TILTING STERILIZER

1 of 23

Award Winning Design

The TILTING STERILIZER (Patent No. IDP 0023361) won the followings awards: -ITEX Gold Medal, Malaysia -ITEX 2008 Best Invention For Corporate Category, Malaysia -Malaysia Innovative Product Award 2008 -Best invention in engineering By MOSCOW Award (Russia)

2 of 23

Modern POM with Tilting Sterilizer

3 of 23

TILTING STERILIZER
BESTEEL Berhad (111216-X)

The simple and brilliant design of TILTING STERILIZER ensures

z z z z z z z

High throughput. Shortest steaming time in industry (45-50 min) Minimum downtime due to lesser moving parts Lower capital cost in overall POM construction Low operation and maintenance costs High efficiency in oil extraction and cost effective Quality in oil extraction Easy and safe to operate & needs little training for the operators and engineers

4 of 23

BENEFITS & ADVANTAGES OF TILTING STERILIZER

Lower Construction Cost with Less Machineries No need FFB cages, rail tracks, transfer carriages, capstans, bollards, winches, overhead-cranes, hoists, cage indexer system, cantilever bridges, tipper, pushers and tractors, EFB press, EFB splitter and SFB post heating cooker High Throughput Shortest steaming time in industry (45-50 minutes). Compact and with minimum dead space Low downtime Reduced down-time due to lesser machineries and human factors Minimum oil loss Low oil loss in EFB. No oil drips, and condensate is directly used for dilution Lower power consumption and waste water discharge Due to lesser machinery and use >50% lower steam consumption

a..\ ..\..\ ..\ .. \S\c.ppt

..\ \.. ..\ \.. ..\ \S\p.ppt a..

...\ ..\..\ ..\..\ ..\S\idx.ppt

than conventional system

5 of 23

BENEFITS & ADVANTAGES OF TILTING STERILIZER

Easy & Safe to Operate Much easier to operate than conventional horizontal sterilizers Automatic operation with safety interlocks, and cleaner working environment Lower Operation & Maintenance Costs Only 2-3 operators to operate a multiple sterilizers station. Minimum damage to FFB The tilted position allows FFB to slide/roll down during filling Much smaller sterilization station >>> lower cost Needs only 30% of the space occupied by horizontal sterilizer.
a..\ ..\ .. ..\ \.. ..\ \S\3. Ppt

a..\ ..\ .. ..\ \.. ..\ \S\m.pp t

w.. ..\ \ .. ..\ \ .. ..\ \S\w. pdf

6 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer vs Horizontal Sterilizer

Descriptions
No. of Peak Cycle Time Oil Loss in EFB Oil Loss Recovery Throughput Unstripped Bunch Operation Flexibility Steam Consumption Heat Loss Number of Equipment Number of Operator per shift (60 t/h mill)

Tilting Sterilizer
1 72 to 83 mins Average 1.07% Condensate is used for dilution, oil loss recovered 23 to 27 t/h <1 % 1 to 3 peaks 170 - 200 kg/t FFB Minimal Less 18

Horizontal Sterilizer
3 100 to 120 mins <3.44 % (Additional equipment required to recover oil loss) Low, oil drips onto floor 11 t/h <2 % 2 to 3 peaks 300 - 450 kg/t FFB High (large vessel) More 32

7 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer vs Horizontal Sterilizer

Descriptions
Cost of Investment

Tilting Sterilizer

Horizontal Sterilizer

>20% lower than CMC type High conventional mills Maintenance Requirement Only scheduled maitenance of Many plant items to be maintained hydraulics Cost of Operation Low High General Operation & Working Simple to operate, safer and cleaner Complex and many human dependent Environment environment factors, oily working floor Delay and Downtime Minimal Transferring of cages Waste water & Recovery Minimum condensate More steam condensate Upgrading Plant Small space required provides many Difficuit to retofit, need more space flexibilities in arrangement Automation Fully automation from filling of FFB to Difficuit for complete automation unloading of SFB

8 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer vs Vertical Sterilizer

Descriptions
Throughput

Tilting Sterilizer
High. optimised space usage (23-27t/h) 72 to 83 mins <1 % Average 1.07%

Vertical Sterilizer
More dead space reduces capacity and throughput (15 t/h) Longer. SFB discharge by auger, more dead space >> less efficient cooking <3 % * <6 % * (Additional equipment is used to recover oil loss) Added maintenance of auger (some use water for cushioning) Fair (some use water for cushioning) Added tasks like water filling system and auger discharge

Cycle Time Unstripped Bunch Oil Loss in EFB

Maintenance Requirement Cost of Operation General Operation & Working Environment

Only scheduled maintenance of the hydraulics Low Simple to operate

* Based on technical specification issued by other for Air Tawar POM, Kota Tinggi
9 of 23

Sterilization Process Cycle of 30 t Capacity Tilting Sterilizer

Sterilization Process (One Peak Cycle) Deaeration 1st Peak 2nd Peak Holding Exhaust/Purging/Drain Door Open Interlock Delay Total Steaming Time FFB Filling Discharge SFB Total Cycle Time
Based on steam pressure 40 psig TeeTeh Palm Oil Mill
10 of 23

Time (min.) 1 5.5 0 36.5 5 2 50 15 to 18 7 to 15 72 to 83

Tilting Sterilizer Specifications

DESCRIP TION
Holding Capacity t (tonne) Throughput Capacity (t/hr) Shell Length (mm) Diameter (mm) Vessel Volume (m) Inlet/Outlet Door (mm) M aterial Standard (Vessel) Design Pressure (kg/cm) Design Temperature (C) Insulation (50 mm thk rockw ool c/w 0.7 mm Al cladding) Vessel Design Approval to M alaysia Regulation (DOSH) Outlet Door Lining Vessel Body Lining Discharge M echanism Hydraulic for Tilting & Door
11 of 23

Size 30T
30 23 to 27 7200 3200 64 1500/1700 JIS SS 400 3.5 150 Yes Yes Optional Optional Tilting Yes

Tilting Sterilizer Specifications

DESCRIPTION Holding Capacity t (tonne) Cycle Time (min/cycle) Feeding Time (min) Steaming Time (min) Discharge Time (min) Oil Loss in EFB (%) Unstripped Fruit Bunch (%) Steam Consumption (kg/t FFB) DOBI
12 of 23

Size 30T 30 72 to 83 15 to 18 50 7 to 15 Average 1.07% <1 170-200 >2.73

Oil Loss in Empty Fruit Bunches

(sample on wet basis)
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Max. Min. Avg. Mar-10 Loss(%) 1.88 NA NA 1.01 NA 0.86 5.21 1.86 NA 2.01 2.49 NA 0.58 0.62 1.12 NA 1.00 NA NA NA 1.25 NA 0.49 1.05 0.82 NA 0.51 1.11 1.01 1.08 1.03 5.21 0.49 1.35 Apr-10 Loss(%) NA NA NA 0.44 NA 0.70 NA 0.56 NA 1.19 0.63 NA 1.62 1.68 1.78 NA 0.69 NA 1.13 NA 1.14 1.06 NA 0.86 0.55 0.66 1.82 NA 0.58 NA NA 1.82 0.44 1.01 May-10 Loss(%) NA NA 0.83 1.79 NA 0.92 NA NA 0.31 0.82 NA 0.46 0.62 NA 0.81 NA 1.10 NA 0.58 0.32 NA 0.81 0.66 NA 0.56 1.24 0.37 NA 1.09 NA 0.94 1.79 0.31 0.79 Jun-10 Loss(%) NA NA 0.55 NA NA NA 1.61 0.85 0.72 0.72 NA 0.82 1.01 1.43 NA NA 1.25 NA 0.91 NA 1.20 NA 1.09 0.72 NA 0.93 0.62 0.94 0.60 NA NA 1.61 0.55 0.94 Jul-10 Loss(%) 0.63 NA 1.07 NA 0.89 0.99 0.90 1.18 NA NA NA NA NA 1.23 0.82 NA 2.19 1.13 1.25 0.59 0.75 0.81 NA NA 0.90 1.90 0.89 2.68 1.38 NA 1.41 2.68 0.59 1.18 Aug-10 Loss(%) 0.51 0.85 NA 1.82 0.87 NA 1.10 0.58 1.10 1.00 0.76 NA NA 0.92 1.48 1.34 1.05 0.90 0.97 NA 1.15 1.20 1.53 NA 1.31 1.38 NA 1.10 0.83 0.81 NA 1.82 0.51 1.07 Sep-10 Loss(%) NA 1.15 NA 0.84 1.18 1.38 2.70 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.54 0.75 NA NA 1.28 0.85 0.83 NA 0.77 0.75 NA 1.64 0.50 1.08 NA 1.05 1.23 NA 2.70 0.50 1.09 Oct-10 Loss(%) NA 1.49 0.53 1.65 2.17 1.95 0.64 NA 0.78 0.89 0.75 1.31 0.64 1.93 NA 1.17 0.72 0.93 0.75 1.22 1.08 1.05 NA NA 1.70 0.76 0.78 1.17 NA 1.14 1.38 2.17 0.53 1.14

Year Average 1.07%

13 of 23

Records from Tee Teh Palm Oil Mill (Mar. to Oct. 2010)

Performance Test Result (Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Public Co Ltd, Thailand)

Date

Capacity Tons FFB/Day

Steam Usage kg/Ton FFB

Electricity Usage kW/Ton FFB 2

Steam Pressure barg

% Oil (wet) in Fruit Fibre

% Oil (wet) in EFB

% Oil (wet) in Wastewater1

% USB

1/7/10 2/7/10 3/7/10 4/7/10 5/7/10 6/7/10 7/7/10 8/7/10 10/7/10 11/7/10 12/7/10 Average

1284 1323 1264 1276 1382 1411 1178 1200 1424 1395 1486 1329

180 180 no data no data no data 170 200 190 no data 200 200 187

1.59 1.56 no data no data no data 1.47 1.76 1.66 no data 1.50 1.58 1.59

2.90 2.90 2.90 2.90 2.80 2.90 2.70 2.60 2.30 2.40 2.30 2.69

4.10 4.67 4.07 3.96 3.83 4.60 4.69 3.67 4.49 4.11 3.82 4.18

2.00 2.45 1.70 1.89 3.50 1.68 1.66 1.93 1.62 1.52 1.78 1.98

1.12 1.26 0.88 1.02 0.58 0.85 1.45 0.91 0.99 1.57 1.77 1.13

<1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1%

1 at decanter outlet 2 Sterilization station and loading ramp areas Steam flow measured using vortex flow meter FFB are sourced from third party plantations

14 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer Current Project List

Location Pahang, Malaysia Palembang, Indonesia Sabah, Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia Chumporn, Thailand Chumporn, Thailand Perak, Malaysia Chumporn, Thailand Saraw ak, Malaysia Perak, Malaysia Pangga, Thailand Client Tee Teh Palm Oil Mill PT Pinago Utama Berkat Setia Sdn Bhd Berkat Setia Sdn Bhd CPI CPI Felcra Chumpron SP Palm Oil Ltd Saraw ak OIL Palms Bhd Ladang Langkap Private mill Unit x FFB Capacity/h 3 x 30 tones 2 x 20 tones 2 x 30 tones 2 x 30 tones 4 x 30 tones 1 x 30 tones 3 x 20 tones 4 x 30 tones 4 x 30 tones 4 x 30 tones 2 x 30 tones Status Operation since Sept. 2009 Operation since July 2009 Remarks

Replacement of horizontal sterilizers Add-on to existing horizontal sterilizers Phase 1 replacement of Installation horizontal sterilizers Phase 2 replacement of Construction horizontal sterilizers Operation since Replacement of March 2010 horizontal sterilizers Final Second phase upgrading Negotiation Change from using Installation vertical sterilizers Construction Construction Engineering Engineering New Mill New Mill Mill upgrading New Mill

15 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer Potential Project List

Location Papua New Guinea Perak, Malaysia Kalimantan, Indonesia

Client Indonesia Client Private mill Indonesia Client

Unit x FFB Capacity/h 3 x 30 tones 10 x 30 tones 2 x 30 tones

Status Final Negotiation Negotiation Mill desin stage

Remarks New Mill Multiple mill upgrading New Mill

16 of 23

Space Saving with Tilting Sterilizer

Tilting Sterilizer saves 70% space

Tilting Sterilizers

POM Using Horizontal Sterilizers POM Using Tilting Sterilizer

17 of 23

Replacement of Horizontal Sterilizers with Tilting Technology (Pahang, Malaysia)

Loading Ramp

Existing Horizontal Sterilizers Tilting Sterilizers

Loading Ramp

18 of 23

Extension of Capacity Using Tilting Sterilizers (Indonesia)

Existing Horizontal Sterilizers

Tilting Sterilizers

Loading Ramp

19 of 23

Replacement of Horizontal Sterilizers with Tilting Technology (Thailand)

20 of 23

Replacement of Horizontal Sterilizers with Tilting Technology (Sabah, Malaysia)

Existing Horizontal Sterilizers

21 of 23

Tilting Sterilizer A Better Solution to Your Milling Process

Lower Capital Cost - higher throughput >>> fewer unit required - Lesser machineries required >>> saved space & building - Simpler design with fewer moving parts Lower Oil Losses & High Quality Oil Extraction - 2% lower (oil in EFB) than conventional horizontal sterilizer - >5% lower (oil in EFB) than vertical sterilizer - All oil in condensate recovered. No oil drips on floor - DOBI >2.73, Low iron in oil (3.74 ppm) Lower Operation & Maintenance Costs - Much fewer moving parts - Needs only half of the operators in a conventional mill - Steam consumption reduced by half (of conventional system)
22 of 23

Thank You

Lot 9683, Kawasan Perindustrian Desa Aman, Aman, Batu 11, Desa Aman, 47000 Sungai Buloh, Buloh, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Ehsan, MALAYSIA. Tel : +603 6156 5999 (Hunting Line) Line) Fax : +603+603-6156998, 61564888 E-Mail: enquiry @besteelberhad.com @besteelberhad.com

Thank

You

23 of 23