Effects of water hardness (CaCl2 addition) on performance of papermaking additives for fine-particle
Source abstract
Abstract
Water hardness, which can be defined as the concentration of calcium and magnesium ions, is known to vary greatly depending on geographical locations. Laboratory tests were carried out to evaluate effects of large differences in water hardness on the performance of certain wet-end additives to the paper machine process. Tests were carried out at hardness levels of 25, 125, and 225 ppm (as calcium carbonate equivalents). Increased water hardness was found to have a generally negative effect on the performance of a cationic acrylamide- type retention aid, although the extent of performance loss depended on experimental details. Likewise, rates of dewatering in systems containing cationic retention aid were adversely affected by increasing hardness, though the effects were not statistically significant in all cases considered. The tendency of bridge-forming flocculants (cationic retention aid or sequential addition of a cationic additive and then anionic retention aid) fell slightly with increasing water hardness.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Coagulation and Flocculation Studies · Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Minerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (28)
Show source-provided references
1. Manivasakam, N., Industrial Water Analysis Handbook, Chemical Publishing Company, New York, 2011.
2. “Map of water hardness in the United States,” United States Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, VA, USA, 1975. Available [Online] https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/map-water-hard-ness-united-states <20Oct2025>.10.2172/60063 ↗
3. Hudak, P.F., Environ. Monitor. Assess. 68(2): 177(2001).,https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010760413010.10.1023/A:1010760413010 ↗
4. Paul, J.D., J. Hydrol. 548: 448(2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.03.030.10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.03.030 ↗
5. Takahashi, Y. and Imaizumi, Y., Jpn. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 34(5): 475(1988). https://doi.org/10.1248/jhs1956.34.475.10.1248/jhs1956.34.475 ↗
6. Osorio, V.K.L., Oliveira, W.C., El Seoud, O.A., et al., J. Chem. Educ. 82(2): 257(2005). https://doi.org/10.1021/ed082p257.10.1021/ed082p257 ↗
7. Drozd, J.C. and Desai, D.D., J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 68(1): 59(1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02660312.10.1007/BF02660312 ↗
8. Soontravanich, S., Lopez, H.E., et al., J. Surfactants Deterg. 13(4): 367(2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11743-010-1208-5.10.1007/s11743-010-1208-5 ↗
9. Itsadanont, S., Scamehorn, J.F., Soontravanich, S., et al., J. Surfactants Deterg. 17(5): 849(2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11743-013-1544-3.10.1007/s11743-013-1544-3 ↗
10. Hubbe, M.A., Szlek, D.B., and Vera, R.E., BioResources 17(4): 7167(2022). https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.17.4.Hubbe.10.15376/biores.17.4.hubbe ↗
11. Hilal, N., Al-Zoubi, H., Darwish, N.A., et al., Desalination 170(3): 281(2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.01.007.10.1016/j.desal.2004.01.007 ↗
12. Guo, H., Li, X.H., Yang, W.L., et al., Front. Chem. Sci. Eng. 16(5): 681(2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-021-2103-5.10.1007/s11705-021-2103-5 ↗
13. Pizzi, N.G., Water Treatment, 4th edn., American Water Works Association, Denver, CO, USA, 2010, Ch. 12, pp. 327-342.
14. Falkenberg, W., Wenderoth, E., and Kleemann, S., Wochenbl. Papierfabr. 123(23-24): 1104(1995).10.2134/jeq1995.2461104x ↗
15. Shaikh, S.M.R., Nasser, M.S., Magzoub, M., et al., Appl. Clay Sci. 158: 46(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2018.03.017.10.1016/j.clay.2018.03.017 ↗
16. Borgogna, M., Skjåk-Bræk, G., Paoletti, S., et al., J. Phys. Chem. B 117(24): 7277(2013). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp4030766.10.1021/jp4030766 ↗
17. Huang, Y.C., Fowkes, F.M., Lloyd, T.B., et al., Langmuir 7(8):1742(1991). https://doi.org/10.1021/la00056a028.10.1021/la00056a028 ↗
18. Moulin, P. and Roques, H., J. Colloid Interface Sci. 261(1): 115(2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9797(03)00057-2.10.1016/S0021-9797(03)00057-2 ↗
19. Keavney, J.J. and Kulick, R.J., “Internal sizing,” in Pulp and Paper Chemical Technnology (J.P. Casey, Ed.), 3rd edn., Vol. III, Wiley-Interscience Publishing, New York, 1981, pp. 1547-1592.
20. Ohno, K., Isogai, A., and Onabe, F., J. Wood Sci. 45(6): 481(1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00538957.10.1007/bf00538957 ↗
21. Pruszynski, P., Xu, L.B., and Hart, P.W., TAPPI J. 22(6): 423(2023). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ22.6.423.10.32964/TJ22.6.423 ↗
22. Hubbe, M.A., Sjöstrand, B., Lestelius, M., et al., BioResources 19(3): 6859(2024). https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.19.3.Hubbe.10.15376/biores.19.3.hubbe ↗
23. Gilbert, C.D. and Hsieh, J. S., “The impact of whitewater clo-sure on papermaking,” TAPPI Joint Engineering and Papermakers Superconference, Poster Session, Student SP-4, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, 1997.
24. Goodwin, K.D., Zhang, D., Gillespie, N.J., et al., TAPPI J. 24(10): 493(2025). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ24.10.493.10.32964/TJ24.10.493 ↗
25. Leib, B.D., Garland, L.J., Barrios, N.A., et al., TAPPI J. 21(10):572(2022). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ21.10.572.10.32964/TJ21.10.572 ↗
26. Hamm, K.V., Kozel, D.J., Jones, L.A., et al., TAPPI J. 23(9):477(2024). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ23.9.477.10.32964/TJ23.9.477 ↗
27. Salas, C., Hubbe, M., and Rojas, O.J., “Nanocellulose applications in papermaking,” in Production of Materials from Sustainable Biomass Resources (Z. Fang, R.L. Smith, Jr., and X.-F. Tian, Eds.), Biofuels and Biorefineries Series 9, Springer, New York, 2019, Chapter 3, pp. 61-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3768-0_3.10.1007/978-981-13-3768-0_3 ↗
28. Litavecz, M.S., Putney, S., Seidel, I.J., et al., TAPPI J. 23(5):237(2024). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ23.5.237.10.32964/TJ23.5.237 ↗