 180
120 103.7 96.1 180
150 76.2 71.3 180
180 50.7 47.6 180

[0173]

TABLE 46
50 ppm Blend 80
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7.7 7.4 86
30 19.4 19.1 132
45 41.7 41.1 168
60 60.8 59.2 179
75 75.4 74.1 180
90 85.4 83.1 180
105 84.8 78.3 180
120 78 70.8 180
150 63.1 55.6 180
180 39.2 33 180

[0174]

TABLE 47
10 ppm Blend 80
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 10.3 10.3 86
30 19.5 19.2 132
45 31.2 30.9 168
60 39.2 35 179
75 36.7 33.9 180
90 32.3 31.5 180
105 28.2 26.7 180
120 21.3 19.9 180
150 12.3 11.3 180
180 5.5 4.4 180

[0175] The data of Example 12 demonstrates that use levels of 10, 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2000 or 2006 and 4NHMP in the use range of about 10 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 13

[0176] Blend 81B was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 48-51 below.

TABLE 48
500 ppm Blend 81B
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 80
30 42 42 124
45 42 42 164
60 42 42 180
75 42 42 180
90 42 42 180
105 48 48 180
120 48 48 180
150 48 48 180
180 54 54 180

[0177]

TABLE 49
100 ppm Blend 81B
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7 7.1 82
30 18.8 18.5 128
45 38.5 36.5 163
60 65.6 61.8 180
75 85.7 83.3 180
90 102.3 91.6 180
105 106.5 103.4 180
120 113.1 108.6 180
150 107.9 104.1 180
180 97.1 94.4 180

[0178]

TABLE 50
50 ppm Blend 81B
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 6.2 5.8 82
30 15.5 15.2 128
45 34.3 33.6 163
60 56 45.3 180
75 71.2 67.6 180
90 83.5 79.3 180
105 84.2 81.5 180
120 79.3 76.7 180
150 69.6 67.9 180
180 58.9 55.3 180

[0179]

TABLE 51
10 ppm Blend 81B
Time,
Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 11.3 10.9 82
30 23.4 22.4 128
45 45.4 43.7 163
60 54.6 53.3 180
75 54.9 51.9 180
90 49.3 46.4 180
105 38.8 37.8 180
120 30.6 29.6 180
150 12.6 11.6 180
180 4.4 3.7 180

[0180] The data of Example 13 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2010 or 2016 and Dequest 2066 or 2060 in the use range of about 30 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 14

[0181] Blend 82 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 52-55 below.

TABLE 52
500 ppm Blend 82
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 82
30 30 30 126
45 18 12 162
60 18 12 180
75 18 18 180
90 24 18 180
105 24 24 180
120 24 24 180
150 24 24 180
180 24 24 180

[0182]

TABLE 53
100 ppm Blend 82
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 7.3 4.9 82
30 21 18 128
45 40.7 38.5 163
60 59.8 58.8 180
75 78.8 76.2 180
90 98.3 97.3 180
105 109.3 107.9 180
120 108.6 106.6 180
150 94.6 88.2 180
180 76.5 72.5 180

[0183]

TABLE 54
50 ppm Blend 82
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 9.2 8.9 82
30 21.7 21.4 128
45 46.7 44.9 163
60 62.4 61.8 180
75 77.4 75.2 180
90 92.4 89.3 180
105 99.6 97.1 180
120 94.9 95.9 180
150 90.5 87.4 180
180 82.4 79 180

[0184]

TABLE 55
10 ppm Blend 82
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 12 12 82
30 30 30 128
45 42 42 163
60 54 54 180
75 42 30 180
90 30 24 180
105 24 18 180
120 18 18 180
150 18 18 180
180 18 12 180

[0185] The data of Example 14 demonstrates that use levels of 50 and 100 ppm provided sigificant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 or 500 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2010 or 2016 and Dequest 2054 in the use range of about 30 to about 150 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 15

[0186] Blend 83A was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 56-59 below.

TABLE 56
500 ppm Blend 83A
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 82
30 24 24 124
45 18 18 156
60 18 18 176
75 18 18 176
90 18 18 176
105 18 18 176
120 18 18 176
150 24 24 176
180 24 24 176

[0187]

TABLE 57
100 ppm Blend 83A
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 5 4.7 82
30 19 18 128
45 33.1 32.7 163
60 54.9 52.8 180
75 75.7 72 180
90 91.8 90.4 180
105 98.9 98.3 180
120 99.3 96.9 180
150 93.5 88.7 180
180 89.7 84.9 180

[0188]

TABLE 58
50 ppm Blend 83A
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 6.7 6.4 82
30 17.4 17.1 128
45 38.8 36.5 163
60 59.2 59.9 180
75 76.4 75.1 180
90 89.4 88.7 180
105 96.1 93.5 180
120 98.4 97.1 180
150 98.7 96.4 180
180 94.8 92.5 180

[0189]

TABLE 59
10 ppm Blend 83A
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 10.7 10.4 82
30 22.7 22.1 128
45 43.6 42.6 163
60 59.4 58.3 180
75 67.9 63.5 180
90 64.4 63.4 180
105 56.3 52.8 180
120 45 42.3 180
150 25.8 24.8 180
180 14.9 13.5 180

[0190] The data of Example 15 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2010 or 2016 and 4NHMP in the use range of about 20 to about 500 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 16

[0191] Blend 83B was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 60-63 below.

TABLE 60
500 ppm Blend 83B
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 18 18 80
30 36 36 124
45 36 36 166
60 36 36 180
75 36 36 180
90 42 42 180
105 42 42 180
120 42 42 180
158 42 42 180
180 42 42 180

[0192]

TABLE 61
100 ppm Blend 83B
Time, Total Inhibited
Minutes Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 12 12 82
30 30 30 128
45 54 54 163
60 72 72 180
75 84 84 180
90 108 101 180
105 108 101 180
120 108 101 180
150 108 108 180
180 114 108 180

[0193]

TABLE 62
50 ppm Blend 83B
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 12.4 11.9 82
30 28.4 28.3 128
45 56.1 54.7 163
60 86.7 83.8 180
75 110.2 107.8 180
90 124.8 123.4 180
105 133.2 129.9 180
120 135.2 128.5 180
158 134.6 132.3 180
180 115.8 104.5 180

[0194]

TABLE 63
10 ppm Blend 83B
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 18 12 82
30 30 30 128
45 42 42 163
60 54 54 180
75 60 54 180
90 60 60 180
105 60 54 180
120 60 60 180
158 54 54 180
180 42 42 180

[0195] The data of Example 16 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2010 or 2016 and 4NHMP in the use range of about 20 to about 500 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 17

[0196] Blend 84 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 64-67 below.

TABLE 64
500 ppm Blend 84
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 82
30 48 48 126
45 78 78 164
60 102 102 180
75 120 114 180
90 126 120 180
105 132 126 180
120 132 126 180
150 120 114 180
180 102 102 180

[0197]

TABLE 65
100 ppm Blend 84
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 6.3 5.9 82
30 19.6 17.3 128
45 42.7 41.7 163
60 53.7 51.7 180
75 81.5 79.5 180
90 94.3 93.2 180
105 106.6 104.3 180
120 110.3 107.9 180
150 99.3 96.9 180
180 59.1 58.8 180

[0198]

TABLE 66
50 ppm Blend 84
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 6.7 6.4 82
30 17.8 17.4 128
45 42.7 40.4 163
60 57.3 56.6 180
75 73.8 72.8 180
90 84.8 83.8 180
105 89.6 89 180
120 91.2 86.4 180
150 65.7 62.4 180
180 38.8 38.5 180

[0199]

TABLE 67
10 ppm Blend 84
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 8.3 7.9 82
30 15.8 15.5 128
45 36.5 35.5 163
60 52.3 50.9 180
75 58.8 55.7 180
90 55.3 52.9 180
105 43.4 42.3 180
120 34.4 33.1 180
150 22.1 20.3 180
180 12.7 11.4 180

[0200] The data of Example 17 demonstrates that use levels of 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 or 50 inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of 4NHMP and Dequest 2054 in the use range of about 80 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 18

[0201] Blend 85 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 100 ppm active acid. The results are given in Table 68 below.

TABLE 68
100 ppm Blend 85
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 10.5 10.2 82
30 24.3 23.7 128
45 41.1 40.3 163
60 58.5 57.9 180
75 73.9 73.6 180
90 86.8 86 180
105 89.1 89.1 180
120 94.4 94.4 180
150 97.5 94.9 180
180 90.5 89.3 180

[0202] The data of Example 18 demonstrates that a use level of 100 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2000 or 2006 and Dequest 2010 or 2016 in the use range of about 70 to about 200 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 19

[0203] Blend 86 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 69-72 below.

TABLE 69
500 ppm Blend 86
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 22
15 24 24 84
30 36 36 126
45 66 66 166
60 84 84 180
75 96 90 180
90 108 102 180
105 114 108 180
120 114 108 180
150 114 108 180
180 108 102 180

[0204]

TABLE 70
100 ppm Blend 86
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 4.4 4.1 82
30 16.4 15.9 128
45 34.9 29.9 163
60 44.7 43.9 180
75 57.1 56.8 180
90 69.2 68.3 180
105 73.1 72.3 180
120 73.6 70 180
150 66.4 63.5 180
180 52.1 46.7 180

[0205]

TABLE 71
50 ppm Blend 86
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 25
15 6.1 5.8 82
30 19.1 18.7 128
45 45.3 44.6 163
60 64.1 63.4 180
75 75.7 74.4 180
90 88 81.6 180
105 89.9 88.3 180
120 87.1 84.8 180
150 57.3 54.3 180
180 33.9 33.6 180

[0206]

TABLE 72
10 ppm Blend 86
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  25
 15 12 12  82
 30 30 30 128
 45 42 42 163
 60 54 48 180
 75 54 54 180
 90 54 54 180
105 48 48 180
120 42 42 180
150 30 30 180
180 24 24 180

[0207] The data of Example 19 demonstrates that use levels of 10, 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2060 or 2066 and 4NHMP in the use range of about 10 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 20

[0208] Blend 87 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 73-76 below.

TABLE 73
500 ppm Blend 87
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  22
 15  30  30  82
 30  48  48 126
 45  78  78 163
 60  96  96 180
 75 114 108 180
 90 120 114 180
105 126 120 180
120 132 126 180
158 138 132 180
180 138 132 180

[0209]

TABLE 74
100 ppm Blend 87
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0 0 0  25
 15 7.4 7.1  82
 30 21.3 20.9 128
 45 43.4 41.4 163
 60 61.8 59 180
 75 83 82.9 180
 90 92.6 89.5 180
105 96.5 94.4 180
120 96.8 93.3 180
158 80.2 77.4 180
180 53.8 50 180

[0210]

TABLE 75
50 ppm Blend 87
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0 0 0  25
 15 14.7 14.3  82
 30 29.8 29.3 128
 45 63.2 60.8 163
 60 86.2 85.7 180
 75 111.6 111.6 180
 90 130.4 127.6 180
105 142.2 139.4 180
120 141.3 137 180
158 110.7 101.3 180
180 67.4 60.8 180

[0211]

TABLE 76
10 ppm Blend 87
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  25
 15 18 12  82
 30 36 36 128
 45 60 54 163
 60 66 60 180
 75 42 30 180
 90 30 18 180
105 24 18 180
120 18 12 180
158 12 12 180
180 12  6 180

[0212] The data of Example 20 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2060 or 2066 and Dequest 2054 in the use range of about 50 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention. It is believed that the difference between the data for 50 ppm inhibitor and 100 ppm inhibitor is due to the wood chips used in the experiments. The advantage of using 100 ppm inhibitor compared to 50 ppm inhibitor is seen in the shape of the curve as opposed to the height of the curve.

Example 21

[0213] Blend 94 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 77-80 below.

TABLE 77
500 ppm Blend 94
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  21
 15  24  24  90
 30  42  42 136
 45  66  66 174
 60  90  84 178
 75 102  96 178
 90 108  96 178
105 114 108 178
120 114 108 178
150 120 114 178
180 120 114 178

[0214]

TABLE 78
100 ppm Blend 94
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  21
 15 18 18  80
 30 30 30 132
 45 48 48 170
 60 60 60 176
 75 72 66 176
 90 78 72 176
105 84 78 176
120 84 78 176
150 84 78 176
180 78 72 176

[0215]

TABLE 79
50 ppm Blend 94
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  21
 15 18 18  80
 30 30 30 132
 45 42 42 170
 60 60 60 176
 75 72 72 176
 90 78 78 176
105 78 72 176
120 78 78 176
150 72 60 176
180 42 42 176

[0216]

TABLE 80
10 ppm Blend 94
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  21
 15 12 12  80
 30 30 30 132
 45 48 42 170
 60 66 54 176
 75 66 60 176
 90 48 42 176
105 36 30 176
120 30 24 176
150 24 18 176
180 24 12 176

[0217] The data of Example 21 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2000 or 2006 and Dequest 2046 in the use range of about 30 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 22

[0218] Blend 95 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 81-84 below.

TABLE 81
500 ppm Blend 95
Time, Total Calcium, Inhibited Calcium,
Minutes ppm ppm Temperature
 0  0  0  21
 15 12 12  82
 30 30 30 132
 45 48 48 170
 60 54 54 177
 75 54 54 177
 90 60 54 177
105 60 54 177
120 60 60 177
150 66 60 177
180 66 60 177

[0219]

TABLE 82
100 ppm Blend 95
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 24 24 132
45 42 42 170
60 54 54 176
75 66 66 176
90 72 72 176
105 78 78 176
120 84 84 176
150 84 84 176
180 84 84 176

[0220]

TABLE 83
50 ppm Blend 95
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 6 6 80
30 24 24 132
45 42 42 170
60 54 48 176
75 60 60 176
90 66 66 176
105 66 66 176
120 72 72 176
150 72 72 176
180 72 72 176

[0221]

TABLE 84
10 ppm Blend 95
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 66 66 176
75 66 60 176
90 42 36 176
105 30 30 176
120 30 24 176
150 24 18 176
180 24 18 176

[0222] The data of Example 22 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm inhibitor or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2010 or 2016 and Dequest 2046 in the use range of about 20 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 23

[0223] Blend 96 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 85-88 below.

TABLE 85
500 ppm Blend 96
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 88
30 36 36 136
45 54 54 172
60 78 72 174
75 90 84 174
90 96 90 174
105 102 90 174
120 108 96 174
150 108 96 174
180 108 96 174

[0224]

TABLE 86
100 ppm Blend 96
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 60 176
75 66 66 176
90 72 72 176
105 78 78 176
120 84 84 176
150 84 84 176
180 84 84 176

[0225]

TABLE 87
50 ppm Blend 96
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 6 6 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 60 176
75 72 72 176
90 78 72 176
105 84 78 176
120 84 84 176
150 72 48 176
180 48 42 176

[0226]

TABLE 88
10 ppm Blend 96
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 24 24 132
45 48 42 170
60 66 60 176
75 78 78 176
90 78 72 176
105 54 54 176
120 42 36 176
150 30 24 176
180 24 24 176

[0227] The data of Example 23 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm or use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2046 and Dequest 2054 in the use range of about 30 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 24

[0228] Blend 97 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 89-92 below.

TABLE 89
500 ppm Blend 97
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 24 24 86
30 36 36 134
45 66 60 172
60 84 78 174
75 96 90 174
90 102 96 174
105 114 108 174
120 114 108 174
150 114 108 174
180 114 108 174

[0229]

TABLE 90
100 ppm Blend 97
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 54 54 176
75 60 60 176
90 66 66 176
105 72 72 176
120 72 72 176
150 72 72 176
180 72 72 176

[0230]

TABLE 91
50 ppm Blend 97
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Inhibited Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 60 60 176
75 72 72 176
90 72 72 176
105 72 66 176
120 72 72 176
150 66 66 176
180 54 54 176

[0231]

TABLE 92
10 ppm Blend 97
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 66 66 176
75 72 66 176
90 60 54 176
105 48 42 176
120 36 30 176
150 30 24 176
180 24 18 176

[0232] The data of Example 24 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2060 or 2066 and Dequest 2046 in the use range of about 20 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

Example 25

[0233] Blend 98 was tested in the Kraft Cook Test described in the Examples section at 500, 100, 50 and 10 ppm active acid. The results are given in Tables 93-96 below.

TABLE 93
500 ppm Blend 98
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 24 24 84
30 42 42 132
45 60 60 168
60 90 90 180
75 96 96 180
90 102 102 180
105 102 102 180
120 102 102 180
150 102 102 180
180 102 102 180

[0234]

TABLE 94
100 ppm Blend 98
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 18 18 80
30 30 30 132
45 42 42 170
60 54 54 176
75 66 66 176
90 66 66 176
105 72 72 176
120 72 72 176
150 72 72 176
180 72 72 176

[0235]

TABLE 95
50 ppm Blend 98
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 24 24 132
45 42 42 170
60 60 60 176
75 66 66 176
90 72 72 176
105 72 72 176
120 78 78 176
150 72 72 176
180 66 66 176

[0236]

TABLE 96
10 ppm Blend 98
Inhibited
Time, Minutes Total Calcium, ppm Calcium, ppm Temperature
0 0 0 21
15 12 12 80
30 30 30 132
45 48 48 170
60 66 60 176
75 78 72 176
90 72 72 176
105 66 66 176
120 54 54 176
150 36 36 176
180 24 24 176

[0237] The data of Example 25 demonstrates that use levels of 50, 100 and 500 ppm provided significant improvement in calcium inhibition compared to the use of 10 ppm or the use of no inhibitor. The data of this example suggests that a blend of Dequest 2046 and 4NHMP in the use range of about 20 to about 1000 ppm would be effective to inhibit calcium salt scale according to the invention.

[0238] The preceding description is for illustration and should not be taken as limiting. Various modifications and alterations will be readily suggested to persons skilled in the art. It is intended, therefore, that the foregoing be considered as exemplary only and that the scope of the invention be ascertained from the following claims. It is further intended that each and every claim limitation be literally construed to include any and all variants which are insubstantially different from what is literally recited except variants which are in the prior art.

Referenced by
Citing PatentFiling datePublication dateApplicantTitle
US6869503 *Jun 5, 2002Mar 22, 2005Solutia, Inc.Composition for inhibiting calcium salt scale
US6890404 *Jun 5, 2002May 10, 2005Solutia, Inc.Improving properties of pulp produced or reducing the digester cycle time in alkaline chemical pulping processes in which an effective amount of at least one selected phosphonate or carboxylate compound or mixtures thereof is admixed with the
US7097739 *Jan 7, 2005Aug 29, 2006Solutia Inc.Improving properties of the pulp or reducing the digester cycle time in alkaline chemical pulping processes in which a phosphonate and/or carboxylate compound is admixed with the alkaline aqueous mixture in the digester of the chemical pulping process
US7172677Jul 21, 2004Feb 6, 2007Solutia Inc.Mixing a selected phosphonate with an aqueous digester composition to inhibit the formation, deposition and adherence of scale to metallic surfaces, particularly in commercial chemical pulp processing equipment
US7241363Jun 26, 2004Jul 10, 2007International Paper CompanyMethods to decrease scaling in digester systems
US7300542Jan 26, 2005Nov 27, 2007Thermophos Trading GmbhEffective amount of selected phosphonates or phosphonate blends is admixed with black liquor composition recovered from digester in chemical pulping process; suited for Kraft pulping process
US7918967Jun 1, 2007Apr 5, 2011International Paper CompanyApparatus for decreasing scaling in digester systems
US7985318 *May 10, 2007Jul 26, 2011Nalco CompanyThermoconductive measurement; adding antiscaling agent such as acrylic-maleic acid copolymer, ethylene-vinyl acetate-methacrylic acid terpolymer, linseed oil-maleic anhydride copolymer crosslinked with pentaerythritol; amides, esters, acids, sulfonic acids, amines, or anhydrides to black liquor
US8361952Jul 28, 2010Jan 29, 2013Ecolab Usa Inc.Stability enhancement agent for solid detergent compositions
US8669223Dec 19, 2012Mar 11, 2014Ecolab Usa Inc.Stability enhancement agent for solid detergent compositions
USRE41552May 9, 2007Aug 24, 2010Thermphos Trading GmbhComposition for the production of improved pulp
Classifications
U.S. Classification162/29, 162/48, 252/175, 252/181, 162/30.11
International ClassificationC02F5/14, D21C3/22, C02F5/12, D21C3/00, C02F5/00, C09K3/00
Cooperative ClassificationC02F5/12, D21C3/226, C02F5/14
European ClassificationD21C3/22D, C02F5/14, C02F5/12
Legal Events
DateCodeEventDescription
Mar 3, 2008ASAssignment
Owner name: CPFILMS INC., VIRGINIA
Owner name: MONCHEM INTERNATIONAL, INC., MISSOURI
Free format text: RELEASE OF SHORT-FORM PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:CITIBANK, N.A.;REEL/FRAME:020638/0177
Effective date: 20080228
Owner name: MONCHEM, INC., MISSOURI
Owner name: SOLUTIA INC., MISSOURI
Owner name: SOLUTIA SYSTEMS, INC., MISSOURI
Owner name: CPFILMS INC.,VIRGINIA
Owner name: MONCHEM INTERNATIONAL, INC.,MISSOURI
Owner name: MONCHEM, INC.,MISSOURI
Owner name: SOLUTIA INC.,MISSOURI
Free format text: RELEASE OF SHORT-FORM PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:CITIBANK, N.A.;US-ASSIGNMENT DATABASE UPDATED:20100427;REEL/FRAME:20638/177
Owner name: SOLUTIA SYSTEMS, INC.,MISSOURI
Oct 17, 2007ASAssignment
Owner name: THERMPHOS TRADING GMBH, SWITZERLAND
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:SOLUTIA INC.;REEL/FRAME:019974/0227
Effective date: 20070525
Nov 25, 2003ASAssignment
Owner name: ABLECO FINANCE LLC, NEW YORK
Free format text: SHORT-FORM JUNIOR PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:SOLUTIA INC.;REEL/FRAME:014683/0683
Effective date: 20031008
Owner name: ABLECO FINANCE LLC,NEW YORK
Free format text: SHORT-FORM JUNIOR PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:SOLUTIA INC.;US-ASSIGNMENT DATABASE UPDATED:20100427;REEL/FRAME:14683/683
Oct 9, 2003ASAssignment
Owner name: ABLECO FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT, NEW YORK
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT FOR SECURITY;ASSIGNOR:SOLUTIA INC.;REEL/FRAME:014043/0021
Effective date: 20031008
Owner name: ABLECO FINANCE LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT,NEW YORK
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT FOR SECURITY;ASSIGNOR:SOLUTIA INC.;US-ASSIGNMENT DATABASE UPDATED:20100427;REEL/FRAME:14043/21
Jun 5, 2002ASAssignment
Owner name: SOLUTIA INC., MISSOURI
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:THOMPSON, JACOB OWEN;VERRETT, SHELDON PHILLIP;SEVERTSON,STEVEN JOHN;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:012987/0851;SIGNING DATES FROM 20020516 TO 20020528