Document J3wRqXq0Q30MVNbeLZ6vGZDJO

S, B. Bullltt-Wilm. D-70X6 J. D. McBurney-Wilm. D-7012 P, B, Evans-Lab. / G, P. Graves-Wilnu D-7014 S, C, Horn! Lab. J. W, Iliff W. 0, Jewett-Lab. G. E. Lewis-Lab. Russell Morgan-Lab. D, M. Staloopoulos-Lab. (3) Marshall Laboratory HGf fog C^MAHOH July 2, 1951 MEMORAHDOM REPORT NO. M-363 ' POLYMER K BASE - MANUFACTURING COSTS Re: P, t Staicopoulos letter 5/24/51 to G. E. Lewis 1 have made a high spot estimate of the cost of manufac turing at Philadelphia a Polymer K suspension of the following com position; Polymer K Toluene H-555 Total lOOiOOO Ibs./yr 400.000 tt Cost estimates have been mad for three production scales ranging from 100,000-300,000 ibs./yr, Polymer K content. Mill cost plus 25$ net return (50$ Federal tax and 7.9$ A.O.E.) varies from |3,05 to $2.40/lb, Polymer IC at 100,000 and 300,000 Ibs./yr, (total Polymer K) production scales respectively. A summary of the results of the estimate is given on'the following pages N35426 p HI A <M uA P 3 43 *4 4 * <n ON Oi IS to g* a ' ' 43 HI; H >OXt\ H *si vW\*Hq | a o HV On A ot O 4- c\t 43 Hi| SP H i ,0k <0| Wl IP .3 fl O *ri fH *AJi H .0 3 *laS; o o o<* sO oCM o o o*t A C\i A UJ! 3j Si s; o1 6-4 I Si H Cft +3 &k 3 4 h: 33 : Hi H u5| r > flj *4 o Hi Hi Hj H| Mj Ml < i 33 O Jsi H : $ &k] </3 P -<i *5 O Sri o s&S Et, 3 03 Pi $ & 5H fig uS3 l H). SiOOk C0| Hi CO, 4p X) HH H H a! g3 c a a 03 <0 CVi \ A H CO 43] H i i.3s hokj it O ;s o , o#* o o oft CM o H is HH v Q3)i t* o o } A-f, oan OH 4 <0 CO no CM tO H P H H 0 3 as Xcv IS tt Q o OA NO H CM > O O o ft* P A CM SSkC43I Xs. asa*t pc;, S3 HO J,ki 43 i OS 3B oOHo H Hi 43 O 3o 6 k a o o* OP **H O O H 1 ON 4 A N> *s PO 0 XJ o $k 3 5* 5p <H 8o CM O Oft xo ON oft H P 0 x0>sfk a* o o OP H o oo AO Otv s '41 NO*v wH O *=s ON o>* S T3 M9 C3 ik 50 X S 43 43 3 Sk *4 x> -o .fe) <0 &4 :f4 NO O 4- A vO d iC3 $-r! ua 43 43 Jk fk to w po fcb & A -A A nOi 4- n0 A t> %1 PP <4 Sk PP c a 'A "A CUNN) CANi M. it * <troi HA. O CM c'!s-s OS DUP030003256 DUP030003257 The. attached graph shows the manner in which return on investment varies with production level at certain assumed values of lain cost plus Y$ return per pound Polymer K content. The steep slope of the curves demonstrates the natural disadvantages accruing from low capacity outputs. In the appendix are given* Process Plow Diagram * assumed process Table II Unit Cost Analysis ; *, Table III Equipment List and Total Direct Plant investment Table IV Capital Cost Summary We recommends 1. Process development aimed at flushing Polymer K into a single solvent and avoiding the use of two solvents such as both toluene and butanol, 2. Determination of maximum permissible sodium chloride residue in Polymer A, which should dictate the necessary scop of experimental work on leaching out the chloride with water. Thus, it may prove possible to eliminate the W & F mixer here assumed necessary for leaching. A. 3. Investigation to determine if nickel sulfate may be substituted for nickelous chloride. If satisfactory, this would reduce nickel salt cost per pound of Polymer K about 15$. The equipment in this estimate was designed for one~shift operation because of the low production scale ass;mod Smaller equipment required for the same production in thrVe shifts would not represent substantially smaller investment because we would have arrived at the point of rapidly Increasing Unit Investments due to small equipment size. For this reason, one"Shift operation was chosen, but operating the equipment of this (istlmafce on a threeshift basis would triple productive capacity, Si\ch operation would change production of the smallest plant from 100,000 Ibs./yr, Poly mer K to 300,000 Ibs./yr, The mill cost plus 25$ net return on investment would become $2,14/113. instead of f3.0L/lb, lot included in this estimate is the appreciable sum of money that may prove necessary for research and process development, MARSHALL LABORATORY OBC: aig 8/29/51 GEORGE B, 0.1 AHE DUP030003258 DUP030003259 APPENDIX A unit cost breakdown Is given In Table II for the three production levels considered in this estimate. Return on invest ment is given for the "arbitrary" tax rate set by the treasurer and for the Company*s "forecast effective overall" tax rate. Table III gives an equipment cost summary and derivation of direct plant investment (new money) for a plant (design basis) of 100,000 lbs./yr. Polymer ft (dry basis) capacity. Table IV is a capital cost summary showing allocation of investments and derivation of working capital for the 100,000 lbs./ yr. Polymer ft plant, PROCESS DESCRIPTION The assumed process is based on the writer's observation of some laboratory preparations with material balance indicated by D. N. Staicopoulos. Refer to the process flow diagram, 1, A suitable amount of nickelous chloride solution Is mad up in the Monel flush vessel which la provided with a removable two-speed turbine-type agitator. Caustic solution is added, leaving a slight excess of nickelous chloride. The mixture is agitated at the low speed. Some H-555 Is added with high speed agitation, and the mix thickens somewhat. The function of the H-555 Is to place orgaaophilic groups around the Polymer K to enable the latter to be flushed into toluene. Toluene is added and the high-speed agitator employed to flush the Polymer ft into the toluene. For this, considerable shearing action seems necessary, which this type agitation usually provides. The Polymer ft and toluene will form a pasty mass which is very hydrophobic. Should distribution to the agitator prove difficult, high and low speed stirring may be alternated, and the agitator may be moved up and down. , The separated water is drained out thru a large valve in the bottom of the flush vessel. The vessel cover is removable and the Polymer ft-toluene mass is manually poked out thru the bottom onto a traveling belt. 2. A suitable traveling belt (which may be covered) con veys the Polymer ft paste a short distance to a f & f type sigma mixer. S. The function of the mixer is to knead the Polymer ft-toluene paste with water to leach out sodium chloride. Water is decanted by tilting the mixer. The process is short and may be repeated as many times as required for adequate salt removal, 4, The Polymer K-toluen paste Is manually removed from the mixer and put into the sludge suspender where it Is mixed up with toluene to form a suspension containing a little water. DUP030003260 -2- Though not assumed In this estimatet it may prove desirable to add some butanol as a defineculating agent. This would increase the fluidity by breaking up the gel structure while maintaining the desired degree of suspension. However, as pointed out in the recom mendations, it will be desirable from a process (and cost) stand-, point to avoid use of this solvent if possible, 5, The water is. removed by distilling overhead with toluene where it separates as a layer. Forced circulation is employed in the ealandria and drying of Polymer K and/or fouling of the ealandria tubes is minimized by maintaining a back pressure in the tubes so that flashing occurs only in the free vessel space and not in the tubes. This back pressure is a matter of design and can be obtained by a suitable nozzle restriction on the ealandria outlet as shown. The evaporator contents are boiled down to the toluene concentration desired in the products when i-t only remains to pump the product out thru a suitable cooler into drums for storage, ASSUMPTION AND GOST BASES 1, An adjusted Construction Cost Index of 600 was assumed. 2. The following material prices were used: NiClp.HHoO Toluene H-555 50$ Caustic #0.35/lb.' 0.0497/lb. 0.4973/lb. 2.75/100 lbs. 3. A five-day week* one-shift day was assumed, with the following labor rates; Operator Helper . Laborer $2.00/br. 1.67 1.54 4,. Polymer K was assumed to be N1 (OH )2l/4HgO. The fol lowing losses were assumed: , N:LClp,6HoO Toluene 0.5# 5,0 Materi&l balance was according to reference letter with 110 c.c, of H-555 substituted for 65 c.c,' 5. There Is an existing W & P type mixer, 50-gallon capacity in the "Dulux" Dept., bldg, 176, It is idle most of the time. We have assumed reinstallation and use of this mixer in another location. 6, Us of existing building and storage space has been assumed. Building //75 investment has been prorated by floor area to arrive at approximate building investment, allocation. DUP030003261 7, We have assumed that the product will he used as a raw material within the Finishes Division, and none sold outside. 8* Semi-detailed design was made for capacity of 100,000 lbs./yr. Polymer X. Investments at other capacities were arrived at by factoring. OBC:aig 7/2/51 DUP030003262 TABLE! It MIT COST ANALYSIS POLYMER It AT PHILADELPHIA 18.2# SUSPENSION IN TOLUENE AMD H-555 BASIS: ifLB. POLYMER % Production level * lbs, Polymer K/yr. MClg.SHoO 2.41 lbs./lb. at 35.00^/lb, Toluene 4.18 " " 4,97$/lb. B-555 .487 " 49,73^/lbo 50# caustic 1.60 w u 2,75^/lb. Total Materials Utilities Labor Salaries Maintenance materials labor Overheadsd Taxes * Insurance Depreciation Process control Mil Cost 25$ net return on total plant investment 19 n " n working capital Mill cost plus 25$ net return 25$ net return on total plant investment " " " " working capital Mill cost plus 25$ net return 100,000 84,4$/lb, 20.8 24 2 4.4 133.8 0.6 9.24 3.4 4.1 4.3 3.4 10.3 8.6 15.0 192,74 92,8 19,2 305 ^/lb. 130.8 27.2 351 {^/lb. 200,000 84.4#/lb, 20.S 24,2 4.4 133,8 0.45 4,75 1.75 3.1 . 3.25 2.0 7.8 6.5 7.5 171 70,2 17.8 259 $/lb. 99.0 85.2 295 $/lb. 300,000 84.4^/lb 20.8 24.2 4.4 133,8 0.37 3.16 1,17 2,64 2.76 2.36 6,6 5.5 5.0 163.5 59.7 17.3 240 $/lb 84.4 24.4 272 4/lb * 25$ net return: 54.5$ gross return incl, 50$ Fed. tax and, 7.9$ A.O.E, " " n 76,6$. " 64.6$ " * " GBCsaig 7/3/51 DUP030003263 TABLE XII EQUIPMENT LIST AND TOTAL DIRECT PLANT INVKSTMBM? CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX s* 600 POLYMER K AT PHILADELPHIA 100.000 LBS, POLYMER K/gR, AS 18.2/ SUSPENSION IN H-47 & B-555 Caustic mix tank. 350 gal, stl, ' stress reMe ved, SIS entering agitator Pumpout pump "Y^-I/eSrAH^F,t/:w^Up3-shp^e-e4Uglt-us^r-b^in4e00asgailt-a. tomronel, Freight Installation Belt conveyor 20* long with side leaves 24'wide ' Relnstallation of existing 50-gal. W & P typemixer'* Mix tank Polymer K-toluene 250 gala, S/S clad pumpout pump S/S side entering agitator, S/S propeller Water evaporator 500 gal, ^"S/Sciad entrainment separator, baffle & nozzles . reboiler S/S tubes 40 sq. ft. circulation pump S/S overhead condenser, 51 sq, ft. Brown flntube toluene-water decanter 50 gal,, S/S Product bottoms cooler 51 sq. l",ft,' lSr<>wn firitubo S/S Drum stacker (storage) Total apparatus & equipment Instrumentation Piping Outside lines Elec, installations 8% 40/ 5/ 8/ A &it it it E Sub-total plant Installed Cost * # 900 800 1,200 4,000 150 500 2,000 2,500 1,400 1,800 1,000 8,700 1,300 3,100 1,600 500 800 600 5.000 #37,850 3,000 15,000 1,900 3,000 #60,750 -2- Field distributives Engineering Undeveloped design 25$ STP 20$ " 40$ " Total Direct Plant Investment + unless otherwise noted mixer itself under existing equipt, (q.v0) GBC;alg 7/2/51 #15,150 12,100 24.000 #112,000 DUP030003265 TABLE IV CAPITAL COST SUMMARY POLYMER K AT PHILADELPHIA 100.000 LBS,Aft, AS POLYMER g I. Plant investment Direct Plant Existing facilities used directly Allocated facilities-process building storage n " tankage electrical service Permanent investment Working capital Raw materials 1.1 mo. Cash 1.5 mo. (mill cost - depree.) Total working capital Total Investment #112,000 19,584 15,400 1,000 1,500 600 21.000 #171,000 12,500 23.000 #35,300 #206,300 GBC:alg 7/2/51 DUP030003266