Group 5 PDR Draft

Process Design Report
PROCESS DESIGN FOR THE BATCH PRODUCTION OF ORGANIC VINEGAR

FROM MANGO (MANGIFERA INDICA) AND PINEAPPLE (ANANAS COMOSUS)
REJECTS USING AN IMPROVED DESIGN OF A RECIRCULATING PACKED
BED BIOREACTOR
STUDENT NAME: Arvin M. Valmoria
EMAIL: 20140003911@my.xu.edu.ph
DEPARTMENT: Department of Chemical Engineering
SIGNATURE: ______________________________
STUDENT NAME: Alec Morissey P. Quizo

SIGNATURE: ______________________________
STUDENT NAME: Archelle Eloise V. Zambas

SIGNATURE: ______________________________
SUPERVISOR: Hercules R. Cascon, Ph. D.

SIGNATURE: _______________________________
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 22 August 2020
Table of Contents
1
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
The Design Problem and Rationale
The Design Basis
Description of Manufactured Product
Methods of Manufacturing
Raw Materials
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Raw Material Preparation
Alcoholic Fermentation
Acetic Acid Fermentation
MATERIAL AND ENERGY BALANCE

Material Balance
Energy Balance
List of Tables
Table 1. Oxidative fermentation profitability assessment.
2
Table 2. Production process profitability assessment.
Table 3. Second profitability assessment.
Table 4. Mass balance of the Generator method DWSIM simulation
Table 5. Energy balance of the Generator method DWSIM simulation.
Table 6. Washer material balance.
Table 7. Mango juice extractor material balance.
Table 8. Sugar Composition from (Othoman et. al., 2011) and (Fruits and Sugars,
n.d.).
Table 9. Extracted Mango Juice Properties.
Table 10. Pineapple juice extraction material balance.
n.d.).
Table 12. Extracted Pineapple Juice Properties (Ali et al. 2015) and ("19 CFR §
151.91 - Brix Values Of Unconcentrated Natural Fruit Juices." 2016).
Table 13. Mixer Mass Balance.
Table 14. Fermented Juice Composition.
Table 15. Ethanolic Fermenter Material Balance.
Table 16. Filtration Material Balance.
Table 17. Vinegar product composition.
Table 18. Acetic acid fermentation material balance.
Table 19. Overall Material Balance.
Table 20. Raw Material Preparation Energy Balance summary for Electric Utility.
Table 21. Raw Material Preparation Energy Balance Summary for Water and Steam
Utility.
Table 22. Summary of Energy Balance on Ethanolic Fermentation for Electric Utility.
Table 23. Summary on Energy Balance for Acetic Acid Fermentation on Water Utility
Table 24. Summary on Energy Balance for Acetic Acid Fermentation on Electric
Utility
List of Figures
Figure 1. Global Vinegar Market
Figure 2. Trade Flow of Exports in Philippines 2019
3
Figure 3. Metabolism of Glucose to CO2 and EtOH
Figure 4. Oxidation of EtOH to Acetic Acid
Figure 5. Block Diagram for Orleans Method
Figure 6. Orleans method of vinegar production.

Figure 7. Process Flow Diagram for Submerged Fermentation
Figure 8. Submerged fermentation unit
Figure 9. Process Flow Diagram for Generator Process
Figure 10 Generator fermentation unit

Figure 11. Oxidative fermentation for the production of acetic acid.
Figure 12. Alcoholic Fermentation.
Figure 13. 2-step fermentation process for vinegar production.
Figure 14.Material Preparation Stage.
Figure 15. Alcoholic Fermentation Stage.
Figure 16. Oxidative Fermentation Stage.
Figure 17. Production Process line.
Figure 18. Process Flow Diagram.

Figure 19. Generator method dwsim simulation.
Figure 20. Washer block diagram.
Figure 21. Sorter block diagram.
Figure 22. Mango juice extractor block diagram.
Figure 23. Pineapple juice extraction block diagram.
Figure 24. Mixer Block Diagram.
Figure 25. Alcoholic Fermentation Block Diagram.
Figure 26. Filtration Block Diagram.
Figure 27. Acetic acid generator (acetator) with Condenser block diagram.
Figure 28. Quantitative Flow Diagram
4
ABSTRACT
The steady rise of demand for vinegar as one of the necessities in a consumer’s
daily life results in a need to find production processes that are fast and can produce
high-quality vinegar. The utilization of a packed bed bioreactor (PBBR) was
considered to be a solution to this dilemma as it is capable of generating high-quality
vinegar at a fast rate on a low price. Although past studies had reported that the
PBBR process for vinegar production is susceptible to evaporative losses, such
problems can be mitigated by the addition of a cooling and recovery unit. Vinegar will
be produced through batch ethanolic fermentation of overripe mangos and
pineapples. Since vinegar is a common culinary condiment, it has a potential global
market especially towards Southeast Asia, Europe, and North America, where
vinegar is a major ingredient in their cuisine. The final vinegar product is expected to
have a pH level of 4, and a titratable acidity of 4%. An initial profit-to-cost analysis
strictly based on the raw materials and an assumed product sales producing 112
metric tons of vinegar per batch, which is sold as Php 245.00 per gallon, indicated a
total production cost per batch equal to Php 13.7M of raw materials, with a per batch
revenue of Php 14.5M. This analysis was done on the basis that the plant would
operate 300 days a year, with the raw material quantity based on data of rejected
fruits annually of earlier years in the Philippines.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 THE DESIGN PROBLEM AND RATIONALE
The condiments industry is a fast growing industry with large markets in Asia, United
States, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. Vinegar is a staple condiment in
culinary. There is an increasing demand of vinegar due mostly to its uses as
condiment especially in the Philippines. Many of the Philippines’ well-known and
signature dishes such as “adobo” and “paksiw” have vinegar as their main
ingredient. Consumer preferences for quick-food products also contribute to the
increasing demand for vinegar.
As one of the most in-demand products in the kitchen, as well as the household, the
vinegar market as of 2019 has reached a market value of 1.3 billion US dollars in the
global market (Vinegar Market: Global Industry Trends, Share, Size, Growth,
Opportunity and Forecast 2020-2025, n.d.). The most popular vinegar product is the
Balsamic vinegar due to its widespread knowledge of being rich in antioxidants
compared to other vinegar products. In the reported forecast, the vinegar global
market will be expected to reach around 1.4 billion US dollars by 2025, with the
compound annual growth rate of 1.4%.
Figure 1 Global Vinegar Market (retrieved from https://www.imarcgroup.com/vinegar-

manufacturing-plant)
This rise in the global market mainly stems from the increase in demand of ready-to-
eat (RTE) products, especially with the main distribution channel coming from
supermarkets and hypermarkets (Vinegar Market: Global Industry Trends, Share,
Size, Growth, Opportunity and Forecast 2020-2025, n.d.). Europe, as of 2019, is
leading in the vinegar global market, with the leading market players who are
Acetifici Italiani Modena S.R.L., Australian Vinegar Pty Ltd., Bizen Chemical Co. Ltd.,
Fleischmann’s Vinegar Company, Inc., Kraft Heinz Company, Shanxi Shuita Vinegar
Co., Ltd., Castelo Alimentos S.A., Burg Groep B.V., and Aspall Cyder Ltd.
Figure 2 Trade Flow of Exports in Philippines 2019 taken from (retrieved from
https://trendeconomy.com/data/h2/Philippines/2209)
In 2019, the Philippines have totalled around 1.7 million US dollars from vinegar and
its substitutes from acetic acid, with Saudi Arabia being its largest market for exports.
The Philippines, as of 2019, reached 65.4% in imports, and 34.6% for exports.
The rise of the demand for vinegar causes a need for fast production. The use of a
recirculating packed bed bioreactor (PBBR) for the trickling process of vinegar
production is a solution to the dilemma of producing high quality vinegar at a fast rate
and low cost. However, the PBBR method has been proven to be susceptible to
evaporative loss of ethanol which possibly lowers the quality of the vinegar product.
To solve this problem, cooling and recycling units are added to the process to
address evaporative losses and recover any possible ethanol that may escape
during fermentation.
7
1.2 THE DESIGN BASES
1.2.1 DESCRIPTION OF MANUFACTURED PRODUCT
The plant shall manufacture organic fruit vinegar from overripe pineapple and
mango. Vinegar is an aqueous solution of acetic acid containing 5% to 8% acetic
acid by volume. Thus, vinegar is essentially composed of acetic acid and water.
Acetic acid is a colorless organic compound with the chemical formula C H 3 COOH .
Alcoholic fermentation of mango and pineapple fruit juice and subsequent acetic
fermentation (also known as oxidation fermentation) will produce acetic acid.
Although acetic acid is colorless, the vinegar product will be orange-yellow in color
because of natural colors in mangos and pineapples. The vinegar product offers mild
fruity taste and health benefits in virtue of it being made from fruits.
Figure 3 Metabolism of Glucose to CO2 and EtOH ( Importance of Yeast for Alcoholic
Fermentation, 2013)
8
The metabolism of alcoholic fermentation, as shown in Figure 3, is possible because
the yeast in the fermentation can produce energy by either fermentation or oxidative
phosphorylation (Importance of Yeast for Alcoholic Fermentation, 2013). As yeasts
prefer fermentation, this allows the yeast to break down the glucose, and convert it to
ethanol.
Figure 4 Oxidation of EtOH to Acetic Acid from (Belitz, Grosch, & Schieberle, 2008)
After the fermentation of the ethanol, the acetobacter specie are then cultivated into
the solution (Belitz, Grosch, & Schieberle, 2008). Ethanol would then be
dehydrogenated, and then oxidized in the respiratory chain, where part of the energy
formed is released as heat. This is then removed during the cooling process during
vinegar fermentation. However, should there be a shortage of oxygen supply, each
microorganism would then be disproportionate to a proportion of the existing
acetaldehyde, which would pave way for an aerobic reaction.
1.2.2 METHODS OF MANUFACTURING
1.2.2.1 The Orleans method
The Orleans method which originated from France is a slow method of producing
high-quality vinegar. The grape juice is fermented inside wooden barrels filled with
alcohol fermenting liquid which has holes drilled at the end of it to allow oxygen to
enter. These holes were left open and covered with screen filters that prevent the
9
entry of insects and bugs which will interrupt the process. Oxygen is essential in the
production of vinegar for the reason that the bacteria require oxygen to convert the
solution into vinegar. For optimum growth of the bacteria, 20-25% of fresh vinegar is
poured into the barrel to acidify the solution (Peppler & Beaman, 1967).
Figure 5 Block Diagram for Orleans MethoD (retrieved from

https://slideplayer.com/slide/12321697/73/images/63/Common+production+flowshee
t+of+vinegar.jpg)
The Orleans method may be considered as a natural fermentation as it does not

involve any other extra procedure during fermentation which also requires a long
time to finish. It is commonly applied in making wine vinegar and balsamic vinegar,
wherein high-quality vinegar fermentation may take up to two years to finish. The
vinegar produced contains a mild woody aroma and an earthy taste imparted by the
wooden casket in which it is fermented. The long fermentation time is generally the
reason why the Orleans method is not commonly applied for many commercial
vinegar production nowadays.
10
Fig 6 Orleans method of vinegar production. (a) storage house for fermentation (b)
Fermentation barrel design (c) Balsamic vinegar product.
The advantage of using this method is it has low equipment and running costs; it
produces high-quality vinegar due to the slow production process that helps improve
the flavor and aroma. The disadvantage of this method is the long time required to
produce vinegar which leads to high costs per volume produced (Raspor &
Goranovic, 2008).
1.2.2.2 The Submerged fermentation method
The basic principle behind the submerged-culture fermentor is that the bacteria are
not contacted with a substrate and air is introduced into the medium at the bottom of
the tank. The air is broken down into tiny bubbles and forced into the alcohol-
bacteria solution by a high-speed motor to increase the oxidation rate. The fermentor
also has an air outflow, thermometer, cooling coils and a system to control and
remove foam build-up. The produced vinegar is then filtered and pasteurized to
inhibit bacterial growth and enzyme actions (Manufacturing Process, n.d.).
11
Figure 7 Process Flow Diagram for Submerged Fermentation taken from (retrieved
from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/figure/10.1080/15422119.2016.1185017?
scroll=top&needAccess=true)
The submerged process could be done in different systems, namely discontinuous,

semi-continuous or continuous systems. The most commonly used is the semi-
continuous system where about 40-50% of the volume of vinegar is unloaded after a
desired level of acetification is reached, while the remaining vinegar was used as
inoculum for the next cycle.
12
Figure 8 Submerged fermentation unit (retrieved from
https://aceticacidvinegar.weebly.com/manufacturing-process.html)
The advantage of this system is the short bacterial lag time for growth leading to
more efficient production (Bhat, Akhtar, & Amin, 2014). The drawback of the
submerged process is the system is very sensitive; a short interruption of air inflow
and stirring could result in cell death for the reason that the bacteria are dispersed in
the medium. (Mazza & Murooka, 2009). This requires the system to have strict
operating procedures and high maintenance making the production process complex
and costly.
1.2.2.3 The Generator process
The generator process (also known as the trickling, quick process) involves an
alcoholic substrate sprayed in the top layer of the fermentation chamber filled with
packing materials (beech wood shavings) where the bacteria are grown, forming a
thick slime coating around it so that the bacteria could react with the substrate
producing vinegar. The substrate is allowed to trickle through the bottom of the
chamber while air is blowing in from the lower part to maintain high oxygen
availability. The partially finished vinegar inside the collection chamber is then
13
recirculated until the desired concentration of acetic acid is achieved (Bhat, Akhtar, &
Amin, 2014). To prevent overheating, a cooling coil is used maintaining a
temperature of 27-30°C (Raspor & Goranovic, 2008).
Figure 9 Process Flow Diagram for Generator Process taken from (https://guichon-
valves.com/faqs/acetic-acid-manufacturing-process-for-acetic-acid/)
The use of the generator process has some disadvantages like high risk of clogging
due to the cellulose-producing bacterial growth in the generator, accumulation of
dead bacteria and the presence of vinegar eels. Another disadvantage is the
relatively high loss of ethanol by evaporation resulting in produced vinegar with low
acetic acid concentration (Tesfaye, Morales, Garcia-Prailla, & Troncoso, 2002).
Figure 10 Generator fermentation unit (retrieved from

https://aceticacidvinegar.weebly.com/manufacturing-process.html)
14
Among the different ways to manufacture vinegar, the generator process shows the
highest potential especially in a start-up plant. Also, the drawbacks of the generator
process can be mitigated without heavily affecting the quality of the final product.
Thus, the plant shall employ the generator process to manufacture the organic fruit
vinegar product.
1.2.2.4 Other methods of vinegar production
In the study done by (Horiuchi, Kanno and Kobayashi, 1999), it utilizes onions as a
means of vinegar production. These onions failed to meet the quality standards
required by the market, which accounts for about 10% of all onions harvested in the
Okhotsk area of Hokkaido (the largest producer of onions in Japan). To obtain the
substrate used for vinegar fermentation, the onions were pressed in a mechanical
juicer after which the extract was immediately autoclaved for 30 min at 120 ℃ and
then filtered twice. Saccharomyces cerevisiae AHU3532 and Acetobacter aceti
TUA549B were used for alcohol and acetic acid fermentation, respectively. The
experiments were done in batches using flasks fitted with aeration equipment.
Alcohol fermentation was performed at 25 ℃ while providing CO2 to maintain
anaerobic conditions. On the other hand, acetic acid fermentation was conducted at
30 ℃ under aerobic conditions by seeding with A. aceti.
1.2.3 RAW MATERIALS
The raw materials of the manufacturing process are mangos and pineapples. The
Philippines is one of the biggest producers of pineapple products in the world and
was ranked as second among the top pineapple producing countries in the world
with an estimated 70,000 hectares planted with the crop, contributing about 17% to
the world supply (Barona, 2005). According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, the
production of pineapple in the Philippines during the third quarter of 2019 was
estimated at 712.29 thousand metric tonnes (Major Fruit Crops quarterly bulletin,
2019). Together with the large number of pineapples produced comes a large
number of rejects. Pineapple wastes and rejects produce about 35% of pineapple
fruit wastes (Roba, Samicho, Abdullah, & Nadzirah, 2013). Reject pineapples
include those that are already too ripe when harvested. Soluble sugar contents in
ripe pineapple are predominantly sucrose, fructose and glucose which comprise
15
about 7% to 12% in the fresh weight of the core and the pulp (Cordenunsi, 2010). A
study done by (Roda, De Faveri, Dordoni, & Lambri, 2014) on the production of
vinegar from pineapple wastes through saccharification procedure compared
vinegars obtained using pineapple peel and pineapple core as raw materials. The
product vinegar with the lowest pH at 3.85 was from the vinegar obtained using
pineapple core as raw material. Their study shows that it is possible to produce
vinegar from pineapple wastes however, the product vinegar had a relatively high
pH. This may be caused by the high fiber content of the pineapple core.
The mango (mangifera indica) is produced principally in developing countries

of the tropics. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority, the production of
mango in the period july to September 2019 was estimated at 57.85 thousand metric
tonnes in which 18.8% is that of ripe mangos (Major Fruit Crops quarterly bulletin,
2019). Mango is a climacteric fruit that continues the ripening process even after
detachment from the parent plant (Tharanathan, Yashoda, & Prabha, 2006) because
of this mangos cannot be stored for long for the risk of over-ripening. Over-ripened
mangoes cannot be sold due to its effects on the taste and aesthetic of the fruit.
Incidentally, sugar content increases during the ripening process with ripe mangos
having 18% - 20% sugar content. The presence of fermentable sugar in mango fruit
makes it an ideal substrate for alcoholic fermentation of fruit juice and subsequent
secondary fermentation into vinegar (Dias, Schwan, Freire, & Serodio, 2007). A
study done by (Oyetero, Adenubi, Ogundipe, Bankole, & Adeyeye, 2017) produced
vinegar from mango through alcoholic fermentation using acetobacter aceti. The
product vinegar of their study had titratable acidity of 0.25 g/L. Their study shows
that it is possible to produce vinegar from mango however, their product had a very
low titratable acidity.
Mangos and pineapples are available all-year round in the Philippines, but their peak
harvest are seasonal. Since mass harvest of the fruits is not expected to be
continuous, the production process shall be done by batch.
For mangos, during transportation, wooden boxes are used to contain them
(MANGO - Post-harvest and Processing, n.d.). To cushion the fruits during the
travels, paper scraps or newspapers would prove beneficial. As soon as they arrived,
16
they must be stored in a chilled environment, around 13°C, but not below. As they
are already overripe fruits, they cannot be stored for more than five days. For
transportation of pineapples, smooth roads, and well ventilated vehicles are a must
to avoid unnecessary damage, and packed in a carton that is strong enough to
withstand the rough journey of the fruit (Pineapple Production and Post Harvest
Handling, n.d.). During storage, the fruit must be cooled and maintained at 8°C. After
arrival, they cannot be stored for more than five days, as they are already overripe.
Yeast ( Saccharomyces cerevisiae) will be used as a catalyst for the alcoholic

fermentation of the fruit juice. During alcoholic fermentation, the yeast converts the
sugars naturally present in the fruit juice into cellular energy, producing ethanol and
carbon dioxide as by-products. Sucrose in the juice is broken down into two
molecules of glucose. The glucose molecules then undergo glycolysis in which it is
broken down into two pyruvate molecules. Then finally, the pyruvate is converted
into ethanol and carbon dioxide catalyzed by pyruvate decarboxylate. The chemical
reactions are presented by the following equations,
Breaking of sucrose into glucose:
C12H22O11 + H2O + invertase → 2 C6H12O6
Glycolysis:
C6H12O6 + 2 ADP + 2 Pi + 2 NAD+ → 2 CH3COCOO− + 2 ATP + 2 NADH + 2 H2O + 2

H+
2-step conversion of pyruvate into ethanol
1.)CH3COCOO− + H+ → CH3CHO + CO2
2.)CH3CHO + NADH + H+ → C2H5OH + NAD+
Heinz Apple Cider Vinegar will be added during the oxidation fermentation as a
mother vinegar. The acetic acid bacteria (Acetobacter aceti) from the mother vinegar
is necessary for the acetic fermentation to proceed. Acetic fermentation is the
17
metabolic conversion of alcohol into acetic acid using bacteria cultivated under
aerobic conditions.
Among acetic acid bacteria, the species Acetobacter aceti have high oxidation
capacity and can survive in an environment with high concentrations of acetic acid
(Fukuya, et al., 1990). The study done by Garcia-Garcia et al.,(2009) revealed that
there are two steps in the oxidation of ethanol to acetic acid. The first step is the
oxidation of ethanol into acetaldehyde by the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH)
and the second is the oxidation of acetaldehyde into acetic acid by the enzyme
aldehyde hydrogenase (ALDH). Further oxidation of acetic acid into carbon dioxide is
possible when ethanol concentration is limited. This reaction is called over-oxidation
and is an unwanted reaction in vinegar production. This can be mitigated by
capturing and recycling any ethanol that may have escaped together with the
exhaust air.
CHAPTER 2
PROJECT SYNTHESIS AND DEVELOPMENT
2.1 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Vinegar is basically an aqueous solution of acetic acid. Vinegar typically contains 5-
8% acetic acid by weight. Acetic acid is produced through oxidative fermentation of
ethanol. The fermentation reaction is presented in figure 11.
18
Figure 11: Oxidative fermentation for the production of acetic acid
The reaction equation states that 1.0kgmol of ethanol and 1.0kgmol of oxygen gas is
required to produce 1.0kgmol of acetic acid and 1.0kgmol of water. An initial
profitability assessment of the process is established based on the reactants and
products prices and does not yet include the cost for equipment and utilities. The
profit margin will be based on 1.0kgmol of process-grade ethanol (46.07 kg) as raw
material to produce 1.0kgmol of vinegar (78.07 kg) as the product.
Table 1. Oxidative fermentation profitability assessment.
Mass (kg) Commercial Cost/Sale Price

price per kg (Php) Reference
(Php)
Value of 78.07 39.00 3044.73 [1]

product
Value of 46.07 56.05 2582.22 [2]

bioethanol
total sale−total cost (3044.73)−(2582.22)

Profit Margin= = x 100=15.19 %
total sales 3044.73
The initial profitability analysis of the described process shows that the production
will have a profit margin of 15.19%. This indicates that the process is possibly
profitable and that the production process has justification to continue.
Alternatively, ethanol can be generated through alcoholic fermentation. The process

involves fermentation of fruits using yeast. The compound in fruits that are mainly
19
involved in the fermentation process are its sugars such as fructose and glucose,
thus this process favors fruits that have a high sugar content. With considerations on
the local availability, the fruits that are chosen are mangoes and pineapples.
The Philippines is among the largest producers of mango and pineapple worldwide
and has large plantations around the country. These fruits are harvested altogether
and a portion of the harvested does not meet market requirements and are rejected.
Instead of throwing away these rejects, they can be used as raw feed for the
fermentation process.
Pineapple wastes and rejects produce about 35% of pineapple fruit wastes (Roba,
Samicho, Abdullah, & Nadzirah, 2013). Reject pineapples include those that are
already too ripe when harvested. Soluble sugar contents in ripe pineapple are
predominantly sucrose, fructose and glucose which comprise about 7% to 12% in
the fresh weight of the core and the pulp (Cordenunsi, 2010).
Mango is a climacteric fruit that continues the ripening process even after
detachment from the parent plant (Tharanathan, Yashoda, & Prabha, 2006) because
of this mangos cannot be stored for long for the risk of over-ripening. Over-ripened
mangoes cannot be sold due to its effects on the taste and aesthetic of the fruit.
Incidentally, sugar content increases during the ripening process with ripe mangos
having 18% - 20% sugar content (8). The presence of fermentable sugar in mango
fruit makes it an ideal substrate for alcoholic fermentation. (Dias, Schwan, Freire, &
Serodio, 2007).
Different studies on the production of vinegar from mangoes and pineapple has
already been done. A study done by (Roda, De Faveri, Dordoni, & Lambri, 2014) on
the production of vinegar from pineapple wastes through saccharification procedure
compared vinegars obtained using pineapple peel and pineapple core as raw
materials. The product vinegar with the lowest pH at 3.85 was from the vinegar
obtained using pineapple core as raw material. Their study shows that it is possible
to produce vinegar from pineapple wastes however, the product vinegar had a
relatively high pH. Similarly, A study done by (Oyetero, Adenubi, Ogundipe, Bankole,
& Adeyeye, 2017) produced vinegar from mango through alcoholic fermentation
20
using acetobacter aceti. The product vinegar of their study had titratable acidity of
0.25 g/L. Their study shows that it is possible to produce vinegar from mango
however, their product had a very low titratable acidity. The alcoholic fermentation
process is presented on figure 12.
Figure 12. Alcoholic Fermentation
The reaction equation states that 0.5kgmol of glucose is required to produce

1.0kgmol of ethanol and 1.0kgmol carbon dioxide. Glucose is a sugar that is
naturally produced by plants during photosynthesis and is mostly stored in their fruit
(Glucose, n.d.). Using reject mangoes and pineapples as a natural source of glucose
and connecting figure 1 and figure 2, the overall production process becomes,
Figure 13. 2-step fermentation process for vinegar production
Figure 13 can be interpreted as:
To produce 1.0kgmol of vinegar, 1.0kgmol of ethanol and 1.0kgmol of oxygen gas is

required. And to produce the needed 1.0kgmol of ethanol, 0.5.0kgmol of the glucose
from the reject fruits is required.
Since the resulting equation produces a 1:1 ratio of acetic acid and water, then the
product vinegar will be 50% acetic acid and 50% water however, commercial vinegar
are usually at 4-5% acetic acid by weight (Analyzing the Acid in Vinegar, n.d.), thus it
21
is assumed that the product vinegar for sale will be diluted to 5% acetic acid and the
value of the overall product will be calculated as that of commercial organic cider
vinegar.
Thus, to produce 1.0kgmol of vinegar diluted to 5% acetic acid (1201.04 kg),

0.5kgmol of reject fruits (90.08 kg, pure glucose equivalent mass) is required. A new
profitability assessment will be done for the process described in figure 3 considering
a 1:1 ratio of mango and pineapple and using a commercial organic vinegar price for
the vinegar product.
Table 2. Production process profitability assessment.

(Php)
Value of 1201.04 kg 492.43 591428.13 [3]

product
Value of 45.04 kg 25.00 1126.00 [4]

mango
Value of 45.04 kg 35.00 1576.40 [5]

pineapple
total sale−total cost (591428.13)−(1126.00 +1576.40)

Profit Margin= = x 100=99.54 %
total sales 9263.25
The initial profitability analysis of the described process shows that the production
will have a profit margin of 99.54%. This indicates that there is a high chance that the
process is profitable and that the production process has justification to continue.
However, a thorough investigation of the process revealed that the oxidative

fermentation does not reach a 100% conversion. A study done by Krusong et al
(2014) on the impact of high initial concentrations of acetic acid and ethanol on
acetification rate in an internal venturi injector bioreactor have shown that the
22
biotransformation of ethanol into acetic acid in a high initial ethanol concentration
solution reached a maximum of 94.4%.
Also, Yahia et. al. (2019) has determined that the total sugar content of most mango
cultivars per 100g fruit is 13.66g while Bartolome et. al.(1994) has determined that
the total soluble sugar content of smooth cayenne pineapple cultivar is 8% of the
uncrowned fruit weight.
Establishing a second profitability assessment of the process using the obtained

data and considering the possibility of compressed carbon dioxide as product,
Table 3. Second profitability assessment.

(Php)
Value of 1133.78 492.43 558308.15 [3]

vinegar
Value of 329.72 25.00 8243.00 [4]

mango
Value of 563.00 35.00 19705.00 [5]

pineapple
total sale−total cost (558308.15)−(8243+ 19705)

Profit Margin= = x 100=94.99%
total sales (8744.51+19705.00)
The profitability assessment of the production process resulted in a profit margin of

94.99%. This indicates that the process is still possibly profitable and continuation of
the production is still justified.
The production process shall be divided into 3 main parts namely: 1.) Preparation of
materials 2.) Alcoholic Fermentation and 3.) Oxidative Fermentation.
23
Mango juice and pineapple juice will be extracted from the fruits and will be used for
the alcoholic fermentation process. Extraction methods will be separate on the type
of fruit because of their physical properties such as the presence of seed in mango.
The preparation process is presented in figure 14.
Figure 14.Material Preparation Stage
Pineapples will be manually de-crowned and remaining mango stems will also be
manually removed before the fruits are sent to a fruit washing section by a conveyor.
The washed fruits are then sorted into their respective juice extraction sections.
During the mango juice extraction, the mangoes will be peeled and de-stoned
automatically to separate the pulp. The mango pulp then undergoes a pulp refining
before it is sent to a storage tank. Meanwhile, in the pineapple juice extraction, since
the pineapple does not have a seed but rather a core, the whole pineapple will be
sent to a crusher and the pulp is subsequently pressed to remove excess solids.
Another preparation method for pineapples involves manually-operated machines
that will peel and remove the core of the pineapple. This method was not chosen
since it is labor intensive and each machine can only operate on one pineapple a
time thus requiring multiple units of the machine.
The mango and pineapple juices will then be mixed together to produce a
homogeneous juice and is stored in a tank before it is sent to the alcoholic
fermentation stage.
24
The alcoholic fermentation stage is the first part of the 2-step fermentation process.
The main process of this stage is the fermentation of the fruit juice using yeast for a
specified time. The alcoholic fermentation stage is presented by figure 15.
Figure 15. Alcoholic Fermentation Stage
The fruit juice is pasteurized to kill any pathogens present to make sure that the
product is safe for consumption. Before the fruit juice is sent to the fermenter, it is
cooled so that it will not kill the yeast that is going to be used for the fermentation.
In the alcoholic fermentation process, the yeast consumes the glucose in the fruit
juice and generates ethanol and carbon dioxide. This process takes time to finish
with the goal of generating as much ethanol as possible. The more ethanol
generated in this process, more acetic acid will be generated on the oxidative
fermentation stage. The fermenter is vented to release the C O 2-rich gas produced in
the process.
After the fermentation, the ethanol-rich slurry will be filtered to recover the yeast. The
slurry will then be sent to the oxidative stage.
The oxidative fermentation stage is the second step in the 2-step fermentation
process. This is the stage where the product vinegar is generated. The oxidative
fermentation step is presented by figure 16.
25
Figure 16. Oxidative Fermentation Stage
The ethanol slurry will be stored in a tank before it is sent to the acetic acid
fermentation unit. During the acetic acid fermentation process, acetobacter aceti
(A.aceti) bacteria inoculated in the packings that are placed inside the fermenter
consumes the ethanol in the juice and generates acetic acid. The fermenter is
aerated to provide the oxygen needed and has a gas outlet for the unreacted air in
the proces.
According to Pham et al. (1992), at 0.434 vvm, 28% of the ethanol in the slurry
evaporates. This evaporative loss of ethanol causes a decrease in the available
ethanol for conversion. When there is no more ethanol left in the slurry,
overoxidation occurs wherein the A.aceti bacteria consumes the acetic acid and
converts it to carbon dioxide and water (de Ley et al.,1984). Overoxidation reduces
the quality of the vinegar product. To prevent this, the exhaust gas is condensed
back to the ethanol tank to be recycled in the process.
The product vinegar will be stored in a tank for quality check before it is sent for
bottling.
The overall proposed production process line for the production of vinegar through a
2-step fermentation process from reject mangoes and pineapples is presented in
figure 17.
26
Figure 17. Production Process line
2.2 PROCESS DESCRIPTION

The entire operations for the vinegar production are divided into four main steps: (1)
raw material preparation, (2) ethanol fermentation, (3) acetic acid fermentation, and
lastly (4) bottling and distribution.
27
28
29
2.2.1 Raw Material Preparation
For the raw material preparation, the rejected fruits are distributed into the washer by
the conveyor belt, CV-101. They are washed in the washer, W-101, before getting
sorted in EQ-101 and separated to be juiced and slurried. Wastewater is carried out
in stream 3. For the sorted mangos, they are first peeled and pumped by EQ-103,
then into a EQ-105 to be refined, before stored into a TK-103. The pineapple,
however, are crushed in EQ-102, where they are pressed further in EQ-104, before
being stored in TK-104. Waste pulp and peelings are then carried off by streams 19
and 20.
2.2.2 Alcoholic Fermentation
For the alcoholic fermentation, the raw materials are mixed together in M-101, to
enter the alcoholic fermenter, R-101. However, before entering the fermentation
tank, the mixed juice, stored in TK-105, is first sterilized in E-102 and cooled down in
E-101. Once in the fermentation tank, activated yeast in TK-101 is then pumped into
R-101 for ethanol fermentation.
The activation of the yeast is done by mixing the dry yeast into warm water and a bit
of the fruit juice it will be fermented in (Dry Wine Yeast, 2019). This starter yeast is
prepared beforehand to avoid shocking the yeast culture once added into the
fermentation. The fermentation is expected to take place at a minimum of 4 days,
and maximum: 15 days (Fermentation Timeline, n.d.).
The ethanol-rich fermented juice produced proceeds to a filter where the biomass in
the juice is filtered by F-101 and recycled back into TK-101 for future fermentation
while the filtrate proceeds to the acetic acid fermentation.
2.2.3 Acetic Acid Fermentation
The filtrated ethanol-rich fermented juice is fed into the acetic acid fermentation unit,
R-102. Air is introduced and compressed by C-101, before carried into the bottom of
R-102. Before entering the compressor, air will first be filtered out of its pollutants. If
the air is left untreated, it can lead to health risks (High Quality Compressed Air for
the Food Industry, 2011).
Ethanol is trickled down inoculated packings with the a. aceti from the mother
vinegar. Evaporated ethanol then enters E-103, which is condensed back to liquid
form and recycled back to the R-102. The fermentation is expected to take place at
an average of 3 days at which the vinegar product would be produced. The vinegar
is stored in a tank for quality check.
2.2.4 Bottling and Distribution

Once the vinegar is produced in the acetator, R-102, and has passed the quality
check from its storage tank, TK-106, it will be pumped into the bottling station. The
vinegar will be packed in bottles sized 1L. Once done with, they will be packed, and
ready to be distributed.
30
CHAPTER 3
MATERIAL AND ENERGY BALANCE
The plant is designed to make organic vinegar from reject mangoes and pineapples.
A total of 33 metric tonnes, of which 10875 kg are mangoes and 21750 kg are
pineapples, will be used as raw materials annually. The mangoes and pineapple will
be procured from SOCCSKSARGEN, which has an estimated annual mangoes and
pineapple production of 27 thousand metric tons and 18 thousand metric tons
respectively (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2019).
The vinegar will be produced through a 2-step batch fermentation process using an
alcoholic fermenter and a recirculating acetic acid generator bioreactor however, the
production line shall also include sections for material preparation such as juice
extraction and pasteurization. The production process is expected to have an annual
yield of 13537 kg of vinegar solution. A detailed material balance is presented below.
The Generator method was simulated beforehand using the DWSIM simulation
program to provide an initial estimation of the product yield. An improved design of
the method was used wherein a condenser (E-101) was added to recover and
recycle any ethanol that escapes through the exit gas of the bioreactor during the
acetic fermentation. This delays the onset of overoxidation and increases the quality
of the product.
31
Figure 20. Generator method dwsim simulation
Table 4. Mass balance of the Generator method DWSIM simulation
Component IN (kg/day) OUT (kg/day)
Mango Juice 12350.00
Pineapple juice 8330.00
Aeration (O2 gas) 10490.00
CO2 Recover 3830.00
Alcoholic Fermenter 303.17

Exhaust Gas
Acetic Acid Fermenter 8143.96

Exhaust Gas
Vinegar Product 18892.90
Total 31170.00 31170.00
Table 5. Energy balance of the Generator method DWSIM simulation.
Component Mass Flow Rate (kg/day) Energy (kW)
32
Heater (ESTR-001) 20680.00 37.76
Cooler (ESTR-002) 20680.00 37.76
Alcoholic Fermenter R101 20680.00 -10.24

(ESTR-003)
CO2 Scrubber (ESTR- 4133.18 1.71

030)
Acetator R102 (ESTR- 27036.80 -474.36

004)
MATERIAL BALANCE
A material balance is made to show a clear account of the amount of materials that
enters and leaves each individual process. The raw fruit feed for the material
balance are mango and pineapple fruits with a mass ratio of 2:1 respectively. The
amount of feed materials are based on 18.8% of the annual mango production of
SOCCKSARGEN which is 2700 metric tonnes and then with a 2:1 mass ratio of
mangoes to pineapple, the amount of raw pineapples is 1350 metric tonnes.
For washer
Washing of the fruits is the first part of the production process. Dust, dirt and other
miscellaneous solids to ensure that the food is clean and prevent possible undesired
effects to other parts of the process. Pineapple crowns and excess mango stem
should be removed before the fruits enter the washer.
Assumptions:
● Washable solids constitute 1% of the bulk mass of the fruits.
● 100% of the washable solids are removed during washing.
● An additional 1.0kg of wash water will be used for every kilogram of fruit.
Thus, for 2 kg of fruits, 3 kg of wash water will be used.
33
Figure 21. Washer block diagram
Entering:
Mass of washable solids in mango = 2700.00 (0.01) = 27.00 Mg
Mass of washable solids in pineapple = 1350.00 (0.01) = 13.50 Mg
Total mass of fruit = 4050 Mg
Total mass of washable solids = 27.00 + 13.50 = 40.50 Mg
Mass of inlet wash water = 4050.00 (1.5) = 6075.00 Mg
Leaving:
Mass of mango leaving washer = 2700.00 (1-0.01) = 2673.00 Mg
Mass of pineapple leaving washer = 1350.00 (1-0.01) = 1336.50 Mg
Total mass fruits leaving = 4009.50 Mg
Mass of outlet wash water = 6075.00 + 40.50 = 6115.50 Mg
Table 6. Washer material balance
>>insert energy balance for washer w/ spec sheet of equipment
34
For Sorter
The mangoes and pineapples have different physical characteristics, thus they will
undergo separate processes for juice extraction. After washing, the mangoes will be
separated from the pineapples and the fruits will be sent to their respective juice
extraction processes.
Figure 22. Sorter block diagram
For Mango Processing

As soon as the mango has been sorted and separated from the pineapple feed, they
undergo a processing to extract the mango juice. Inside the juice extractor, the
mango fruits will be peeled and de-stoned, and then the juice will be refined to
remove the pulp.
Assumptions:
● The mango peels, pulp and seed are 65% of the fruit mass (Solids) (Yahia,
2011)
Figure 23. Mango juice extractor block diagram
Total mass of mango solids (peels, pulp and seed) = 2673.00 (0.65) = 1737.45 Mg
35
Mass of mango juice = 2673.00 (0.35) = 935.55 Mg
Table 7. Mango juice extractor material balance
n.d.)
Component % wt. Mango Juice Mass in Mango

(Mg)
Sucrose 10.0 93.56
Glucose 0.8 7.48
Fructose 4.0 37.42
Table 9. Extracted Mango Juice Properties
* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4325023/
>>insert spec sheet and energy balance
For Pineapple Processing
Just like the rejected mango fruits, rejected pineapple will also go through an
extraction and refining process to collect the pineapple juice for fermentation as well.
The pineapple shall go through the crusher wherein the whole pineapple will be
crushed, removing its peels. The resulting pineapple juice with its pulp will be
pressed to extract and separate the juice from the pulp.
Assumption:
36
● Pineapple peel constitutes 41% of the weight of an uncrowned pineapple fruit
(Medina et. al.);
● Pulp in the total juice mass of the pineapple constitutes 20% of the fruit juice
mass (Othoman et. al., 2011)
Figure 24. Pineapple juice extraction block diagram
Mass pineapple peels = 1336.50 (0.41) = 547.97 Mg

Mass of pineapple pulp = 788.54 (0.20) = 157.71 Mg
Total mass pineapple solids = 547.97 + 157.71 = 705.67 Mg
Mass of pineapple juice = 1336.50 - 705.67 = 630.83 Mg
Table 10. Pineapple juice extraction material balance.
n.d.)
Component % wt. Pineapple Juice Mass in Pineapple (Mg)
Sucrose 4.0 25.23
Glucose 3.0 18.92
Fructose 2.2 13.88
37
Table 12. Extracted Pineapple Juice Properties (Ali et al. 2015) and ("19 CFR §
151.91 - Brix Values Of Unconcentrated Natural Fruit Juices." 2016)
>>insert spec sheet nd energy balance

Mixer
The mango and pineapple juice will be mixed together to produce a homogeneous
mixture of fruit juice. The fruit juice will be stored in a tank before it is sent to the
fermenter.
Assumptions:
● No reaction occurs during mixing.
● Sugar is added to ensure that the vinegar product meets satisfactory
specification.
Figure 25. Mixer Block Diagram
Table 13. Mixer Mass Balance
>>insert energy balance, refer to equipment design for more calculations

The fruit juice will be sterilized and cooled to ambient temperature before it is sent to
the fermenter. The fruit mixture is then brought into an alcoholic fermenter, where the
38
fermentable sugars in the juice mixture are converted into ethanol. It also produces
by-products such as carbon dioxide, along with biomass. Liquid yeast is added to
facilitate the fermentation process.
Assumptions:
● Other compositions such as acids, complex sugars, metabolites, cellulose and
other suspended solids in the juice broth are considered as inerts, which is
estimated to be 65.5% of the fermentable juice. (Raji et. al., 2012)
● The primary fermentation time is expected to be around 3 to 5 days, where
approximately 70% of the fermentable sugars are converted to ethanol.
(Kraus, 2002)
● Recovery for CO2 formed in the reaction is 95%
● Fruit juice density is 1033 kg/m3
● For every 55 gallons of fermentation juice, around 1 L of inoculating liquid
yeast solution is needed, with a culture density of 1.10 g/mL. (Premium Liquid
Yeast for Commercial Beverage Makers, n.d.)
Figure 26. Alcoholic Fermentation Block Diagram

Table 14. Fermented Juice Composition
39
Table 15. Ethanolic Fermenter Material Balance
*For calculation details, refer to appendix A.1.1

>> insert energy balance, refer to ch4 for more deets
Filtration System:
It is expected that at least 80% of the total biomass in the juice will be filtered and all
free CO2 will be released to the vent. The filtrate fermented juice will then be sent to
the fermenter 2 for the oxidative fermentation.
Assumption:
● 80% filtration efficiency
● 100% of the free CO2 is released
Figure 27. Filtration Block Diagram
Table 16. Filtration Material Balance
>>insert energy balance, ch4
40
Acetic Acid Generation
Once the ethanol has been formed, and fed to the second fermenter, compressed air
is introduced at a rate of 0.434 vvm (volume per minute) (Pham et. al., 1992). The a.
aceti bacteria is inoculated onto the packings in the fermenter to aid in the
conversion. According to Pham et al.(1992), 28% of the ethanol in the juice
evaporates with the exhaust gas. However, a condenser will be added to the system
to recover and recycle the evaporated ethanol.
Assumption:
● Air supplied will be at room temperature (25 °C).
● Ethanol evaporation is 28% at an aeration rate of 0.434 vvm (Pham et al.,
1992)
● 100% recovery of ethanol in the condenser
● Conversion efficiency of ethanol to acetic acid will be at 94.4% (Krusong et
al., 2014).
● No pathogenic bacteria accumulation in packings .
Figure 28. Acetic acid generator (acetator) with Condenser block diagram.
Table 17. Vinegar product composition.
41
Table 18. Acetic acid fermentation material balance.
*For calculation details, please refer to appendix A.1.2

>>insert air compression and energy balance, ch4 for pump power
Overall Material and Energy Balance
In the material balance summary described in Figures 21 to 28, the overall material
balance presented below in Figure 29, has specified the mass flow per annual
production. The mass balance for this process has been identified to help analyze
the energy balance needed in the next part of the section. The material balance is
also helpful in analyzing the profitability of the entire process in general. As the
amount fed can be determined as well as the amount of product made from the
specified feed, total cost and total production sale can be estimated.
42
Figure 29. Quantitative Flow Diagram
Table 19. Overall Material Balance
43
The production process is predicted to generate 1523.05 Mg vinegar solution from
2700 Mg and 1350 Mg of mangoes and pineapples respectively in a year.
Energy Balance
For the production plant for vinegar, the computations for the energy balance includes (1)
operating time for every equipment, (2) the energy requirement, and (3) the heating duty.
The operating time is taken into account because the entire process for the vinegar
production is made in batches. As such, there are some operating times for every batch
process, taken from literature such as:
● For the sterilization of fruit juice to a temperature of 77o C , one minute is the required
holding time of the temperature (Food Preservation, n.d.)
● After sterilization, the minimum cooling process required would take around thirty
(30) minutes (Chobin, 2017)
● The initial fermentation which is the ethanolic fermentation is expected to take place
around 3 to 5 days (Kraus, 2002)
● The acetification of the fermented juice will take as long as 96 hours to complete
(Walkie, 1958)
For Table 20, it summarizes the energy requirement and the operating time required for
every stage involved during the raw material preparation process in the vinegar plant
production, that makes use of electric utility. The total energy requirement is roughly 26058
kWh for the raw material preparation on electrical utility per annum production.
Table 20. Raw Material Preparation Energy Balance summary for Electric Utility
44
Equipment Capacity, Power, kW Operating Annual Usage, Source
kg/hr Time, hrs/yr kWh
(m3/hr)
Washer (W-101) 25000.00 4.00 162.00 648.00 App. A.2
Sorter (EQ-101) 25000.00 5.50 160.38 882.09 App. A.2
Pineapple 4000.00 7.50 668.25 5011.88 App. A.2

Crusher (EQ-
102)
Mango Pulper 3000.00 8.00 445.50 3564.00 App. A.2

(EQ-103)
Pineapple Pulp 20000.00 2.20 39.43 86.74 App. A.2

Presser (EQ-104)
Mixer (M-101) 1994.00 2.40 785.55 1885.31 App. A.2
Pumps (P-101 to (2400.00) 2000.00 7.55 13980.17 App. A.2

P-106)
The heating duty in the sterilizer unit is 6447.98 kW, with a steam requirement of 10284.50
kg per year to heat the fruit juice from 25°C to 77°C. In cooling the fruit juice back to 25°C,
292 Mg per year of cooling water is needed. Summary for this is found on Table 21. In the
calculation for the mass of cold water, the predicted maximum temperature rise in a cooling
water was 30o C taken from (Sinnot & Towler, 2008). The total energy requirement per
annum production for steam and water utilities in raw material production is 999437 kWh.
Table 21. Raw Material Preparation Energy Balance Summary for Water and Steam Utility
Equipment Fruit Juice, C Utility Used Mass Required, Annual

kg/yr Heating
T, in T, out Duty, kW
Cooler (E-101) 77 25 Cooling 10284.50 6447.98

Water
Pasteurizer (E- 25 77 Low 292278.12 6447.98

102) Pressure
Steam
After the fruit juice has been sterilized and cooled down, it is then fed to the first fermentor,
wherein the fermentable sugars in the fruit juice are converted into ethanol. The energy
released for the conversion in an annual production is a negative value of 23618.8 kJ, which
makes the reaction exothermic, and heat is given off during the fermentation. Table 22
summarizes the energy balance for the ethanolic fermentation making use of electric utility.
Table 22. Summary of Energy Balance on Ethanolic Fermentation for Electric Utility
45
(m3/hr)
Filter Press (F- 6000.00 0.37 251.20 92.94 App. A.2

101)
Pumps (P-107) (2400.00) 2000.00 0.56 1123.30 App. A.2
When ethanol is formed, they are stored and introduced to the second fermentor, which is
the acetator, in the generator process. This reaction is also exothermic, as the energy is
negative in value during computation. For the recycling stream of evaporated ethanol,
around 2.81 kg per year of water is needed to condense the evaporated ethanol and back
into the acetator, with a heating duty of 33.92 MW. As the acetic fermentation is exothermic,
the temperature in the reactor may be lessened to around 50o C (Sarbu & Csutak, 2019).
Table 23 is the tabulated data for the water utilities during alcoholic fermentation
Table 23. Summary on Energy Balance for Acetic Acid Fermentation on Water Utility
Equipment Fruit Juice, C Utility Used Mass Required, Annual

kg/yr Heating
T, in T, out Duty, kW
Condenser (E- 50 25 Cooling 19117985.39 421764.00

103) Water
For the compressor energy requirement, compressed air will be supplied around 96 hours
for the acetic acid fermentation (Walkie, 1958). This process will require around 1184.93
kWh of energy in a year. The energy balance summary is shown in Table 24 for the electric
utility in annum production.
Table 24. Summary on Energy Balance for Acetic Acid Fermentation on Electric Utility

(m3/hr)
Air Compressor 394.68 30.00 2013.05 60391.46 App. A.2

(C-101)
Pumps (P-108) (2400.00) 2000.00 0.59 1175.19 App. A.2
46
In predicting the energy requirement for every equipment involved, identifying where to save
energy is made easier, and would aid in creating an energy-efficient process. Excessive use
of energy, mostly electricity, can impact the environment negatively (Environment and Health
in Electricity Generation, 2013). In an industry grouping, food manufacturing is one of the
industries belonging to energy-intensive manufacturing (Industrial Sector Energy
Consumption, 2016). At an average, the energy consumption of a manufacturing facility
would amount to around 95.1 kWh (Manufacturing Facilities, n.d.). As the reactions involved
are exothermic, it takes less energy to complete the process, making the production plant for
vinegar sustainable in terms of energy consumption.
47
CHAPTER 4
PROCESS EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION AND SELECTION
In this chapter, the details, as well as the specifications of the main equipment to be used
during the processes will be outlined in the calculations for the dimensions of the equipment,
as well as the anticipated power requirement. Each calculation shall be based on the
material balance done in Chapter 3, as well as some of the standard heuristic values for
equipment design. The assumptions for the equipment will also be based on some literature.
4.1 Storage Tanks
Based on Figure 18 in Chapter 2, there are around five storage tanks, namely: liquid yeast
tank (TK-101), mango juice tank (TK-103), pineapple juice tank (TK-104), mixed fruit juice
tank (TK-105), and the vinegar tank (TK-106). Storage tanks act as a buffer in between
some of the processing phases as the production plant is a batch process.
In sizing the storage tank, the basis is taken from the material balance, converted to
batches. In the process of designing storage tanks, it’s good to anticipate a 30-day capacity.
As the production process is done by batch, there are 59 expected batches a year, and 6
batches for 30 days.
The batch-amount production for vinegar amounts to 142 Mg, with a density of 1080 kg/m 3.
Projecting it to a 30-day volume capacity, the tank capacity is determined to be 35,000
gallons (132 m3).
142151.33 kg
V liquid = =131.62 m3
kg
1080 3
m
As it falls above 500 gallons in capacity, there is a 10% freeboard space, giving a tank
volume of 39,000 gallons (146 m3). In the heuristics for vessels, the optimum length-
diameter ratio, L/D, is 3.
131.62 m 3 3
V tank = =146.25 m
0.90
π D 2 (3 D)
V tank =
4
π D 2 (3 D)
146.25 m3= ; D=3.96 m (12.99 ft), L=11.88 m (38.98 ft)
4
For the material of construction, the chosen material was aluminium because of its
acceptability with handling ethanol and acetic acid, as seen in Table 10-8 of Timmerhaus.
Additionally, it is a common material used when handling food-grade products (Aluminium in
Packaging, n.d.).
The vessel will be fully radiographed, and a maximum allowable stress of 45,000 psi
(Aluminum 6061-T6; 6061-T651, n.d.). From Coulson, Chapter 18, Table 18.4, the cylindrical
shell thickness is determined to be 0.01 inch. Pressure will also be 14.70 psi. The head type
will be considered as torispherical. This head type is common in cylindrical vessels that
operate up to 15 bar in pressure. (Sinnot & Towler, 2009)
48
As the liquid storage tank has a capacity of more than 10,000 gallons, the tank will be
vertically oriented, and mounted on concrete. Same calculations were done for the other
storage tank for determination of parameters through MS Excel.
4.1.1 Storage Tank Specification Sheet and Diagram
EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION SHEET
EQUIPMENT TK-101 TK-103 TK-104 TK-105 TK-106

NUMBER
EQUIPMENT NAME Liquid Mango Pineapple Mixed Fruit Vinegar

Yeast Juice Juice Juice Storage
Storage Storage Storage Storage Tank
Tank Tank Tank Tank
No. Required 1 1 1 1 1
FUNCTIONS
For TK-101, storing liquid yeast; for TK-103 to 105 for storing the unconverted fruit juice;
TK-106 collection of the produced vinegar solution
ORIENTATION
TK-101 is Vertical on legs; TK-103 to TK-106 are vertical on concrete mounting
Liquid Volume, 191 23911 16132 4006 34771

gallons
Total Volume, 225 26568 17925 4451 38634

gallons
Diameter, m 0.71 3.49 3.07 1.93 3.96
Length, m 2.14 10.48 9.20 5.78 11.88
Liquid depth, m 1.82 9.44 8.28 5.20 10.70
Thickness, mm 0.29 1.43 1.25 0.79 1.62
Shell Type Cylindrical Cylindrical Cylindrical Cylindrical Cylindrical
Head Type Torispherical Torispherical Torispherical Torispherical Torispherical
Material of Aluminum Aluminum Aluminum Aluminum Aluminum

Construction
EQUIPMENT DIAGRAM AND LAYOUT
49
4.2 Agitated Vessels
There are two agitated vessels involved in the vinegar production plant process: (1) Fruit
Juice Mixer (M-101, and (2) the ethanolic fermenter (R-101). The mixer homogenizes the
two separate fruit juices extracted from the rejected fruits, creating a uniform stream to be
fed to the first fermenter. The ethanolic fermenter then mixes the liquid yeast and the mixed
fruit juice to fully ferment the sugars before proceeding to acetification.
The headspace in the tank is determined to be 20% (James, 2015). In the heuristics from
Couper, the stirred tank proportions according to tank diameter, D, are: liquid level height, L=
D; turbine impeller diameter, Dt = D/3; impeller level above tank bottom, H b = D/3; impeller
blade width, bi = D/15; four vertical baffles width, Bi = D/10.
50
For the ethanolic fermenter, the liquid volume is expected to be 25.40 m 3 per batch
production. This gives a tank diameter and height of 2.96 m, with a 20% headspace (James,
2015).
π D 2( 0.8 D)
V liquid =
4
3π D2 (0.8 D)
25.40 m = ; DT= 2.96 m, HT= 3.70 m, HL= 2.96 m
4
For impeller dimensions and design, the type of impeller chosen is a 6-flat blade impeller.
Di=2.96 /3=0.99 m=H ib
Bi=2.96 /10=0.30 m
b i=2.96/15=0.20 m
In designing agitated vessels, the time required to achieve uniformity is important to specify.
Mixing tanks exist to blend two different substances together. Hence knowledge of how long
it will take to mix, in the case of the ethanolic tank, the liquid yeast and the mixed fruit juice is
required to be specified.
In Couper, Chapter 10, the blend time is given from equation 10.6:
−ln(1−U )
t u=
km
The variable km is a dimensionless mixing-rate constant, given in equation 10.7, and U is the
mixing uniformity, which is to be assumed as 99% uniformity in the tank. The variables, a
and b can be found in Table 10.1 for fully turbulent flow regimes, N is the impeller speed in
rps, D/T is the impeller-to-tank diameter ratio, while T/Z is the tank diameter-to-height ratio.
51
b 1 /2
D T
k m=aN ( )( )
T Z
For the impeller speed, in the study of (Nienow, Isailovic and Barrett 2016), the average
impeller speed for 10 m3 of two liquids mixed together is 65 rpm. However, the expected
liquid capacity is much lower than 10 m3, therefore, a scale-up ratio will be used, as found in
Geankoplis:
1 /3
V2
Scale−up ratio= ( ) V1
1 /3
25.40
( ) =0.688
Scale−up ratio=
10
rev 1 min
min ( 60 sec )
N=0.688(65 ) =0.75 rps
To check if the flow is fully turbulent, Reynold’s number will be calculated. The density 1033
kg/m3, with a 1.8 cP viscosity.
2
N D2 ρ 0.32 ( 2.96 ) (1033)
N ℜ= = =3.74 ×106
μ 1.8× 10 −3
As Reynold's number is beyond 10,000, the flow is fully turbulent. Hence the constants a
and b can be taken in Table 10.1.
Plugging in the values, the mixing rate constant, km, is found to be 0.073. Blending time, tu, is
then found to be 63 seconds.
2.17 1 /2
1.06 3.19
k m=1.06 ×0.75 × ( ) ( )
3.19 3.19
=0.065
−ln (1−0.99)
t u= =70.67 seconds
0.065
For the power requirement of the agitated vessel, determining the power number, Np, is
important. For this, Figure 10.6 of Couper will be used. Np is found to be roughly equal to 5.
52
From the Couper formula, the power requirement formula is given, where density, ρ , is in
kg/m3, N is in rps, and D in meters. With an 80% efficiency assumption (Agitator Power,
n.d.), the brake kW of the mixer is 2.35 kW, with a power density of 0.1 kW/m3, which
indicates the agitation is mild. The juice mixer, M-101, had also undergone the same
process of calculation through MS Excel.
P=N p ρ N 3 D❑5i =5× 1033 ×0.753 ×0.995 =1995.71Watts=2.68 HP
2 kW
brake kW = =2.35 kW
0.80
2.35 kW
power density = 3
=0.1 kW /m 3
20.32 m
4.2.1 Agitator Vessel Specification Sheet and Diagram
Equipment Number M-101 R-101
Equipment Name Fruit Juice Mixer Alcoholic Fermenter
No. Required 1 1
FUNCTION
M-101 is to homogenize the separated pineapple and mango juices together;

R-101 is to ferment the mixed fruit juice into ethanol
OPERATION
Type and time, hours Batch Batch, 70
Temperature, C 25 25
53
MATERIALS HANDLED
Fluid Fruit Juice Mixture Fruit Juice Mixture + Liquid

Yeast
Volume Entering, m3 20.21 20.32
Density, kg/m3 1033 1033
Viscosity, cP 1.80 1.80
BASIC DESIGN DATA
Orientation Vertical Vertical
Diameter, m 2.95 2.96
Height, m 3.69 3.70
Baffle width, m 0.30 0.30
Material of Aluminum Aluminum

Construction
Uniformity time, 68.73 70.67

seconds
Power Requirement, 2.150 1.996

kW
Power Density, kW/m3 0.10 0.09
HEAD
Type Torispherical Torispherical
Thickness, mm 7 7
Crown Radius, m 0.18 0.18
IMPELLER
Type Rushton 6-flat Rushton 6-flat
Diameter, m 0.98 0.99
Height from bottom, m 1.23 1.23
54
4.3 Filter Press
After the fermentation in the first fermentor is finished, the product stream with the fermented
fruit juice will be fermented once more to form into vinegar. However, the exit stream from
the ethanolic fermenter also contains yeast and biomass, which will then be filtered out. The
9 m
cake resistance is taken to be 1.4 ×10 , and the filter medium resistance, R m, as
kg
2.10 ×108 m−1(McGuire, 2009). The plate area will also be assumed as 0.84 m2 with a frame
thickness of 0.01 m (Peters, 2003).
In estimating the amount of frames required for the filter press as well as the total area, the
volume of the biomass is taken to be 0.37 m 3, for a filtrate mass flow rate of 19769.87 kg per
batch. This would make the cake thickness to be around 0.44 m, resulting in a total area of
29.26 m2, with 2 filter press frames in total.
m biomass 407.33 kg 3
volume biomass , V c = = =0.37 m
ρbiomass 1112.6 kg /m 3
Vc 0.37 m 3
cake thickness , T c = = =0.44 m
plate area 0.84
55
cake thickness 0.44 m
N , number of frames= = =34
plate thickness 0.01 m
Total Area=(34+1)× 0.84 m2=29.26 m2
In the calculation of the pressure drop in the filters, the filter press is expected to operate at a
constant pressure. Making use of Geankoplis’ equation 14.2-17 as the working equation.
The variable Kp and B and filtration constants in s/m6 and s/m3 respectively. In the
preliminary energy balance, the concentration slurry, cs, is mass of accumulated cake, over
volume filtrate. The volume of filtrate, V, is at 0.21 m3, while the filtrated biomass is 6.25 kg,
giving a cs of 29.85 kg/m3.
Kp 2
t= V + BV
2
However, Kp and B can be expressed as in equations 14.2-14 and 14.2-15 in Geankoplis
respectively, where Rm is 2.10x108 m-1, and α , the specific cake resistance, as 1.4x109 m/kg.
μαcs
K p= 2
A (−Δ P )
μ Rm
B=
A (−Δ P )
Substituting, and rearranging equations 14.2-14 and 14.2-15 to equation 14.2-17. This
results in a pressure drop of 667.77 kPa
m kg
−Δ P=
1
3600 {[ (
2 ( 1.8 Pa s ) 1.4 × 109
❑
❑ ( 29.26 m )
kg)(
17.85 3
2 2
m 3 2
][
) (18.25 m ) ❑ + 1.8 Pa s (2 ×10 m
29.26 m 2
8 −1
)
] }
( 18.25 m3 ) =353.47
As there is no change in velocity, the area is also constant, the kinetic energy term in the
OMEB balance is cancelled out. Friction loss is negligible, and there is no elevation as well.
The power requirement then becomes 0.12 kW, with a work shaft of 616.59 J/kg.
v 22−v 21 ΔP
+ g ( z 2−z 1 ) + + Σ F+W s=0
2α ρ
Δ P 353.47 × 103
−W s❑ = = =326.38 J / kg
ρ 1083
19769.87 kg filtrate
P , power requirement=−W s m=326.38 J /kg × =64.73 W ≈ 0.1 kW
3600 s
4 hour( 1 hr )
4.3.1 Filter Press Specification Sheet and Diagram
56
Equipment number F-101
Equipment name Filter Press
No. required 1
FUNCTION
Filters out the biomass and yeast after the ethanolic fermentation
BASIC DESIGN DATA OPERATION
Orientation Horizontal Type Batch
Filter Area, m2 29.26 Pressure Drop, kPa 353.47
Plate Area, m2 0.84 Operating Temperature, C 25
Frame Thickness, in. 0.50
Number of Frames 35
Power Requirement, kW 0.06
MATERIALS HANDLED
Fluid Type Fermented Juice + Biomass
Density, kg/m3 1083
Viscosity, Pa s 1.80E-03
Volume Capacity, m3 0.22
57
4.4 Heat Exchangers
There are three heat exchangers involved in the vinegar production plant. Each of the heat
exchangers have different purposes. The first two occur during the feed preparation phase of
the plant production, the pasteurizer and the cooler. The third heat exchanger is a
condenser, attached to the packed bed bioreactor, E-103. The goal of this condenser so to
mitigate the evaporation loss of the
Table 26. Design Parameters of the condenser, E-103
PARAMETERS UNIT COLD FLUID HOT FLUID

Cooling Water Ethanol + Air
Inlet Temperature ❑o C 5 50
Outlet Temperature ❑o C 24 25
Density kg/m3 1000 789.00
Heat Capacity kJ 4.18 2.63

kg ⋅❑o C
Viscosity Pa⋅ s 1.095 x 10-3 6.70 x 10-3
Mass Flow Rate kg/hour 141.61 429.94
Thermal Conductivity W 0.592 0.171

m⋅❑o C
The heating duty amount, Q, has been calculated as 74.98 kW. Calculating for the minimum
heating area, the log mean temperature is determined as 16.26o C . However, a correction
factor, FT, of a value 0.84 is applied, giving a true mean temperature of 13.66o C .
T co−T ci 24−5
ΔT lm= = =16.26o C
T Hi−T ci 50−5
ln
( T Hi−T co ) ( ln
50−24 )
For correction factor calculation:
T Hi−T Ho 50−25
R= = =0.76
T co −T ci 24−5
T co −T ci 24−5
S= = =0.56
T Hi−T ci 50−5
Plotting S and R on Figure 12.19 of Sinnot and Towler:
58
Corrected log mean temperature: ΔT m=0.84(16. .26)=13.66o C
For the assumption range of the overall coefficient, Uo,it is taken from (Overall Heat Transfer
Coefficient Table Charts and Equation, n.d.). As it is a condensation process, the overall
heat coefficient should range from about 300-1200 W/m2 C (Overall Heat Transfer
Coefficient Table Charts and Equation, n.d.). The final iteration is set to 504 W/m2 C.
Estimating the required area:
Q 7.50× 104 W
A= = =10.89 m2
U ΔT m W (
504 2 13.66 o C )
m ⋅K
For tube measurements, the common standard tube measurement is 19.05 mm outside
diameter, with an inside diameter of 14.83mm. The length of the tube is set to be 1 m, as
opposed to 3 m. As a condenser, it will be horizontal, with the cooling water in the tubes. The
shell side will contain the exhaust air gas and the evaporated ethanol. For this heat
exchanger, there shall be one pass.
SAtube=π d o L=π ×0.01905 ×1=0.06 m2
A 10.89
¿ of tubes required= = ≈ 182
SA of 1 tube 0.060
There shall be 182 tubes in a single pass. The tube-side cross sectional area is calculated
as 1.73 ×10−4 m2 . The area per pass is 0.03 m 2for a volumetric flow rate of 5.7 ×10−2 m 3 /s .
This gives a tube-side velocity of 1.80 m/s. As the tube-side fluid is cooling water, it falls
within the range of 1.5 to 2.5 m/s.
π π
Tube−side CA = (d i )= ( 0.01483 )2=1.73 ×10−4 m 2
4 4
Area per pass=Tube−sideCA × ¿ of tubes per pass=1.73× 10−4 m2 × 182=0.03 m2
0.057 m 3 / s
Tube−side velocity , ut = =1.80 m/s
0.03m 2
59
For the pitch-type, the selected is triangular pitch. From Table 12.4 of Sinnot, for a 1 tube-
pass, K1 and n1 value of 0.319 and 2.142 respectively. From this, the shell and bundle
diameter, Db, is calculated as 359 mm.
1
182
n1
Db =d o ( N t , ¿ of tubes per pass ¿ ¿ K 1 ) ❑ =19.05 ( 0.319 )❑
1 /2.142
=369 mm
For easy and efficient cleaning of heat exchangers, a split-ring floating head exchanger is
chosen. The shell’s inside bundle-diameter is chosen to be 50 mm, which gives the shell an
inside diameter of 0.41 m.
D s =369+50=419 mm
For determining the tube-side heat transfer coefficient, the heat transfer factor is determined
as 0.0037. This gives a Nusselt number of 175.82, giving a heat transfer coefficient of
3776.87 W/m2 C.
Dv ρ 0.01483(1.80)(1000)
N ℜ= = =2.44 ×10 4
μ 1.095× 10−3
C p μ 4.18 ×103 ( 1.095 ×10−3 )

Pr= = =7.55
k 0.606
L/d i=1/0.01483=67
N Nu= j h N ℜ ( Pr 0.33 )=0.0037 ( 2.44 ×104 )( 7.550.33 )=175.82
k 0.606 W
hi =
di
N Nu =(0.1483 )
(175.82)=3776.87 2 o
m ⋅❑ C
60
For baffle spacing, it is set to 35mm. The pitch is 0.02m. This gives a tube-side heat transfer
area, As, of 0.03 m2, with an equivalent shell diameter of 0.01 m. The volumetric flow rate of
the shell is expected to be 0.01 m3/s, giving a shell-side velocity of 0.85 m/s.
( p t−D o ) D s D b ( 0.02381−0.01905 ) × 0.37 ×0.42 2

A s= = =0.03 m
pt 0.02381
1.10 2 1.10
De = ( p t −0.917 d 2o ) = ( 0.023812−0.917 ( 0.01905 )2) =0.01 m
do 0.01905
0.01 m3
Shell−side velocity ,u s= =0.3 m/ s
0.03 m2
Same as in determining the tube-side heat transfer coefficient, the shell-side heat transfer
factor is first determined as 0.009. This then gives a heat transfer coefficient of 575.76 W/m
C.
Dv ρ 0.014 (0.88)(789)
N ℜ= = =2.86 × 103
μ 0.670 ×10
−3
C p μ 2.63× 103 ( 0.670× 10−3 )

Pr= = =10.30
k 0.171
k 0.171
h o= j h N ℜ ( Pr 0.33 )= (0.009) ( 2.86 ×10 3) ( 10.30 0.33) =703.18 W /m 2 ⋅ C
de 0.014
Fouling factors of 0.00009 and 0.00018 are taken for the evaporated fruit juice mixture and
cooling water respectively. The construction material to be used will be aluminum as it is
61
handling food grade materials, this gives it a thermal conductivity of 205 W/m C (Thermal
Conductivity, n.d.).
do
1 1 1
d o ln ( )
di do 1 d 1 1
0.01905 ln ( 0.01905
0.01483 ) 0.01905
( ) ( ) 0.01483 (
= + + + + o = +0.00009+ + 0.00018+
U o ho h od 2kw d i hid d i h i 703.18 2 ( 205 ) 37
U o =483.37 W /m2 C
As the assumed Uo and the calculated Uo have a difference less than 30% in value, the
iteration can be stopped here. For the other two heat exchangers, the same process is done
through MS Excel sheets.
4.4.1 Heat Exchanger Specification Sheet and Diagram
Equipment Design Specifications
Equipment no. E-101 E-102 E-103
Equipment name Cooler Pasteurizer Condenser
No. required 1 1 1
Function
E-101 is to cool down to pasteurized fruit juice; E-102 is to pasteurize the newly
extracted fruit juice; E-103 is to condense the evaporated ethanol back to the acetator
Basic Design Data
Heat Exchanger Type Shell-and-Tube Shell-and-Tube Shell-and-Tube
Pitch type Triangular Triangular Triangular
Tube Diameter, mm 19.05 19.05 19.05
Shell Diameter, m 0.25 0.46 0.42
Length, m 1.00 0.20 1.00
Overall coefficient, W/ m2 C 687.96 425.28 483.37
Heat Transfer Area, m2 2.53 2.26 10.89
Baffle spacing, mm 45 15 35
No. of Passes 1 1 1
No. of Tubes per pass 44 190 182
Material Handle
Shell-side fluid Fruit Juice Fruit Juice Ethanol + Air
62
Shell-side velocity, m/s 0.3 0.4 0.3
Inlet Temperature, C 77 25 50
Outlet Temperature, C 25 77 25
Shell-side density, kg/m3 1033 1033 789
Thermal Heat Conductivity, 0.592 0.606 0.171

W/m C
Tube-side fluid Cooling Water Steam Cooling Water
Tube-side velocity, m/s 2.13 26.93 1.80
Inlet Temperature, C 5 100 5
Outlet Temperature, C 24 78 24
Tube-side density, kg/m3 1000 0.645 1000
Thermal Heat Conductivity, 0.606 0.0251 0.606

W/m C
4.5 Packed Bed Bioreactor

A packed bed bioreactor is designed to generate acetic acid from the produced fermented
juice in R-101. The design calculation involves the scale-up of the lab-scale generator
(Vasquez et al.) to an industrial-scale generator.
Lab-scale generator dimension ratio:
D 1
=
Z 3
From (Sinnott 2005), recommended sizes ranges for column diameters and packing size
are:
63
The packing size used for the Vachib rings will be 25 mm since it is easily obtained
compared to the lab-scale size of 19 mm (Vasquez et al.); smaller packing sizes increases
the difficulty in harvesting bamboo tubes of the required size.
Therefore,
Z
D= =0.9 m
3
Z=2.7 m
Furthermore, column height, Zc is calculated with 20% headspace. This area would be
allocated for the gas emitted, and the receiving filter for the dead biofilms situated below the
packed bed.
2.7
Z c= =3.4 m
0.80
Calculation for the pump duty:
At the bottom of the acetator, in the holding section, lies a pump responsible for recirculating
the vinegar. Pump duty must therefore be included in the calculations.
Assumption:
1. The pipes are uniform in diameter
2. From Geankoplis (2003), pipe is Schedule 40 with ID of 52.5mm and OD of 60.33mm
64
Schematic Diagram of Pipes in R-102 (Vasquez et al.)
For the inlet feed rate, the mass transfer characteristics around the effective mass transfer
area were accounted for with a lab-scale feed rate that was scaled up. According to Pin
(2014) in the lab-scale and industrial scale generator there is the same concentration
difference of broth and mass transfer rate for both. Inlet rate of the fluid can also be
calculated with the ratio of the generator’s effective mass transfer area, A.
Mass transfer area is simply the product of volume of the packed bed and its effective
interfacial area. Therefore;
A 1 ae1 V 1 L1
= = Equation 51
A 2 ae2 V 2 L2
Where A1, ae, L1, V1 are the effective mass transfer area, effective interfacial area, broth inlet
rate and packed bed volume of the lab-scale generator respectively, and A2 and L2 are that of
the industrial-scale generator.
L1 a e2 V 2 3.83 x 10−5 ( 190 ) ( 2.43 ) m3

L2 = = =3.14 x 10−3
a e1 V 1 260 ( 0.0217 ) s
3.14 x 10−3 m
v= =0.06
0.0525 s
Sudden contraction loss;
65
( 0.06 )2 J
h c =0.55 =9.84 x 10−4
2 kg
Since this is a trickling reactor, flow is laminar and friction in the straight pipe is 0.
Friction loss at 3 90ᵒC elbows;
2 K f v 2 2 ( 0.75 )( 0.06 )2 −3 J
hf= = =4.02 x 10
2 2 kg
Friction loss in the straight pipe
0.0525 ( 0.06 ) ( 997 )

Nre= =29.9 , turbulent
8.9 x 10−4
f =0.01
4 ( 0.01 )( 1.8+ 4+0.8 )

∗ ( 0.06 )2
0.525 J
Ff= =0.01
2 kg
Sudden expansion;
K ex v 2 1.0 ( 0.06 )2 −3 J
h ex = = =1.79 x 10
2 2 kg
Total friction loss and power requirement;
J
ΣF=hc + hf + hex + F f =0.011
kg
v 21−v 22 ΔP
+ g ( z 2−z 1 ) + + ΣF +W S =0
2 ⍴
J
W S=−39.18
kg
−W S=−ηW P
−39.2 65.31 J
W P= =
0.60 kg
kg J
brake kW =
3.13
s( 65.33
kg )
=0.2 kW
1000

EQUIPMENT NUMBER R-102
66
NAME Fermenter 2
NO. REQUIRED 1
FUNCTION
Converts ethanol to acetic acid
OPERATION
Orientation Vertical
Operating Pressure, atm 1
Operating Temperature, ᵒC 29
BASIC DESIGN DATA
Material Aluminum
Fluid Fermented Juice
Diameter, m 0.90
Height, m 3.34
PACKED BED CHARACTERISTICS
Height of bed, m 0.9
Type of Packings Vachib rings
Height of 1 unit packing, mm 25
Length of 1 unit packing, mm 25
Arrangement Random
Geometric surface area per 221
unit, m2/m3
Void fraction 0.67
Equivalent spherical diameter, 0.009
m
FLOW INFORMATION
Gas flow rate, Mg/batch 10.49
Liquid flow rate, Mg/batch 19.89
Pump duty, kW 0.2
67
4.6 Pumps
Based on the PFD (Figure 18), eight pumps will be utilized for this production facility. As this
production plant will mostly deal with liquids, having pumps placed on streams will help the
fluids get transported from one process to another.
Design Calculation
Based on the PFD design of the vinegar production process, P-103 transports the extracted
mango juice from its storage tank (TK-103) to the juice mixer (M-101). Kinematic parameters
are provided below for the calculation of the pump’s power requirement.
Assumptions:
1. Pump classification is a centrifugal pump.

2. Mass flow rate of mango juice: 12350 kg mango juice in 0.598 hours.
3. Pipe material: commercial steel pipe
4. Pipe length is 8 m with an elevation of 1 m.
5. The density of mango juice is 1033 kg/m 3 and viscosity is 0.0018 Pa⋅s (Singh and
Eipeson 2000).
The optimum pipe diameter is calculated using equation (12-15) from the book (Peters,
Timmerhaus and West 2006), for turbulent flow:
D i , opt =0.363 m 0.45

v ρ0.13
where m v =volumetric flow rate∈m 3 /s and ρ=density ∈kg/m 3. The volumetric flow rate of
mango juice is calculated as:
68
12350 kg 1h m3 m3
m v =( )( )( )=0.00556
0.598 h 3600 s 1033 kg s
m 3 0.45 kg 0.13
D i , opt =0.363(0.00556 ) (1033 3 ) =0.0865m ∼¿
s m
Based on Appendix A.5-1 from the book (Geankoplis 2003), the nearest commercial steel
1
pipe standard on the list is Nominal 3 in. Schedule 40, with an inside diameter of 3.548 in
2
or 0.09012 m and has a cross-sectional area of 0.006379 m2. Calculating for the velocity of
the mango juice:
Volumetric Flow Rate

v=
Cross−sectional Areaof Pipe
0.00556 m3 / s m
v= 2
=0.87
0.006379 m s
The overall-mechanical-energy-balance (OMEB) equation is written between points 1

(Mango Juice ST TK-103) and 2 (Mixer M-101):
❑
1 2 2 P −P1
(v 2−v 1)+ g( z 2−z 1 )+ 2 + Σ F+ W S =0
2α ρ
It is assumed that there is negligible movement of the mango juice in the storage tank,
P 2−P1
hence v1 =0. Since the operating pressure for the whole process is constant, =0.
ρ
The OMEB equation becomes:
1 2
(v )+ g (z 2−z 1)+ Σ F +W S=0
2α 2
Calculation for the Reynolds number:
3
Dv ρ (0.09012 m)(0.87 m/s )(1033 kg/m )
ℜ= =
μ 0.0018 Pa ⋅s
ℜ=45042.65 (turbulent); 𝝰 = 1.0
The 𝚺F term for frictional losses includes the following:
1. Contraction loss at tank exit (contraction from large A1 to a small A2).
A2
K c =0.55(1− )=0.55(1−0)=0.55
A1
2. Friction in the straight pipe.
69
Δ L v2
F f =4 f
D❑ 2
where F f =Friction loss∈ pipes , J /kg
f =Fanning friction factor
Δ L=Length of pipe , m
D=Inside diameter , m
v=velocity of the fluid ,m/ s
Calculation for the Fanning friction factor:
For commercial steel pipe from the table in Fig. 2.10-3 (Geankoplis 2003), the
equivalent roughness (𝛜) is 4.6 × 10−5 m. Hence, the relative roughness is
ε 4.6 ×10−5 m
= =0.00051
D 0.09012 m
Using Colebrook’s equation:
1
√❑
1
√❑
ΔL 8m
Solving for f , f =0.00575 . 4 f =4 (0.00575)( )=2.04
D 0.09012m
3. Friction loss through valves and fittings.
The designed piping system involves two 90° elbows, one gate valve, wide open and
one check valve, swing. The number of velocity heads is summarized in the table
below.
Type of Fitting or Valve Frictional Loss, Number of Velocity

Heads, K f
Elbow, 90° (× 2) 2 ×0.75=1.5
Gate valve, wide open 0.17
Check valve, swing 2.0
Total 3.67
70
4. Expansion loss at the mixer entrance (expansion from small A1 to a large A2).
A1 2 2
K ex =(1− ) =(1−0) =1.0
A2
Therefore, the total friction loss is
ΔL v2
Σ F=(4 f + K ex + K c + K f )
D 2α
( 0.87 m/s)2 J
Σ F=(2.04+1.0+ 0.55+3.67) =2.75
2(1.0) kg
Substituting the obtained value for 𝚺F into the OMEB equation and calculate
1 m 2 m J
(0.87 ) +(9.81 2 )(1 m−0)+(2.75 )+W S=0
2(1.0) s s kg
J
Solving for WS, W S=−12.94
kg
Calculating for the brake power of the pump:
12350 kg 1 h kg
Mass flow rate= ( )=5.74
0.598 h 3600 s s
For an efficiency of 75%, the brake kW of the pump (P-102) is
−W S × Mass flow rate

brake kW =
η ×1000
(12.94 J /kg)(5.74 kg/ s)

brake kW =
( 0.75)(1000)
brake kW = 0.099 ~ 0.1 kW
Calculation of the other pump’s power requirement follows the same method of solution
(Geankoplis 2003). Result varies on the pipe length, number of valves and fittings, fluid
dynamics, pressure difference of the suction and discharge vessel, and the pipe elevation.
EQUIPMENT P-101 P-102 P-103 P-104 P-105 P-106 P-107

NO.
POINT 1 Wash TK-104 TK-103 M-101 E-101 F-101 R-102

water Pineapple Mango Mixer Cooler Filter Fermenter
Inlet Juice ST Juice 2
ST
71
POINT 2 W-101 M-101 M-101 TK-105 R-101 R-102 TK-106
Washer Mixer Mixer Mixed Fermenter Fermenter Vinegar
Juice 1 2 ST
ST
NO. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
REQUIRED
FUNCTION
Transports liquid from one equipment to another.
BASIC DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
Volumetric 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Flow Rate,
m3/h
Mass Flow 19400 20660 20660 20660 20660 20660 20400

Rate, kg/h
Operating 4.13 0.40 0.60 1 1 0.96 0.99

Time, h
Head, m 1.71 1.32 1.32 4.24 3.71 4.21 4.26
Density, 970 1033 1033 1033 1033 1033 1020

kg/m3
Viscosity, 0.0008 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018

Pa.s 9
PIPINGS
Length, m 8 8 8 8 4.5 8 10
Elevation, m 1.5 1 1 4 3.5 4 4
Inside 90.12 90.12 90.12 90.12 90.12 90.12 90.12

Diameter,
mm
Area, mm2 6379 6379 6379 6379 6379 6379 6379
Power, kW 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.32 0.28 0.32 0.32
Available 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.34 0.31 0.34 0.34

power
commerciall
y, kW
SUMMARY
72
This preliminary plant design report aims to valorize reject fruit wastes by
transforming it into a useful and profitable product—Vinegar. The rise of the demand
for vinegar causes a need for fast production. The use of a recirculating packed bed
bioreactor (PBBR) for the trickling process of vinegar production is a solution to the
dilemma of producing high-quality vinegar at a fast rate and low cost. However, the
PBBR method has been proven to be susceptible to evaporative loss of ethanol
which possibly lowers the quality of the vinegar product. To solve this problem,
cooling and recycling units are added to the process to address evaporative losses
and recover any possible ethanol that may escape during fermentation.
The designed plant is to produce organic vinegar from reject mangoes and
pineapples. A total of 4050 metric tonnes, of which 2700 Mg are mangoes and 1350
Mg are pineapples, will be used as raw materials annually. The mangoes and
pineapple will be procured from SOCCSKSARGEN, which has an estimated annual
mango and pineapple production of 27 thousand metric tons and 14 thousand metric
tons respectively (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2019).
The main processes involved in vinegar production are ethanol fermentation and
acetic acid fermentation. The alcoholic fermentation stage is the first part of the 2-
step fermentation process. The main process of this stage is the fermentation of the
fruit juice using yeast for a specified time. The fruit juice is pasteurized to kill any
pathogens present to make sure that the product is safe for consumption. Before the
fruit juice is sent to the fermenter, it is cooled so that it will not kill the yeast that is
going to be used for the fermentation. In the alcoholic fermentation process, the
yeast consumes the glucose in the fruit juice and generates ethanol and carbon
dioxide. The fermenter is vented to release the C O 2-rich gas produced in the
process. After the fermentation, the fermented juice will be filtered to recover the
yeast. The juice will then be sent to the oxidative fermentation stage. This is the
second step in the 2-step fermentation process where the product vinegar is
generated. The fermented juice will be stored in a tank before it is sent to the acetic
acid fermentation unit. During the acetic acid fermentation process, acetobacter aceti
(A.aceti) bacteria inoculated in the packings that are placed inside the fermenter
73
consume the ethanol in the juice and generate acetic acid. The fermenter is aerated
to provide the oxygen needed and has a gas outlet for the unreacted air in the
process. The product vinegar will be stored in a tank for quality check before it is
sent for bottling.
To ensure all the equipment are food-grade, Aluminum is used as a material of

construction. The custom-designed equipment utilized in the production process is
heat exchangers, vessels, and reactors. The remaining equipment is proprietary
where their costs were collected from those of the commercial ones. Accordingly, the
designed equipment is fitted to the standard way of costing presented in the
literature.
74
APPENDICES
Appendix A
A.1 CALCULATION IN THE FERMENTATION PROCESS
A.1.1 Calculation for Fermenter 1

Inert Balance:
Total fermentable juice (TFJ) = mass of pineapple juice + mass of mango juice
TFJ = 630.83 + 935.55 = 1566.38 Mg
Total mass inerts in juice = 1566.38 x 0.655 = 1025.98 Mg
Table A1. Fermentable Sugar Balance
Component Mass in Pineapple Mass in Mango Total mass in Fruit

(Mg) (Mg) Juice
(Mg)
Sucrose 25.23 93.56 118.79
Glucose 18.92 7.48 26.40
Fructose 13.88 37.42 51.30
Total mass of fermentable sugars = 118.79 + 26.40+ 51.30 = 196.49 Mg
Water Balance:
Mass water ∈fermentable juice=Mass fruit juice−mass inerts−mass fermentable sugars
Mass water ∈fermentable juice=1566.38 Mg−1025.98 Mg−196.49 Mg=343.91 Mg
Conversion of Sucrose to Glucose:

C 12 H 22 O 11 + H 2 O→ 2C 6 H 12 O 6
Mass Sucrose
Moles sucrose converted= × 0.95
Molar weight sucrose
118.79 Mg
Moles sucrose converted= x 0.95=0.33 M mol
342.3 Mg / Mmol
Mass sucrose converted to glucose = 0.66 Mmol (342.3 Mg/Mmol) = 112.85 Mg
Mass sucrose remaining = 118.79 Mg - 112.55 Mg = 6.24 Mg
Mass water consumed = 0.33 Mmol (18.02) = 5.95 Mg
Mass residual water = 343.90 - 5.95 = 337.95 Mg
75
Mass glucose formed = 0.33 (2)(180.156Mg/Mmol) = 118.90 Mg
Total mass glucose = 26.40 Mg + 118.90 Mg = 145.30 Mg
Conversion of Glucose to Ethanol:

C 6 H 11 OH → 2C 2 H 5 OH + 2C O 2
Mass of glucose∧fructose
Moles glucose converted= × 0.7
Molar weight of glucose
145.30 Mg +51.30 Mg
Moles glucose converted= x 0.70=0.76 Mmol
180.16 Mg / Mmol
Mass glucose converted = 0.76 (180.16) = 137.55 Mg
Mass glucose remaining = 196.5-137.55 = 58.95Mg
Moles EtOH produced = moles CO2 produced = 0.76 (2) = 1.53 Mmol
Mass EtOH produced = 1.53 Mmol (46.07 Mg/Mmol) = 70.35 Mg
Mass CO2 produced = 1.53 Mmol (44.01 Mg/Mmol) = 67.20 Mg
Total mass of unconverted sugars = mass unconverted sucrose + mass unconverted
glucose
Total mass of unconverted sugars = 5.94 Mg + 58.95 Mg = 64.89 Mg
Biomass Balance:
Assumptions:
● At 80 hrs fermentation time, 70% of the fermentable sugars are converted into
ethanol (Kraus, 2002);
● 30% of the unconverted sugar is converted into biomass (Birol et al., 1998)
Unconverted sugar in biomass = 64.89 Mg (0.3) = 19.47 Mg

Residual sugar = 64.89 Mg (0.7) = 45.42 Mg
mass fruit juice
∗volume liq . yeast
Mass of yeast = density of fruit juice
∗density of liquid yeast
volume fruit juice
1.10 kg yeast
∗1 L yeast
1 L yeast
∗1 gal
55 gal . juice
Mass of yeast = ∗1000 L =
3.78 L 3
∗1 m juice
1 m3
∗1566.38 Mg juice
1033 kg juice
8.00 Mg yeast
Monod Parameters of yeast for a 76-h fermentation time (Birol et al., 1998).
76
Max. specific growth rate, μmax Conc. of limiting substrate growth, Ka
0.755 h−1 g
566
dm 3
unconverted sugar ∈biomass

S= ∗density of fruit juice
mass fruit juice
319.47 Mg sugar
∗1033 kg fruit juice
S= 1566.38 Mg fruit juice kg sugar
3
=0.01 3
1 m fruit juice m fruit juice
Monod Equation:
kg sugar
(0.755 h−1)∗(0.01 )
μmax∗S m fruit juice 3
μ= = =0.02 h−1
Ka+ S kg kg sugar
(566 3 +0.01 3 )
m m fruit juice
Cell Population Growth:

−1
N=N 0 e μ t=(8.00 Mg) e(0.02h )(80 h)❑
N=30.55 Mg biomass growth
Evolved Carbon dioxide:

Assumption:
● 5.0 g dissolved carbon dioxide per liter fermented juice (Briggs, 2004)
Total carbon dioxide produced = 67.20 Mg

Mass fermented juice = mass EtOH produced + mass inerts in juice + mass residual water in
juice + mass residual sugars + biomass produced
Mass fermented juice = 70.35 + 1025.98 + 337.96 + 42.34 +30.55 = 1507.18 Mg
L juice
Evolved carbon dioxide = 1507.18 Mg fermented juice ( )
1.033 kg juice
5.0 g dissolved carbon dioxide

( )
1 L juice
Evolved carbon dioxide = 7.30Mg
Free carbon dioxide = 67.20Mg - 7.30Mg = 59.9 Mg
77
A.1.2 Calculation for Fermenter 2
Ethanol to Acetic Acid Stoichiometric Reaction:
C 2 H 5 OH +O 2 → C H 3 COOH + H 2 O
Mass ethanol in fermented juice = 70.35 Mg
(assuming 95% recovery of evaporated ethanol in the condenser)
Mass ethanol evaporated = 70.35 Mg x 0.05 = 3.52 Mg
Mass ethanol remaining =70.35 - 3.52 =66.83 Mg
Mass ethanol converted to acetic acid = 66.83 Mg x 0.944 = 63.09 Mg
Mass residual ethanol = mass ethanol remaining - mass ethanol converted
Mass residual ethanol = 66.83 - 63.09 =3.74 Mg
mass ethanol reacted 63.09 Mg
Mole ethanol consumed = = =1.37Mmoles
molar mass of ethanol 46.07 Mg /Mmol
Moles acetic acid produced = moles ethanol consumed = 1.37 Mmoles
Mass acetic acid produced = 1.37 Mmoles x 60.052 Mg/Mmol = 82.24 Mg
Mass water produced = moles acetic acid produced x MW of water = 24.68 kg
Total water in juice = mass residual water + mass water produced
Total water in juice = 337.96 Mg + 24.68 Mg = 362.64 Mg
Total mass leaving fermenter 2 = mass inerts + residual biomass + residual sugars +
residual ethanol + total water in juice + mass acetic acid produced
Total mass leaving fermenter 2 = 1025.98+ 6.11 + 42.34 + 3.74 + 362.64 + 82.24
Total mass leaving fermenter 2 = 1523.05 Mg
Air Consumption:
Aerationrate=0.434 vvm
Set fermented juice volume=46.35 m 3
m3
Volumetric flow rate of air=46.35 × 0.434=20.12
min
m3 kg kg
Mass flow rate of air=20.12 ×1.15 3 =23.13
min m min
Total operating hours=96 h
kg min
Mass of air supplied per operation=23.13 × 60 ×96 h=133253.46 kg
min 1h
Theoretical oxygen required=mole ethanol consumed=32.36 kmol
Mass oxygen consumed=theoretical oxygen required × molar mass oxygen
kg
¿ 32.36 kmol × 32
kmol
78
¿ 217.45 kg
Mass of gas exitingthe acetator=mass of minimum dry air entering−mass of oxygen consumed
¿ 133253.46 kg−217.45 ( 0.211 ) kg

¿ 132217.98 kg
A.2 ENERGY BALANCE
A.2.1 Calculation for operating time and energy requirement:
For W-101, Washer
Equipment Capacity = 25,000 kg/hour
Power Requirement = 4 kW
tO.T. = 4,050,000 kg x ( 1 / 25,000 kg/hour) = 162 hours
Energy requirement = [162 hours x (3600 s / hour) x 4 kJ/s] / 1000 = 2332.8 MJ
Annual Usage = 162 hours x 4 kW = 648 kWh
For Separator, EQ-101

Power Requirement = 5.5 kW
tO.T. = 4009500 kg x ( 1 / 25,000 kg/hour) = 160.38 hours
Energy requirement = [ 160.38 hours x (3600 s / hour) x 5.5 kJ/s]/1000 = 3175.52 MJ
Annual Usage = 160.38 hours x 5.5 kW = 882.09 kWh
For Pineapple Crusher, EQ-102

Equipment Capacity = 3000 kg/hour
tO.T. = 1336500 kg x ( 1 / 3000 kg/hour) = 445.50 hours
Energy requirement = [445.50 hours x (3600 s / hour) x 8 kJ/s]/1000 = 12830.40 MJ
Annual Usage = 445.50 hours x 8 kW = 3564 kWh
For Mango Pulper, EQ-103

tO.T. = 2673000 x ( 1 / 4000 kg/hour) = 668.25 hours
Energy requirement = [668.25 hours x (3600 s / hour) x 7.5 kJ/s]/1000 = 18042.75 MJ
For Pineapple Pulp Presser, EQ-104

79
tO.T. = 788540 kg x ( 1 / 20,000 kg/hour) = 39.43 hours
Annual usage = 39.43 hours x 2.2 kW = 86.74 kWh
For Juice Mixer, M-101

Annual usage = 785.55 hours x 2.4 kW = 1885.31 kWh
For Filter Press, F-101

For Air Compressor, C-101

Equipment Capacity = 394.68 kg/hour
tO.T. = 749510 kg x ( 1 / 394.68 kg/hour) = 2013.05 hours
Energy requirement = 2013.05 hours x (3600 s / hour) x 7.5 kJ/s = 217409 MJ
Annual Usage = 2013.05 hours x 30 kW = 60391.46 kWh
For Pumps, P-101 to P-108

Equipment Capacity = 2400 m3/hour
Density of fruit juice = 1033 kg/m3
Density of water = 997 kg/m3
Density of wine = 1100 kg/m3
Density of vinegar = 1080 kg/m3
P-101 (Stream 1)
tO.T. = (6075000/997 kg/m3) x ( 1 / 2400 m3/hour) = 2.54 hours
P-102 (Stream 7)
80
tO.T. = (61155000 kg/997 kg/m3) x ( 1 / 2400 m3/hour) = 2.56 hours
P-103 (Stream 28)
P-104 (Stream 30)
P-105 (Stream 31)
P-106 (Stream 13)
P-107 (Stream 19)
P-108 (Stream 32)
Summary of sources for Energy Balance:

Table A.2.1 Electric Utility Source Summary
Equipment Capacity, kg/h Power, kW Source

3
(m /h)
Washer (W-101) 25,000 4 [7]
Separator (EQ-101) 25,000 5.5 [7]
Pineapple Crusher 3,000 8 [8]

(EQ-102)
Mango Pulper (EQ- 4,000 7.5 [9]

103)
Pineapple Pulp 20,000 2.2 [10]

Presser (EQ-104)
Juice Mixer 1994 2.4 [11]
81
(M-101)
Filter Press 6,000 0.37 [12]

(F-101)
Air Compressor (C- 394.68 30 [13]

101)
Pumps (2400) 2000 [15]

(P-101 to P-108)
A.2.2 Calculation for heating duty and steam requirement:
For Sterilizer unit, E-102,

QPineapple = (630830 kg) x (3.77 kJ/kg C) x (77-25) C = 123667913 kJ/hr
QMango = (935550 kg) x (3.55 kJ/kg C) x (77-25) C = 172702530 kJ/hr
QJuice = 123667913 kJ/hr + 172702530 kJ/hr = 296370443 kJ/hr
Energy Requirement =296370443 kJ/hr x (1 hour / 60 min) x (1 min / 60 sec) = 82325.12 kW
For mass steam required in sterilization unit, with water vaporizing at around 100o C , the
latent heat of water from steam tables is 2257.1 kJ/kg:
296370443 kJ
=3731685 kg
Amount of steam = kJ
2257.1
kg
For Cooler unit, E-101,

QPineapple = (630830 kg) x (3.77 kJ/kg C) x (77-25) C = 123667913 kJ/hr
QMango = (935550 kg) x (3.55 kJ/kg C) x (77-25) C = 172702530 kJ/hr
QJuice = 123667913 kJ/hr + 172702530 kJ/hr = 296370443 kJ/hr
Energy Requirement =296370443 kJ/hr x (1 hour / 60 min) x (1 min / 60 sec) = 82325.12 kW
For mass water required in to cool the fruit juice:
296370443 kJ/hr = mcw (4.18 kJ/kg C) (24-5)C
mcw = 131308 kg
For Condenser unit, E-103,

Qethanol = (19700 kg) x (2.63 kJ/kg C) x (50-25) C = 1295144 kJ/hr
Qair = (754210 kg) x (1.005 kJ/kg C) x (50-25) C = 18949526 kJ/hr
Qevaporated EtOH-Air = 1295144 kJ/hr + 18949526 kJ/hr = 20244670 kJ/hr
Energy Requirement = 20244670 kJ/hr x (1 hour / 60 min) x (1 min / 60 sec) = 5623.52 kW
For mass water required in to condense the ethanol:
20244670 kJ/hr = mcw (4.18 kJ/kg C) (24-5)C
mcw = 254906 kg
82
Water Utility Stream Summary Conditions:
Table A.2.1 Steam Utility Conditions for Sterilizer
Equipment Steam Consumption, kg/yr Total Operating Time,

hour/s in a year
Sterilizer 3731685 kg 1.25

(E-102)
Table A.2.2 Water Utility Conditions for Cooling unit and condenser
Equipment Twater, in, C Twater, out, C Total Operating Time, Mass of Water,
hours kg/yr
Cooler 5 24 37.5 131308

(E-101)
Condenser 5 24 7200 254906

(E-103)
A.2.3 Calculation for Δ H R and energy requirement:
For R-101
kJ
Δ H R= [2 × (−277.6 ) ] + [ 2× (−395.5 ) ]−(−1260 ) =−86.20
mol
Energy Requirement = - 86.2 kJ/mol ( 9998.85 mol ) = - 861900.87 kJ
total operating time per year = 72 hours x 75 batches = 5400 hours
For R-102
kJ
Δ H R= [2 × (−285.82 ) ] + [ 2 × (−483.50 ) ]−[ 2 × (−277.6 ) ] =−983.44
mol
Energy Requirement = - 983.44 kJ/mol ( 6795.34 mol ) = - 6682809.17 kJ
total operating time per year = 96 hours x 75 batches = 7200 hours
Vinegar Plant Production Days
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Raw Material Preparation
Acetic Acid Fermentation
Bottling
83
Appendix B. THE ORLEANS METHOD
Common methods in producing vinegar by the 2-step fermentation process includes the
Orleans method, the Generator method and the Submerged method. The Orleans method is
the oldest method and involves fermentation of the fruit juices inside wooden barrels. This
method produces high quality vinegar but takes a long time to finish (Manufacturing
Process.,n.d.).
Practically, both the alcoholic fermentation and oxidative fermentation happens in one
fermenter unit in the Orleans method. However, due to the limitations of the simulation
program such as no option to add operation time for a conversion bioreactor, a separator
reactor unit (CS-014) and recycle stream were added to indicate that the process is repeated
especially for the chemicals involved in the reaction.
Figure B. Orleans method dwsim simulation
In the simulation, the fruit juice and air are mixed together and are sent to the fermenter unit
(R101). The composition of the feed fruit juice used were only glucose and water. Also, since
there were no studies found on mango and pineapple physicochemical property studies that
show the amount of ethanol and acetic acid naturally present in the fruit, then it was
considered that the natural juice does not contain ethanol and acetic acid before
fermentation.
The vapour stream is vented into the atmosphere while the liquid stream goes into the
separator unit (CS-014) to separate the Acetic acid from the unreacted materials. In practice,
the wooden barrel (fermenter) has a hole that serves as both the entrance and exit of
atmospheric air. The acetic acid stream contains acetic acid and water and some evolved
84
carbon dioxide. Using the default 50 recycle iterations, the simulation resulted in 12849.2kg
product. A material and energy balance of the simulation is presented below.
*CS-014 and ESTR-002 are not included
Table B1. Mass balance of the Orleans method DWSIM simulation
Component IN (kg) OUT (kg)
Mango Juice 3768.19
Pineapple juice 10163.30
Aeration (O2 gas) 7406.08
Vapour 8538.69
Product 12849.20
Total 21337.57 21387.89
Unaccounted 50.32
Table B2. Energy balance of the Orleans method DWSIM simulation
Component Energy (kW)
Fermenter R101 (ESTR-003) -3.98 x 107
REFERENCES
(source:https://sci-
hub.do/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229932600_Rheological_properties
_of_Josapine_pineapple_juice_at_different_stages_of_maturity)
(source:https://sci-
hub.do/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229932600_Rheological_properties
_of_Josapine_pineapple_juice_at_different_stages_of_maturity)
[1] https://freshmart.ph/products/datu-puti-white-vinegar-1l
[2] http://www.sra.gov.ph/bioethanol-reference-price/
[3] https://iprice.ph/braggs-apple-cider/
85
[4] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/philippines-overflows-with-millions-of-
mangoes-as-el-nino-take-effect.
[5] https://psa.gov.ph/fruits-crops-bulletin/pineapple
[7] http://en.triowin.com/pre-treatment-machine-15266231561772668.html
[8] https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Pineapple-Machine-Pineapple-Crush-Machine-
Direct_60680612740.html?spm=a2700.7724857.normalList.2.16eef5fbU0s0bS&s=p
[9] http://www.fruit-process.com/product/juice/mango-juice-machine.html?
gclid=CjwKCAiAzNj9BRBDEiwAPsL0d4Qyqk6brOXaaFuaAQgH8GKiquGmlxG7mvFrcm0U
DN3MkFFGVeaZzBoCfHEQAvD_BwE
[10] https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Making-Machine-Pineapple-Pineapple-Juic-
Machine_1600064180079.html?spm=a2700.7724857.normalList.11.a2bdf26f6jsHTm&s=p
[11] https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Industrial-Juice-Mixer-Juicemixer-Industrial-
Juice_62357659850.html?spm=a2700.7735675.normalList.1.3ed6151ePagY51&s=p
[12] https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Juice-Filter-Filtrates-Filter-Press-
Hot_60824033774.html?spm=a2700.7724857.normalList.12.107312679gfGYG&s=p
[13] https://kaishanusa.com/products/rotary-air-compressors/krsp/
[14] https://www.i-wind.com/air-disinfection-purification-machine/?
gclid=Cj0KCQjwt4X8BRCPARIsABmcnOpG5GdDFlbbvuVVRHnDsDoSWa5_Ua66Oi7Ze9a
9yEO4oGimDICASykaAjqVEALw_wcB&fbclid=IwAR1fLGxd1sB9cmFZXzT2KpwN4WbCFuS
cVC5hKFdz3wUIHbfQnHiB2IYr1-s
[15]
http://www.hbgroups.com/En/Product_Show.Asp?
ID=20&gclid=CjwKCAjw_Y_8BRBiEiwA5MCBJqv_GVKucbX6jwOqZGXSprhwx3XxhhhOto
WSrB1u5oPodX5zTqjEIBoCik8QAvD_BwE
Analyzing the Acid in Vinegar. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://chemistry.bd.psu.edu/halmi/chem3vinegars05.pdf
Barona, M. L. (2005). Our Fruit Industry: Where We Stand. BAR Digest Vol. 7 No. 3.
Bartolome, A. P., Ruperez, P., & Fuster, C. (1996). Changes in Soluble sugars of two
pineapple cultivars during frozen storage. Food Chemistry, 163-166.
Belitz, H.-D., Grosch, W., & Schieberle, P. (2008, December). Spices, Salt and Vinegar.
Retrieved from ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Oxidation-of-
ethanol-to-acetic-acid-by-Acetobacter-species-according-to-Rehm-
1980_fig2_225932429
86
Bhat, S. V., Akhtar, R., & Amin, T. (2014). An Overview on the Biological Production
of Vinegar. 146.
Birol, G., Doruker, P., Kardar, B., Onsan, Z., & Ulgen, K. (1998). Mathematical Description of
Ethanol Fermentation Immobilised Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Process
Biochemistry, 711-763.
Cordenunsi, B. e. (2010). Carbohydrate composition of ripe pineapple (cy perola) and

glycemic response in humans. Cienc Tecnol Aliment, 30(1).
De Ley, J., Gillis, M. and Swings, J. (1984) Family VI. Acetobacteriaceae Gillis and
De Ley, 1980. In Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology Vol 1, 9th edn. ed.
Holt, J.G. pp. 267±278. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins Co
Dias, D. R., Schwan, R. F., Freire, E. S., & Serodio, R. D. (2007). Elaboration of a
fruit wine from cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) pulp. International Journal of Food
Science and Technology, 42(3), 319-329.
Environment and Health in Electricity Generation. (2013, November). Retrieved from World
Nuclear Association: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-
the-environment/environment-and-health-in-electricity-generation.aspx
Ethanol Fermentation. (n.d.). Retrieved from European Technology and Innovation

Platform: https://www.etipbioenergy.eu/value-chains/conversion-
technologies/conventional-technologies/ethanol-fermentation#:~:text=Metabolic
%20conversion&text=Common%20processes%20produce%20a%20fermentation,of
%20adapted%20and%20specialized%20yeasts.
Fermentation Timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved from Brew Your Own:
https://byo.com/article/fermentation-time-line/#:~:text=To%20maximize%20the
%20correct%20flavor,for%20three%20to%2010%20days.
Fukuya, M., Takemura, H., Okumura, H., Kawamura, Y., Horinouchi, S., & Beppu, T. (1990).
Cloning of genes responsible for acetic acid resistance in Acetobacter aceti. J
Bacteriol 172, 2096-2104.
Garcia-Garcia, I, Santos-Duenas, IM., Jimenez-Ot, C., Jimenez-Hornero, J.E. andBonilla-

Venceslada, J.L. 2009. Vinegar Engineering. In: Solieri, L., Giudici, P. (Ed.) Vinegars
of the World. 97-120. Italy: Springer-Verlag.
Glucose. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://hyperphysics.phy-

astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Organic/sugar.html
87
Horiuchi, J.-i., Kanno, T., & Kobayashi, M. (1999). New Vinegar Production from Onions.
Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 107-109.
How to Store Dry Yeast. (n.d.). Retrieved from The Daily Meal:
https://www.thedailymeal.com/cook/baking-tips-how-store-dry-yeast
Importance of Yeast for Alcoholic Fermentation. (2013, June 5). Retrieved from
https://www.slideshare.net/jakkaas/importance-of-yeast-for-alcoholic-fermentation-
22488583
Industrial Sector Energy Consumption. (2016). Retrieved from International Energy Outlook:
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/ieo/pdf/industrial.pdf
Kraus, E. (2002). Wine Fermentation. Retrieved from ECKraus:

https://eckraus.com/wine-making- 101/
Krusong, W., & Tantratian, S. (2014). Acetification of rice wine by Acetobacter aceti using
loofa sponge in a low cost reciprocating shaker. Journal of Applied Microbiology,
1348-1357.
Major Fruit Crops quarterly bulletin. (2019, July-September). Retrieved from

Philippine Statistics Authority: https://psa.gov.ph/fruits-crops-bulletin/pineapple
MANGO - Post-harvest and Processing. (n.d.). Retrieved from International Tropical Fruits
Network: https://www.itfnet.org/v1/2016/05/mango-post-harvest-
processing/#:~:text=To%20ensure%20that%20mangoes%20can,pests%20from
%20damaging%20the%20fruits.
Manufacturing Facilities. (n.d.). Retrieved from Business Energy Advisor:

https://esource.bizenergyadvisor.com/article/manufacturing-facilities#:~:text=On
%20average%2C%20manufacturing%20facilities%20use,consumption%20varies
%20widely%20across%20subsectors.
Manufacturing Process. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://aceticacidvinegar.weebly.com/manufacturing-process.html
Mazza, S., & Murooka, Y. (2009). Vinegar through the ages. Italy: Springer-Verlag
Medina, J. D., & Garcia, H. (n.d.). Pineapple Post-harvest Operations. Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Othman, A. H., & J. Siriphanich. (2011). Pineapple (Ananascomosus L. Merr.). Post-
harvest Biology and Technology of Tropical and Subtropical Fruits.
88
Oyetero, A., Adenubi, E., Ogundipe, O., Bankole, B., & Adeyeye, S. (2017).
Production and Quality evaluation of vinegar from mango. Cogent Food and
Agriculture, 3(1).
Peppler, H. J., & Beaman, R. G. (1967). Microbial Technology (1st ed.). Illinois:
Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
Pham, C. B., & Mata, A. B. (1992). Continuous Fermentation of Acetic Acid Production from
Ethanol using cells immobilized in calcium-alginate gel beads. Transactions National
Academy of Science, 207-218.
Philippines | Imports and Exports | World | Vinegar and substitutes for vinegar | Netweight
(kg); Quantity and Value (US$) | 2008 - 2019. (n.d.). Retrieved from Trade Economy:
https://trendeconomy.com/data/h2/Philippines/2209
Pineapple Production and Post Harvest Handling. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.ecofog.gf/giec/doc_num.php?explnum_id=985
Premium Liquid Yeast for Commercial Beverage Makers. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wyeast:
https://wyeastlab.com/pure-liquid-yeast-commercial-winemaking
Raji, Y. O., Mohammed, J., Misau, I., & Y Danjuma, B. (2012). Production of Vinegar
Raspor, P., & Goranovic, D. (2008). Biotechnological Applications of Acetic Acid
Bacteria. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 28:101-124.
Roba, S., Samicho, Z., Abdullah, N., & Nadzirah, K. Z. (2013). Determination of
Sugar Content in Pineapple Waste variety N36. International Food Research Journal,
20(4), 1941-1943.
Roda, A., De Faveri, D. M., Dordoni, R., & Lambri, M. (2014). Vinegar Production
from pineapple wastes-Preliminary saccharification trials. Chemical Engineering
Transactions, 37, 607-612.
Sarbu, I., & Csutak, O. (2019). The Microbiology of Cocoa Fermentation. In Caffeinated and
Cocoa Based Beverages (pp. 423-446). Bucharest, Romania: Faculty of Biology,
Department of Genetics, University of Bucharest.
Sinnot R., Towler G. (2008). Chemical Engineering Design: Principles, Practice and
Economics of Plant and Process Design. Elsevier.
Tan, S. C. (2005, December). Vinegar Fermentation.
89
Tesfaye, W., Morales, M. L., Garcia-Prailla, M. C., & Troncoso, A. M. (2002). Wine
Vinegar: Technology, authenticity and quality evaluation. Trends in Food Science
and Technology, 13:12-21.
Tharanathan, R. N., Yashoda, H. M., & Prabha, T. N. (2006). Mango (Mangifera
Indica L.), the king of fruits - an overview. Food Rev. Int., 22, 95-123.
Vinegar Market: Global Industry Trends, Share, Size, Growth, Opportunity and
Forecast 2020-2025. (n.d.). Retrieved from iMarc:
https://www.imarcgroup.com/vinegar-manufacturing-plant?
fbclid=IwAR3nkSVg_1i0ht1311IK9dKOpyj8V85N_c_zWpbfcL3IGAy1CIBP3QXnrEI
Walkie, L (1958). Rates of Acetic Acid Formation from Ethanol by
AcetobacterSuboxydans.
Yahia, E. M. (2011). Mango (Mangiferaindica L.). Postharvest Biology and
Technology of Tropical and Subtropical Fruits.
90

Group 5 PDR Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Group 5 PDR Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Process Design Report

PROCESS DESIGN FOR THE BATCH PRODUCTION OF ORGANIC VINEGAR

STUDENT NAME: Alec Morissey P. Quizo

STUDENT NAME: Archelle Eloise V. Zambas

SUPERVISOR: Hercules R. Cascon, Ph. D.

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 22 August 2020

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM DEVELOPMENT

MATERIAL AND ENERGY BALANCE

Table 1. Oxidative fermentation profitability assessment.

Figure 1. Global Vinegar Market

Figure 2. Trade Flow of Exports in Philippines 2019

Figure 4. Oxidation of EtOH to Acetic Acid

Figure 5. Block Diagram for Orleans Method

Figure 6. Orleans method of vinegar production.

Figure 8. Submerged fermentation unit

Figure 9. Process Flow Diagram for Generator Process

Figure 10 Generator fermentation unit

Figure 18. Process Flow Diagram.

Figure 1 Global Vinegar Market (retrieved from https://www.imarcgroup.com/vinegar-

1.2.1 DESCRIPTION OF MANUFACTURED PRODUCT

1.2.2 METHODS OF MANUFACTURING

1.2.2.1 The Orleans method

Figure 5 Block Diagram for Orleans MethoD (retrieved from

The Orleans method may be considered as a natural fermentation as it does not

1.2.2.2 The Submerged fermentation method

The submerged process could be done in different systems, namely discontinuous,

1.2.2.3 The Generator process

Figure 10 Generator fermentation unit (retrieved from

1.2.2.4 Other methods of vinegar production

1.2.3 RAW MATERIALS

The mango (mangifera indica) is produced principally in developing countries

Yeast ( Saccharomyces cerevisiae) will be used as a catalyst for the alcoholic

Breaking of sucrose into glucose:

C12H22O11 + H2O + invertase → 2 C6H12O6

C6H12O6 + 2 ADP + 2 Pi + 2 NAD+ → 2 CH3COCOO− + 2 ATP + 2 NADH + 2 H2O + 2

2-step conversion of pyruvate into ethanol

1.)CH3COCOO− + H+ → CH3CHO + CO2

2.)CH3CHO + NADH + H+ → C2H5OH + NAD+

Table 1. Oxidative fermentation profitability assessment.

Mass (kg) Commercial Cost/Sale Price

Value of 78.07 39.00 3044.73 [1]

Value of 46.07 56.05 2582.22 [2]

total sale−total cost (3044.73)−(2582.22)

Alternatively, ethanol can be generated through alcoholic fermentation. The process

Figure 12. Alcoholic Fermentation

The reaction equation states that 0.5kgmol of glucose is required to produce

Figure 13. 2-step fermentation process for vinegar production

Figure 13 can be interpreted as:

To produce 1.0kgmol of vinegar, 1.0kgmol of ethanol and 1.0kgmol of oxygen gas is

Thus, to produce 1.0kgmol of vinegar diluted to 5% acetic acid (1201.04 kg),

Table 2. Production process profitability assessment.

Mass (kg) Commercial Cost/Sale Price

Value of 1201.04 kg 492.43 591428.13 [3]

Value of 45.04 kg 25.00 1126.00 [4]

Value of 45.04 kg 35.00 1576.40 [5]

total sale−total cost (591428.13)−(1126.00 +1576.40)

However, a thorough investigation of the process revealed that the oxidative

Establishing a second profitability assessment of the process using the obtained

Table 3. Second profitability assessment.

Mass (kg) Commercial Cost/Sale Price

Value of 1133.78 492.43 558308.15 [3]

Value of 329.72 25.00 8243.00 [4]

Value of 563.00 35.00 19705.00 [5]