FIBERBOARDS, USES AND METHODS OF PREPARATION THEREOF

Abstract

There is provided a fiberboard, such as a MDF fiberboard or a HDF fiberboard, comprising wood fibers, a binder, and a sludge such as a pulp and a paper sludge. The sludge can be, for example, chosen from a primary pulp and paper sludge, a secondary pulp and paper sludge, a de-inking sludge, and mixtures thereof.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

In the following drawings, which represent by way of example only, some embodiments of the invention:

FIG. 1 is a schematic representation illustrating how are prepared fiberboards according to one aspect of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is schematic representation illustrating a process, according to another aspect of the present invention, for treating a sludge that requires some treatment before using it in the manufacture of fiberboards; and

FIG. 3 is schematic representation illustrating a process, according to another aspect of the present invention, for treating a sludge that requires some treatment before using it in the manufacture of fiberboards.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Further features and advantages of the invention will become more readily apparent from the following description of some embodiments as illustrated by way of examples only in the appended drawings wherein:

The following non-limiting examples further illustrate the invention.

EXAMPLES

In the present invention, the sludge used can be used as is, i.e. without requiring any treatment or purification. Alternatively, in some cases the sludge can be optionally treated before being used for the production of fiberboards. For example, the sludge can be treated in order to reduce and/or eliminate undesired odours, reduce and/or eliminate microorganisms, reduce and/or eliminate silica, reduce and/or eliminate fines.

When preparing fiberboards, the gluing step can be carried out at the same time or just after the refining step. In this case, sludge can be added before refiner(s). But if it is not the case, sludge can be added after refiner(s) if the sludge's parameters allow it. In accordance with the sludge source, they may contain coarse fibrous particulars, called shavings, which can be refined. Use of coarse sieves allow to withdraw these sludge particles to refine them with fibers. This has been tested with a sieves of 3540 μm opening and then washed two times. Shavings can be withdrawn at first if grit removal is necessary.

As previously indicated, the sludge can be optionally treated before using it in the production of fiberboards. The following possibilities can thus be applied. If a treatment is necessary to decrease the ash content (which comprises silica) due to clay and/or sand, one of the three following methods can be used.

A. Screening of the Sludge:

This method comprises screening the sludge at a consistency of about 1% to about 5%. For example, a screen opening of 160 μm can be used. This treatment allowed to decrease ash content from 27% to 8.7% on sludge. The filtrate was disposed.

B. Screening and Rinsing the Sludge

Such a method is similar to the method schematically represented in FIG. 2. This method comprises screening the sludge at a consistency of about 1 to about 5%. The sludge was rinsed with tap water few times. Better results were obtained with 2 rinses. For example, the screen opening used was 160 μm (sieve). Efficiency was increased when sludge was diluted to consistency of about 1% with hot water (60° C.) and agitated during 5 minutes. This treatment allowed to decrease ash content from 27% to 0.7% on sludge. The filtrate was disposed (reject). Fibers containing shavings were recovered.

C. Removing Sand, Rinsing and Screening the Sludge

This method, which is similar to the method schematically represented in FIG. 3, comprises removing sand and bark from sludge using a desander. After sand removal, sludge is screened at an opening of 160 μm (sieve) and then, rinsed with tap water few times. Very interesting results were obtained when rinsing 2 times. Such a step permits to efficiently remove interesting quantities of fines and clay. Optionally, before passing the sludge in the desander, it is possible to pass it into a coarse sieve (3500 μm or coarser) in order to substantially remove shavings.

Alternatively, clay and fines could also be removed with a centrifugal, a pressurized screen, a pressurized inclined screen or by centrifugation.

Addition of an oxidative agent such as sodium hypochlorite at 0.5% can be made so as to stabilize the sludge during at least 96 hours. Combined to a bacteriostat agent, the period can be extended to 7 days. After having simulated thermal treatments, fresh sludge had a bacterial counting similar to standard MDF panel counting. It was shown that the addition of an oxidative agent was not necessary depending upon storage conditions.

Some results demonstrated that sodium hypochlorite at 0.1% v/v of concentration has a bactericide effect on short term (48 hours). While at concentration at 0.2% v/v, sodium hypochlorite allows sludge to keep for 7 days a bacterial counting lower than the factory raw material.

The results shown in Table 1 demonstrated that the amount of microorganisms is not higher in a sludge-containing panel as opposed to a standard panel. The Table 1 shows microbiological results for different steps in the panel production.

	TABLE 1
	Yeast
	and	Totals
	molds	coliforms	E. coli	Entérococcus	HBAA
	CFU/g	CFU/g	CFU/g	CFU/g	Counting	Contaminants
Primary sludge	100%	#1	865	405	<3	81	11 300	Bacillus positive GRAM, negative
		#2	250	280	<3	30	14 150	oxidase, positive catalase.
								Filamentous negative GRAM, negative
								oxidase, positive catalase.
After refiner	0%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	39 800	Bacillus positive GRAM, negative
		#2	<10	<10	<10	<10	39 200	oxidase, positive catalase.
	5%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	25 900	Bacillus positive GRAM, negative
		#2	10	<10	<10	<10	23 900	oxidase, positive catalase.
	10%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	7000	Bacillus positive GRAM, negative
		#2	10	<10	<10	<10	9300	oxidase, positive catalase.
At former	0%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10
	5%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10
	10%	#1	30	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10
Rough panel	0%	#1	10	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	10	<10	<10	<10	<10
	5%	#1	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	<10	<10	<10	<10	<10
	10%	#1	10	<10	<10	<10	<10	None
		#2	10	<10	<10	<10	<10
HBAA = Heterotrophic bacteria aerobic and anaerobic facultative

It should be noted that in Table 1, primary sludge results correspond to CFU/g anhydrous on sludge. In all other cases, units are CFU/g humid. This explains detection threshold of 3 CFU/g for primary sludge and 10 CFU/g for all others.

In the following examples, which refer to the preparation of fiberboards, the latter have been characterized using standard methods such as:

Internal Bonds:              ASTM D1037-99
Suface bonds:                ASTM D1037-99
Modulus of Rupture (MOR):    ASTM D1037-99
Modulus of Elasticity (MOE): ASTM D1037-99
Stiffness:                   ASTM D1037-99
Thickness Swelling:          ASTM D1037-99
Thickness Edge Swelling:     EN 13329-2000

Example 1

A process as shown in FIG. 1 was carried out in order to produce panels or fiberboards. FIG. 1 thus schematically represents the process that was carried out. The sludge used came from a pulp and paper factory, which produces newspaper with thermomechanic pulp without addition of clay. Primary and secondary sludges were mixed before being pressed. Primary sludge represents 63% and secondary sludge 37%. Sludges contained 74% of water. No treatment and no biocide have been done on sludge.

The sludge was mixed with wood fibers in a half and half proportion (anhydrous weight) before being stored in a silo. The wood fibers content was about 50% hardwood and 50% softwood. Sludge proportion injected in the process was dosed with metering screws. Sludge incorporation tests were at 5% and 10% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

Sludge and fibers were stepped forward to the predigester and the digester. Then, they were refined. During the test, specific energy of the refiner drop-off from 348 kW/T to 276 kW/T.

A mixture comprising the fibers, the sludge, an urea-formaldehyde resin (16% by weight based on the dry weight of the wood fibers), a steochiometric excess of urea (0.9% by weight based on the dry weight of the wood fibers), and wax/paraffin (1% by weight based on the dry weight of the wood fibers) was stepped forward to the former (inlet of the press) and finally, through the continuous press (Siempelkamp™). The so-formed products were HDF panels having a 6.6 mm thickness and a density of 900 kg/m³. Fiber pH increased from 5.23 to 5.34 during sludge insertion of 5%.

Internal bonds strength was 1.91 kN/mm² for the control panel, 1.81 kN/m² for the panels with a sludge content of 5% and 1.64 kN/mm² for the panels having a sludge content of 10%.

Example 2

This example was also carried out as shown in FIG. 1. The sludge used came from a pulp and paper factory which produces newspaper with thermomechanic pulp without addition of clay. Only primary sludge was used. The sludge contained 73% of water. No treatment and no biocide have been done on sludge.

The sludge was mixed with wood fibers in a half and half proportion (anhydrous weight) before being stored in a silo. The wood fibers content was about 40% hardwood and 60% softwood. The sludge proportion injected in the process was dosed with metering screws. Sludge incorporation tests were at 5.7% and 10% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard of the final mixture. Sludge and fibers are stepped forward to the predigester and the digester. After, they were refined. During the test, specific energy of the refiner was constant.

Fiber and sludge were stepped forward to the former ((inlet of the press) and into the continuous press. The product was HDF panels of 6.6 mm thickness and a density of 900 kg/m³. Average length of fiber only was 0.726 mm and sludge only was 0.583 mm. During the test, the average length of mixture with sludge content of 5.7% was 0.686 mm and was 0.688 mm for mixture with sludge content of 10%. Table 2 represents results obtained for rough panel and Table 3 represents results obtained for sanded panels. The test duration was 3 hours.

TABLE 2
	Average
	internal		Average	Minimal
	bonds	Average	surface	core	Press	Mat
	strength	density	density	density	speed	moisture
Panel	(N/mm2)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(mm/sec)	(%)
Control	1 968	930	1 118	870	285	9.0
5.7% of sludge	1 972	911	1 119	824	285	9.0
10% of sludge	1 903	935	1 153	865	285	9.2

TABLE 3
	Average
	internal			Minimal
	bonds	Average	Average	core	Average	Average	Edge	Heaving	Water
	strength	density	surface	density	MOR	MOE	swelling	ASTM	absorption
Panel	(N/mm2)	(kg/m3)	density(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(N/mm2)	(N/mm2)	(%)	(%)	(%)	Hardness
Control	2 063	882	1 088	818	48	5 133.0	16.46	9.58	12.01	9 757
5.7% of sludge	1 849	879	1 090	820	38	4291.0	17.12	9.17	11.85	9 814
10% of sludge	1 503	882	1 117	837	43	4 885.0	16.67	9.49	12.74	9 320

Example 3

Example 3, was carried out in a similar manner as shown in FIG. 1. The sludge used came from a pulp and paper factory which produces newspaper with thermomechanic pulp without addition of clay. Primary sludge only was used. Sludges contained 70% of water. No treatment and no biocide have been done on sludge.

In the panel factory, the sludge was mixed with wood fibers in proportion of half and half (anhydrous weight) before being stored in a silo. The wood fibers content was about 20% hardwood and 80% softwood. Sludge proportion injected in the process was dosed with metering screws. Sludge incorporation tests was 6% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard. Sludge and fibers were stepped forward to the predigester and the digester. After, they were refined.

Fiber and sludge were stepped forward to the former (inlet of the press) and finally, into the continuous press. The product was HDF panels of 7.6 mm thickness and a density of 850 kg/m³. Large amount of water contained in sludge forced to slow down press speed from 310 mm/s to 265 mm/s during the test. The temperature of air dryer was increased of 10° C. Average length of sludge fiber was 0.578 mm and 0.616 mm for fiber only. Table 4 represents results obtained for rough panels and Table 5 represents results obtained for sanded panel.

TABLE 4
	Average
	internal		Average	Minimal
	bonds	Average	surface	core		Mat
	strength	density	density	density	Press speed	moisture
Panel	(N/mm2)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(mm/sec)	(%)
Control	1 450	849	1 067	753	303	9.4
6.0% of	1 582	851	1 133	734	298	9.4
sludge
Specification	min 1 400	850 ± 5%	min 1 075	min 730	280	8.5-10.5

TABLE 5
	Average
	internal		Average	Minimal
	bonds	Average	surface	core	Average	Average	Edge	Heaving	Water		Silicate
	strength	density	density	density	MOR	MOE	swelling	ASTM	absorption		content
Panel	(N/mm2)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(kg/m3)	(N/mm2)	(N/mm2)	(%)	(%)	(%)	Hardness	(%)
Control	1 716	856	1 125	737	44.4	5255.6	15.55	7.66	11.85	—	0.041
6.0% of	1 597	851	1 125	742	49.5	5733.3	14.56	7.29	12.102	—	0.0586
sludge
Specification	min 1 400	850 ± 5%	min 1 075	min 730	min 38	min 4 500	max 16	max 8	—	—	—

As it can be seen from Tables 2 to 5, it was clearly demonstrated that the obtained fiberboards have properties which are substantially the same than conventional fiberboards (control). In fact, the values obtained for the various parameters tested in Tables 2 to 5 are substantially the same for fiberboards which include the sludge and for the conventional fiberboards.

In view of Examples 1 to 3 related to HDF fiberboards, the person skilled in the art would clearly understand how to prepare MDF fiberboards. In fact, it is well known in the present art that one the main differences between preparation of HDF and MDF reside in the pressure applied to the fiberboards i.e. HDF fiberboards require more pressure since they have a higher density. The person skilled in the art would also understand that various parameters will be modified depending on the final desired characteristics of the produced fiberboards.

Example 4

In Example 4, a sludge having a water content of 95.17% and ash content of 25.6% (combustion ash at 525° C.) was used. It was a primary sludge only and this sludge came from a thermomechanical process.

The process carried out in Example 4, was similar to the process schematically represented in FIG. 2. The sludge was diluted to 1% solid weight, vigorously stirred during 5 minutes, screened with an opening of 3.6 mm and rinsed twice. After, having vigorously stirred the filtrate during 5 minutes, it was screened through openings of 160 μm and rinse twice. The screen with openings of 3.6 mm holded 9.8%. Of the solute. These shavings had an ash content of 1%. The screen with an opening of 160 μm holded 53% of solid. These fibers had an ash content of 13.5%. This high value was partially caused by sand. The treated sludge was then ready to be used in the preparation of fiberboards.

Example 5

In Example 5, the sludge used was the same than in Example 4. The process carried out in Example 5, was similar to the one schematically represented in FIG. 3. The sludge was diluted to 1% solid weight, vigorously stirred during 5 minutes, screened through openings of 3.6 mm (coarse sieve) and rinsed twice. The shavings (removed) represented 7.6% of solid. They were characterized by 1.21% of ash content. After the filtrate was vigorously stirred during 5 minutes and the sand was removed with a desander. The reject was sand and small bark particles. They represent 7.19% of solid weight with an ash content of 1.1%. The supernatant was screened with openings of 160 μm (sieve) and then, rinsed twice. The retentate was 37.4 g of solid with a ash content of 11.5%. The treated sludge was then ready to be used in the preparation of fiberboards.

While the invention has been described in connection with specific embodiments thereof, it will be understood that it is capable of further modifications and this application is intended to cover any variations, uses, or adaptations of the invention following, in general, the principles of the invention and including such departures from the present disclosure as come within known or customary practice within the art to which the invention pertains and as may be applied to the essential features hereinbefore set forth, and as follows in the scope of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A fiberboard comprising: wood fibers;a binder; anda pulp and paper sludge,

2. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said wood fibers are virgin wood fibers, post-consumption wood fibers, or a mixture thereof.

3. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is present in said fiberboard in an amount of at least 1% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

4. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is present in said fiberboard in an amount of at least 5% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

5. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is present in said fiberboard in an amount of at least 10% by weight, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

6. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is present in said fiberboard in an amount of about 1% to about 40%, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

7. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is present in said fiberboard in an amount of about 4% to about 15%, based on the total dry weight of the fiberboard.

8. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said fiberboard has substantially the same properties than a conventional fiberboard.

9. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is chosen from a primary pulp and paper sludge, a secondary pulp and paper sludge, a de-inking sludge, and mixtures thereof,

10. The fiberboard of claim 3, wherein said sludge is a primary pulp and paper sludge.

11. The fiberboard of claim 3, wherein said sludge is a mixture of primary pulp and paper sludge and a secondary pulp and paper sludge.

12. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said sludge is a substantially untreated primary sludge taken from a paper mill.

13. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said fiberboard has an internal bond strength of at least 1.30 kN/mm2.

14. The fiberboard of claim 9, wherein said fiberboard has an internal bond strength of at least 1.40 kN/mm2.

15. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said fiberboard has an internal bond strength of at least 1.70 kN/mm2.

16. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said fiberboard has an internal bond strength of at least 1.90 kN/mm2.

17. The fiberboard of claim 7, wherein said fiberboard has an internal bond strength of about 1.3 kN/mm2 to about 1.98 kN/mm2.

18. (canceled)

19. The fiberboard of claim 17, wherein said fiberboard is a high density fiberboard having a density of at least 800 kg/m3.

20. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said fiberboard is a high density fiberboard having a density of at least 900 kg/m3.

21. The fiberboard of claim 3, wherein said fiberboard is a high density fiberboard having a density of about 800 kg/m3 to about 950 kg/m3.

22. The fiberboard of claim 1, wherein said binder is chosen from formaldehyde-based resins, isocyanate-based resins, and mixtures thereof.

23. In a medium density fiberboard or a high density fiberboard comprising wood fibers and a resin, the improvement wherein at least a portion of the wood fibers are replaced with recycled fibers obtained from a sludge chosen from a primary pulp and paper sludge, a secondary pulp and paper sludge, a de-inking sludge, and mixtures thereof.

24. A fiberboard obtained by pressing a mixture comprising wood fibers;a binder; andas a pulp and paper sludge.

25. A process for treating sludge, said process comprising screening a pulp and paper sludge having a dryness of about 0.5% to about 10%, through a screen of 160 μm or coarser, in order to at least partially reduce the amount of ashes contained in said sludge.

26. The process of claim 25, further comprising mixing the treated sludge with wood fibers and a binder so as to obtain a composition, drying said composition, and pressing said dried composition so as to obtain a medium density fiber board or a high density fiberboard.