Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007

___________________________________________________________________________________

CONTROL CALCULATIONS FOR FACTORIES

PRODUCING BOTH SUGAR AND ALCOHOL
By
P.G. WRIGHT1, A.C. FERNANDES2 and FLORENAL ZARPELON3
1

PGW ProSuTech (Australia), 2GAtec (Brazil), 3STAB (Brazil)

peterwright@internode.on.net

KEYWORDS: Sugar, Alcohol, Balance,

TRS, Chemical Control.
Abstract
FOLLOWING the lead of the sugar industry in Brazil and the realities of the oil
markets, the cane sugar industry in Australia may soon be moving to the large
scale production of anhydrous ethanol fuels from substrates other than final
molasses. This paper introduces some of the concepts involved in the analyses
and factory balances for total reducing sugars (TRS), and details the calculations
of TRS equivalents for the various sugar and ethanol grades which may be
produced. The approved conversion constants for ethanol density, theoretical
yields of sugar and ethanol and for other relevant relationships are presented. All
such material is taken from the 2003 edition of the STAB (Brazil) publication by
Antonio Carlos Fernandes. The formulations and equations given there are based
on experience acquired during 27 years of work in the Brazilian Centre of
Technology, Copersucar. The paper is presented in the hope that it will make a
contribution to the development of the sugar/ethanol sector in Australia, in the
way that the referenced STAB publication has done in Brazil.
Introduction
The present trends in oil markets are leading to high costs of petroleum-derived fuels
and to problems in energy security in respect to fueling the large motor vehicle fleet.
Following the lead of the sugar industry in Brazil, the cane sugar industry in Australia may
soon be moving to the large scale production of anhydrous ethanol fuels from substrates other
than final molasses. This will involve sugar factories in diverting part of their molasses, juice
and syrup streams, in addition to the traditional use of final molasses for fermentation to
ethanol.
The techniques of chemical accounting for sugar-ethanol factories have been worked
out by Brazilian technologists over the three decades since the ethanol program was
introduced in Brazil. It is of interest to adapt their techniques to traditional Australian
methods for cane analyses and payment in order to present a system which might best suit
local factories now moving to ethanol production
This paper introduces some of the concepts involved in the analyses and factory
balances for total reducing sugars (TRS), drawing on the 2nd edition of the STAB (Brazil)
publication by Antonio Carlos Fernandes (Fernandes, 2003). The formulations and equations
given there are based on experience acquired during 27 years of work in the Centre of
Technology, Copersucar.
1

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

The paper summarises the calculations of TRS equivalents for the various sugar and
ethanol grades which may be produced. Approved conversion constants for ethanol density,
theoretical yields of sugar and ethanol and for other relevant relationships are presented.
Definitions and terminology
The terminology of the traditional sugar cane factory has to be extended when
alcohol manufacture is included. The definitions in the Australian Laboratory Manuals
(Anon., 1984, 1991) updated in each past edition to follow new analytical methods and
equipment, have now to include a number of new terms to cover the introduction of annex
ethanol facilities. These are listed in Appendix 1.
Conversion factors and tables
Each molecule of inverted sugar or reducing sugar is fermented for the conversion to
two molecules of ethanol and two of carbon dioxide. Thus, 180.16 g of inverted sugar
produce 92.14 g (2*46.07) of ethanol, and each 100 kg of TRS corresponds to 51.14 kg of
ethanol, which when divided by the specific mass of ethanol at 20oC (789.3 kg/m3), results in
0.6479 L ethanol per kg TRS. This result is called stoichiometric efficiency of the
fermentation, the volume in litres of ethanol that can be produced by a kilogram of TRS with
efficiency of 100% fermentation.
For other types of alcohol, such as hydrous or anhydrous, or alcohol of different
grades, the recommended procedure is first to calculate the corresponding volume of each
type of alcohol as pure 100% alcohol, and then adjust it according to the grade (%w/w) of each
type of alcohol. This way, the volumes of the diverse types of alcohol can be added and the
result divided by 0.6479 to get the stoichiometric equivalent in TRS.
Theoretical factors for the conversion of sucrose and TRS to four grades of ethanol
are given in Table 1. These have been taken from Fernandes (2003, p 44, Table 4), modified
with data from Perry & Green, (1984).
Table 1Factors for the theoretical conversion of sucrose and TRS to four
grades of ethanol.
Pure
ethanol

Anhydrous
alcohol

Hydrous
alcohol

Hydrous
alcohol (2)

100.0

99.3

93.8

93.0

Grade GL, % v/v

100.0

99.6

96.0

95.4

Density, kg/m3 at 20oC

789.34

791.51

807.62

809.83

Yield of alcohol on TRS,

Lkg1 TRS

0.6480

0.6507

0.6751

0.6791

Yield of alcohol on
sucrose, Lkg1 sucrose

0.6820

0.6849

0.7106

0.7148

ITEM
Grade, %w/w
o

The maximum practical yield (the fermentation efficiency) is ~94.6% of the

theoretical yield because some of the sugars are consumed in the side reactions necessary for
ethanol synthesis.
Fermentation efficiencies between 88% and 92% are considered good in practice,
with the higher value easier to obtain with high purity fermentation feed.
2

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

The distillation efficiency is the ratio of the mass of ethanol in the final product to the
mass of ethanol in the feed (wine) to the distillery. The losses of ethanol in distillation are
small and distillation efficiencies are usually in the order of 99.0 9.5%. The overall ethanol
yield is on a mass basis, the product of the yield for fermentation and the distillation
efficiency.
Laverack (2003) outlines a range of methods used in day-to-day operations for
specifying ethanol yields. However, the method favoured in Brazil appears to be the yield as
anhydrous alcohol per unit of TRS (Fernandes, 2003, p 177). It is seen in Table 1 that the
maximum theoretical yield of anhydrous alcohol is 0.6507, its density is 791.5 kg/m3, and it
has 99.3%w/w content of pure ethanol. Table 2 lists fermentation and overall efficiency yields
for anhydrous alcohol. It assumes the distillation efficiency is 99.0%.
Table 2Yields of anhydrous alcohol from total reducing sugars, TRS.
Overall yield
Efficiency

Efficiency

Anhydrous alcohol

Fermentation

Overall*

Tonne/tonne

L/tonne

92.0

91.08

0.4691

592.7

90.0

89.10

0.4589

579.8

88.0

87.12

0.4487

566.9

*Assuming distillation efficiency as 99.0%.

Analyses of cane and first expressed juice

Analysis of cane
The analyses of cane by first expressed juice (FEJ) analyses and direct fibre analysis
(eg by the SRI can fibre apparatus) can give pol in cane (polcane), brix in cane (Bxcane), and
fibre in cane (Fibcane).
The basic assumption of the Australian CCS is that the recoverable sugar, by an
idealised standard sugar factory is given by the sucrose in cane less half the quantity of
impurity entering in cane, as in Equation (1).

CCS # sucrose

cane

" 0 . 5 ! impurity

cane

# pol cane " 0 . 5 ! ( Bx cane " pol cane )

# 1 . 5 ! pol cane " 0 . 5 ! Bx cane

(1)

For practical reasons there is an approximation of pol to sucrose and dry substance
to Brix. As well, the analysis of cane is often not done directly but is estimated from the pol
and brix measured in first expressed juice (FEJ). The cane analysis estimate is made by the
3 & 5 formula, with the following relationships:

polcane
Bxcane

= po1FEJ x (100 - (Fibcane + 5) / 100)

= BxFEJ x (100 - (Fibcane + 3) / 100)

(2)
(3)

Analysis of reducing sugars in cane

For control of factories producing alcohol it is necessary to add analyses of

the reducing sugars in FEJ (RSFEJ) and in cane (RScane). Fernandes (2003, p 5758)
3

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

describes the estimation of RS in juice by Lane-Eynon titration. Assuming that the

sequestration of the reducing sugars by the fibre in the cane follows the same
5 formula relationship as does the pol, we can estimate the reducing sugars in cane
(RScane) from its value in first expressed juice as equation 4, [or, taking a Brazilian
regression (Fernandes, 2003, p 75), from its value in mixed juice, as in equation 5]:
(4)
RScane = RSFEJ x (1 (Fibcane + 5) / 100)
RScane = RSMJ (1 0.01 x Fibcane) x (1.0313 0.00575 x Fibcane)
(5)
However, where a reducing sugars titration is not available, Fernandes (2003)
has used a simple expression (equation 6), a function of the apparent purity of mixed
juice PMJ, to estimate the value of reducing sugars in mixed juice, and then cane
(using equation 5).
RSMJ = 3.6410.0343 x PMJ
(6)
Total reducing sugars, TRS (Brazilian ART)
In Brazil practice, the total reducing sugars (the TRS available for fermentation) per
100 cane is commonly estimated1 by the simple expression:
(7)
TRScane = (polcane / 0.95) + RScane
This is because, in the process of inversion of sucrose each molecule of sucrose takes
up one molecule of water to form two molecules of monosaccharides, increasing the mass by
the factor 360/342, or 1/0.95.
Theoretical yield of sugar and alcohol from cane in the conventional process
The calculations of the theoretical yield of sugar and of alcohol can be made with
reference to a general diagram of the principal processing phases from cane to sugar and
alcohol, as shown in Figure 1. This shows the processing steps and loss areas, with diversion
of juice (preferentially second mill juice of lower concentration and purity) to the
fermentation, as well as the diversion of molasses (varying in purity from that of normal final
molasses to B and A molasses, or even a higher purity stream such as partly exhausted
syrup).
Knowing the technological quality of the sugar cane and fixing the parameters of
losses and efficiencies of the industrial unit, the theoretical incomes of sugar and alcohol can
be calculated. The calculation can be made, as for the CCS assumptions, through deducting
the losses of the processes, and then multiplying for a chosen industrial efficiency. Such
theoretical estimates of the yield of sugar and alcohol can be used:
$
For planning the estimative harvest norms of the production of sugar and
alcohol.
$
To calculate the price received for ton of sugar cane.
$
For the simulation of yields from alternative investments.
$
For the calculation of the relative industrial efficiency.
In estimating the sugar and alcohol yields, many characteristics of the raw material
that may influence the results and theoretical incomes have to be ignored. Some of these
factors are:
1

It might well be argued that some of the original reducing sugars may not be fully fermentable by
yeasts, and that a small fraction of the other organic matter in the cane (or juice) might be
fermentable. The Brazil practice, however, is to ignore these details, reasoning that the two
effects cancel each other out, and to use the simpler assumption given here.
4

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

$
$
$
$

The polysaccharides resulting from deterioration after cutting/burning. These

include the polysaccharide dextran, proteins, starch, organic acids,
oligisaccharides and phenolic compounds.
Sugar cane of low moisture content.
Impurities derived from the mechanised loading or mechanised harvest.
Field soil and cane trash.

Raw material
Cane plus extraneous matter
Sugar losses
by deterioration

Weighing
Sampling
Cleaning
Milling/extraction
Primary juice
Clarification for sugar

Bagasse

Secondary
juice

Sugar losses
in cleaning
Sugar losses
in final bagasse

Filtrates

Clarified juice
Fs
Multi-effect evaporation

Sugar losses in
filter cake
Clarification for alcohol
(1-Fs)

Syrup

Sugar losses
undetermined

TRS to distillery

Sugar boiling
& Centrifuging
(1- FSJM)
FSJM

Sugar product

Molasses
Fermentation
Distillation
& Dehydration

TRS losses in
fermentation
Losses of alcohol
& TRS in vinasse

Alcohol product

Fig. 1Diagram of the principal phase of the processing from cane to sugar, with diversions
for alcohol production. (after Fernandes, 2003, Fig. 18).
5

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

Those sugars that pass through the initial phases of processing can be used in
different proportions for production of sugar and of alcohol (Figure 2). Here the factor FS
approximately indicates the amount of raw material used for fabrication of sugar.
1.0 t cane
POL = polcane x10 (kg)

1.0 t cane
RS = RScane x10 (kg)
RECOVERY
EFFICIENCY

Sugar losses in cleaning

bagasse, filter cake,
undetermined
POL recovered
to syrup

Factor
FS

RS in cane, recovered
to syrup

1 - FS

Sugar boiling
& centrifuging

TRS diverted
to distillery
RECOVERY
SJM FORMULA

1-FSJM
Factor
FSJM

RS losses in cleaning
bagasse, filter cake,
undetermined

TRS entering
the distillery

TRS diverted
from molasses
EFFICIENCY of
FERMENTATION
& DISTILLATION

SUGAR
PRODUCT

Fermentation
& Distillation
ALCOHOL
PRODUCT

Fig. 2Simplified scheme for calculation of the theoretical yield of sugar and
alcohol from a cane sugar factory with an annexed distillery.

In Figure 2 it is supposed, for illustrative purposes, that the POL and RS

enter the mill in separate streams. The TRS is the sum of the POL (as inverted sugar) and RS.
It is seen that the distillery will receive:
$
The POL flow in cane (as recovered after the losses in bagasse, filter cake
and undetermined) multiplied by the factor (1 FS).
$
The POL (sucrose) retained in molasses (depending on molasses purity or
(1 FSJM).
$
The RS flow in cane recovered after the losses in bagasse, filter cake and
undetermined.
The sugar product will come from:
$
The POL flow in cane (as recovered after the losses in bagasse, filter cake
and undetermined) multiplied by the factor FS; less
$
The POL (sucrose) retained in the molasses stream.
6

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

Estimation of benchmark sugar yield in a factory

Yield for a fully exhausted final molasses using the RCS formula
For a fully exhausted final molasses, the sugar yield (per 100 cane) can be the factor
FS multiplied by the RCS, where RCS is the benchmark sugar recovery, based on the pol%
cane and the apparent purity of the mixed raw juice (PMJ) (Wright, 2005). The RCS value is
given here in equation 8:

100
RCS # 0.945 !
pol sugar

50
! pol cane ! 1.50 "

P MJ

(8)

Yield for a partially exhausted molasses or syrup using the SJM formula
For a partially exhausted molasses of purity Pmolasses, the sugar yield can be the factor
FS times the sugar recovery, based on the pol% cane [less the sum of the losses (in per
100 pol in cane units) in bagasse, filter cake and undetermined], and on the traditional SJM
formula factor for the fraction sugar recovered. The SJM factor (FSJM) is based on the
apparent purity of the clarified juice (PCJ), sugar (Psugar) and molasses (Pmolasses) as in
equations 9 and 10. The sugar yield Ysugar (in kg/ t cane units) can then be estimated by
equation 11.
F losses # 0.01 ! (100 " loss bagasse " loss

Psugar
F SJM %
PCJ

filter _ cake

PCJ " Pmolasses

!
Psugar " Pmolasses

" loss und )

Y sugar % 10 ! pol cane ! FS ! F SJM ! F losses !

(9 )

(10)
100
pol sugar

(11)

Estimation of benchmark alcohol yield in a factory

For a factory fermenting all the final molasses, and, as well, diverting a fraction FS of
the juice/syrup flow to the distillery, the benchmark alcohol yield is calculated from the sum
of:
1.

The invert sugar (per 100 cane) equivalent of the pol fraction diverted
directly for fermentation,

%
2.

pol cane
! (1 " FS ) ! F losses
(12 )
0 .95
The original reducing sugars in the cane, RScane, multiplied by the fraction of
recovery of sucrose and reducing sugars, estimated as the ratio Flosses;

% RS cane ! F losses
3.

(13 )

The estimate of the invert sugar (per 100 cane) equivalent of the pol retained
in molasses. This is approximated by:

pol cane
! FS ! F losses ! (1 " FSJM )
0.95

(14 )
7

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

The sum of the above three elements gives the total reducing sugars (TRSferment, per
100 cane) available to be fermented to alcohol, as in equation 15.

TRS

ferment

pol cane

% F losses !
! &1 " &F SJM ! FS '' ( RS cane
0
.
95

(15)

This TRSferment value can be used to calculate the yield of the distillery (YAA), usually
expressed in litres of anhydrous alcohol per t cane. The multiplier value used for the yield of
alcohol from TRS depends on both the theoretical yield and the efficiency of the fermentation
and distillation. Some values for anhydrous ethanol (99.3%w/w) were shown in Table 2.
In equation 16, it is calculated from the combined fermentation/distillation efficiency
EF&D and then this value is used to estimate the distillery yield YAA. The combined efficiency
EF&D value can range from 88 to 92%, being higher for a high purity feed stock to the
fermentation.
YAA = 0.10 x TRSferment x 0.6507 x EF&D

(16)

Another estimation of the theoretical alcohol yield expressed the yield in terms of
pure ethanol, YE100. For this the constant in equation 16 above is altered to 0.6479.
YE100 = 0.10 x TRSferment x 0.6479 x EF&D

(17)

Calculation of the amount of TRS from the recorded yields of sugar and alcohol
The amount of TRS required for the production of the recorded yields of sugar and
alcohol, TRSTHP (kg/t cane) is given by Fernandes (2003, p 178) as in equation 18. Here the
sugar yield YS100 is as its equivalent of pure sucrose (kg/t cane) and the alcohol yield YE100 as
pure ethanol or YAA as anhydrous alcohol (in L/t cane).

Y sugar pol sugar

Y S 100
Y
Y AA
(18)
( E100
%
!
(
0.95
0.6479
0.95
100
0.6507
The percentage ratio of the TRSTHP value to that of the estimated TRScane value is the
Theoretical Industrial Efficiency.
TRS THP %

Where product yields are directly recorded, the equivalent TRS in the actual
products, TRSACP, can be calculated from equation 18, and the percentage ratio of the TRSACP
value to that of the estimated TRS in cane TRScane is the Relative Industrial Efficiency.
The spreadsheet coding presented in Table 3 is an example of the use of the
relationships presented to estimate yields of sugar and alcohol.
Table 3 addresses the special case where (a) all the lowest purity molasses is used in
the fermentation and, (b) where the split of streams between sugar and alcohol takes place
on the clear juice or evaporator syrup stream. The split streams are of therefore equal purity.
In practice, however, the most economical split directed to the fermentation has a
preferential inclusion of second mill juice and filtrate, both of which are of a lower purity
(and lower quality) than the clarified first mill juice.
The balance in this case require additional inputs of 1st mill extraction, overall
extraction, and uses appropriate factors to determine the quality differences between the 1st
and 2nd mill juice streams. Spreadsheets have been formulated to cover these aspects, and
these will be explored in the future.
8

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________
Table 3Example of spreadsheet coding for combined sugar and ethanol
production balances.
Sugar cane properties

Label Value

Pol % cane, polcane

Vr1

14.45 Entered value

Purity of first expressed juice,

P1EJ

Vr2

87.00 Entered value

Fibre % cane, Fibcane

Vr3

13.93 Entered value

RS % first expressed juice, RFEJ

Vr4

0.55

Entered value

Sum of bagasse, filter cake,

undet. losses, per 100 pol-incane

Vr5

8.00

Entered value

Fermentation efficiency, EF, %

Vr6

90.00 Entered value

Distillation efficiency, ED ,%

Vr7

99.50 Entered value

Purity of sugar product, Psugar

Vr8

99.74 Entered value

Pol of sugar product, polsugar

Vr9

99.70 Entered value

Purity of molasses, Pmolasses

Vr10

40.00 Entered value

Alcohol Grade, (%w/w)

Vr11

99.30 Entered value

Recorded yield sugar at

specification quality, Ysugar, kg/t
cane

Vr12

43.00 Entered value

Recorded yield anhydrous.

alcohol @ 99.3%w/w, L/t cane

Vr13

58.00 Entered value

Efficiencies and losses

Product specifications

Recorded yields

Adjustment of factor FS,

controlling the fraction split to
sugar
Entered diversion split factor FS
Calculated factors

Vr14 0.3611 Entered value

Label Value

Value of FS that best

corresponds to the balance of
products

Vr20 0.3611 =(Vr12*100/Vr9)/((10-Vr5/10)*Vr1*Vr24)

Density of alcohol, kg/m3

Vr21 791.51 =-0.026364*Vr11^2+2.160818*Vr11+836.901152

Theoretical Yield of anhydrous

alcohol from TRS, L/kg

Vr22 0.6507 =2*46.07/180.16*1000/Vr21*100/Vr11

Factor for the losses in process,

Flosses

Vr23

0.920 =(100-Vr5)/100

Factor SJM recovery to sugar,

FSJM

Vr24

0.893 =Vr8*(Vr26-Vr10)/Vr26/(Vr8-Vr10)

Entered 1st expressed juice

Purity

Vr25

87.00

Estimated clarified juice Purity

Vr26

86.00 =Vr25-1.0

RS % cane (estimated from

RSFEJ using CCS 5 Factor)

Vr27

0.446 =Vr4*(100-(Vr3+5))/100

Calculated values
=if(Vr2=0,(-0.217208 *Vr1^ 2 + 8.082787 *Vr1 +
16.334497), Vr2)

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________
Sugar cane properties

Label Value

Combined fermentation and

distillation efficiency, EF&D, %

Vr28

Anhydrous alcohol yield

corrected for distillery efficiency,
L/kg TRS

Vr29 0.5827 =Vr22*Vr28/100

Flows of TRS, POL

TRS in cane, kg/t cane

89.55 =100*Vr6/100*Vr7/100

Label Value
Vr30 156.56 =10*(Vr1/0.95+Vr27)

TRS in juice after losses, kg/t

cane

Vr31 144.04 =Vr30*Vr23

Flow of POL, kg/t cane

Vr32 144.50 =10*Vr1

Flow of POL in syrup , kg/t cane

Vr33 132.94 =Vr32*Vr23

Flow of POL into the pan station,

Vr34
kg/t cane

48.01 =Vr33*Vr14

Yield of sugar
Sugar yield at 100 pol, kg/t cane

Vr35

42.87 =Vr34*Vr24

Sugar yield at specification, kg/t

cane

Vr36

43.00 =Vr35*100/Vr9

Sugar, per 100 cane, as 100%

pol

Vr37

4.29

=Vr35/10

Sugar, per 100 cane, at

specification

Vr38

4.30

=Vr36/10

Noted sugar yield (as entered),

kg/t cane

Vr39

43.00 =Vr12

Difference between calculated

and recorded sugar yields, %

Vr40

0.000 =IF(Vr39>0,100*(Vr36/Vr39-1),0)

Vr41

4.46

=10*Vr27

RS (from cane) in molasses, kg/t

Vr42
cane

4.10

=Vr41*Vr23

POL diverted from pan station to

Vr43
fermenters, kg/t cane

84.93 =Vr33*(1-Vr14)

RS from invert POL diverted

syrup/juice to fermenters, kg/t
cane

Vr44

89.40 =Vr43/0.95

RS from inverted pol in

molasses, kg/t cane

Vr45

5.41

Yield of TRS & Alcohol

RS in cane, kg/t cane

TRS in fermenter feed, kg/t cane Vr46

Total TRS as calculated, kg/t
cane

=Vr34*(1-Vr24)/0.95

98.91 =Vr44+Vr45+Vr42

Vr47 133.70 =Vr35/0.95+Vr46*Vr28/100

Total TRS as recorded, kg/t cane Vr48 134.26 =(Vr12*Vr9/100)/0.95+Vr13/Vr22

TRSferment, per 100 cane

Vr49

9.89

Yield of Alcohol at specified

Grade, per 100 cane

Vr50

4.562 =Vr49*Vr22*Vr28/100*Vr21/1000

Yield of Alcohol at specified

Grade, L/t cane

Vr51

57.64 =0.10*Vr49*Vr22*Vr28

=Vr23*(Vr1/0.95*(1-Vr24*Vr14)+Vr27)

10

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________
Sugar cane properties

Label Value

Actual yield (as recorded), L/t

Vr52
cane

58.00 =Vr13

Difference between
calculated and recorded
alcohol yields, %

-0.63

Vr53

=IF(Vr52>0,100*(Vr51/Vr52-1),0)

Industrial efficiency values

YS100, kg pure sucrose/t cane Vr54

42.87 =10*Vr37

YE100, L pure ethanol/t cane

Vr55

57.39 =10*Vr50*Vr11/100*1000/789.34

YAA, L anhydrous_alcohol/t
cane

Vr56

57.64 =10*Vr50*1000/Vr21

TRScane, per 100 cane

Vr57

15.66 =Vr30/10

TRSACP, per 100 cane

Vr58

13.43 =Vr48/10

TRSTHP, kg/t cane

Vr59 133.70 =Vr54/0.95+Vr56/Vr22

TRSTHP, per 100 cane

Vr60

13.37 =Vr59/10

Theoretical Industrial
Efficiency, %

Vr61

85.40 =100*Vr60/Vr57

Relative Industrial Efficiency,

%

Vr62

85.75 =100*Vr58/Vr57

Discussion and conclusions

This paper has used material from a recent Brazilian publication (Fernandes, 2003)
and applied some of the concepts involved to outline the analyses and factory balances
required for Australian sugarcane factories which may become involved in the co-production
of sugar and alcohol in sugar factories.
Equations and relationships are presented to assist in the chemical control of
sugar/alcohol factories, and an illustration of their application to a simple case of process
stream diversion to alcohol production is presented. Their adaptation to the more complex
scenarios of preferential diversion of second mill juice and filtrate to the fermentation will be
given in another paper.
The authors hope that this work will make a contribution to the future development
of the sugar/ethanol sector in Australia.
REFERENCES
Anon. (1984). Laboratory Manual for Australian Sugar Mills. Vol. 1. BSES Publications.
Brisbane.
Anon. (1991). Laboratory Manual for Australian Sugar Mills. Vol. 2. (Analytical Methods
and Tables). BSES Publications. Brisbane.
Fernandes, A.C. (2003). Clculos na Agroindstria da Cana-de-acar. 2nd Ed., Sociedade
dos Technicos Acucareiros e Alcooleiros do Brasil (STAB), 240 p.
Laverack, B.P. (2003). Estimates of ethanol production from sugarcane feedstock. Proc.
Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., 25: CD-ROM.
Perry, R.H. and Green, D. (1984). Perrys Chemical Engineers Handbook, 6th Ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, Table 3112, 391.
Wright, P.G. (2005). Process benchmarking in cane sugar factories. Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar
Cane Technol., 27: 440.
11

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

Table of Symbols
Symbols:
pol

Sucrose concentration, w/w, having the same optical rotation as the solution.

Bx

Sucrose concentration, w/w, having the same density as the solution.

The apparent purity of the solution, the percentage ratio of pol to Bx

Fib

The dry, water-insoluble matter in the cane.

RS

The concentration, w/w, of the reducing sugars (mainly glucose and fructose).

TRS

The total reducing sugars content, the sum of the invert equivalent of the sucrose
and the reducing sugars.

loss

The loss of sucrose (or pol, or RS)

FS

The split factor, the fraction of the clear juice or syrup remaining in the pan stage
feed stream.

Efficiency, %

Factor

Yield, kg/ t cane or L/t cane

POL

Flow of pol

RS

Flow of RS

TRS

Flow of TRS

Subscripts:
FEJ

the first expressed juice

MJ

the extracted juice (preferably taken without admixing of recycled streams from
the process)

CJ

the clarified juice

molasses

the lowest purity product from the pan-centrifugal station

bagasse

milled bagasse

filter_cake

filter cake or mud byproduct

und

undetermined stream (of losses)

losses

Sum of losses in bagasse, filter_cake and undetermined loss

SJM

the SJM formula method of estimating sugar recovery from a stream of known
purity

ferment

The fermentation process using yeasts

AA

Anhydrous alcohol 99.3% w/w

E100

Pure 100% Ethanol

F&D

Combined fermentation and distillation processes

sugar

Sugar at the quality specification produced.

S100

Sugar at 100% pol and purity

THP

Theoretical yields of sugar and alcohol

ACP

Actual recorded yield of sugar and alcohol

12

Wright, P.G. et al.

Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Vol. 29, 2007
___________________________________________________________________________________

APPENDIX 1DEFINITIONS
Sugars and total reducing sugars
Some extra terms are necessary to describe the flows and mass balance of total sugars
when alcohol is being produced in the sugar cane factory.
$
Total Reducing Sugars: The total reducing sugars (TRS) represent all sugars
of the sugar cane in the reducing or inverted form. After acid (or enzymic)
inversion of any sucrose, TRS can be determined analytically by oxireduction methods, by colorimetric methods, or by chromatography. It is
estimated by the addition of the reducing sugars (glucose and fructose) to
sucrose in the inverted form of sugars (POL/0.95). Besides glucose, fructose
and inverted sucrose, other reducing substances in the sugar cane juice may
be included in the determination.
$
Purity of TRS: The percentage of total sugars contained in the brix. Used in
the same way as the normal Apparent Purity to express the quality of the
broth for fermentation.
$
Total sugars recovered: The Brazilian term ATR constitutes one of the
parameters of the system of payment of sugar cane in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and
represents the amount of TRS recovered from the sugar cane into sugar and
syrup, and is the result of difference between the TRS of the sugar cane and
the losses in the washing of sugar cane, final bagasse, filter cake and the
undetermined losses and after applying a factor for the average standard
efficiency.
Grades of Alcohol
In the sugar/alcohol sector of Brazil, there are diverse denominations related to
alcohol.
$
Ethyl alcohol or ethanol: the chemically pure product is mentioned of
formula C2H6O.
$
Absolute Alcohol: Alcohol which is highly purified and contains only traces
of water, otherwise the same as chemically pure ethanol.
$
Grade of alcohol: indicates the percentage of ethanol in a water-ethanol
mixture.
o Grade Gay Lussac (GL): the percentage (volume /volume) of ethanol in an
ethanol-water mixture at 15C. For example, 95GL indicates an alcohol
with 95 mL of ethanol for 100 mL of the mixture at 15C.
o Grade, or Grade INPM (INPM): The relative mass /mass of ethanol in an
ethanol-water mixture. The grade INPM is the official measure of the alcohol
grade in Brazil.
o Anhydrous alcohol: Alcohol with a minimum ethanol content of Grade
99.3 %w/w, containing 99.3 kg of ethanol and 0.7 kg of water for 100 kg of
anhydrous alcohol.
o Hydrous alcohol: Alcohol with alcoholic grade in the range 92.6% to
93.8%w/w, containing on average some 93.2 kg of ethanol for 100 kg of
hydrous alcohol.
13