journal article·2026-05-31

Prediction of residual calcium carbonate (CaCO3) in the lime kiln of a kraft pulp mill

T. Resende Costa, C.C. Araüjo Perreira, G. Matheaus De Almeida, M. Cardoso, F. Alobaid, E. Vakkilainen

TAPPI Journal· Volume 25· Issue 5
Publisher page

Abstract

In a kraft pulp mill, the rotary lime kiln is responsible for converting calcium carbonate (CaCO3) into calcium oxide (CaO) to be reused in the causticizing plant. An important parameter of the calcination efficiency and the product quality is the amount of CaCO3 not converted to CaO, commonly defined as residual carbonate. This parameter is usually determined through laboratory analysis, which introduces delays in process control and limits the ability to make timely operational adjustments. This work presents a predictive model that functions as a soft sensor for the residual carbonate in a lime kiln of a Brazilian kraft pulp mill. This model was able to estimate residual CaCO3 every 30 min using routinely measured online process variables, which is a considerable reduction from the 6-h average laboratory measurement. The correlation coefficient (r) between the model predictions and the mill values was 0.83, with a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.33%. Considering the effect of the residence time throughout the lime kiln proved to be decisive in obtaining a satisfactory prediction result. After model validation, a variable importance analysis showed that the carbon monoxide (CO) concentration in the stack flue gas (in ppm), secondary air temperature (in oC), and fan speed (in %) were the most influential variables in predicting the residual carbonate content. Combined with commonly used operation expertise, this subset of variables can serve as additional information to achieve smoother lime kiln operation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Calcium Carbonate Crystallization and Inhibition · Metal Extraction and Bioleaching · Industrial Technology and Control Systems

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. 1. Järvensivu, M., Saari, K., and Jämsä-Jounela, S.-L., Control Eng. Pract. 9(6): 589(2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-0661(01)00017-X. DOI: 10.1016/S0967-0661(01)00017-X10.1016/S0967-0661(01)00017-X ↗
2. 2. Charos, G.N. and Arkun, Y., Tappi J. 74(2): 203(1991). DOI: 10.1097/00000542-199101000-0004510.1097/00000542-199101000-00045 ↗
3. 3. Lipiäinen, S., Kuparinen, K., Sermyagina, E., et al., Sustainable Prod. Consumption 29: 421(2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.10.029. DOI: 10.1016/j.spc.2021.10.02910.1016/j.spc.2021.10.029 ↗
4. 4. Tran, H., TAPPI Kraft Recovery Operations Course, TAPPI Press, Atlanta, 2008.
5. 5. Wu, R., Carrejo, E., Reza, M.S., et al., Fuel 373: 132372(2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.132372. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2024.13237210.1016/j.fuel.2024.132372 ↗
6. 6. Ribeiro, B., “Prediction of the lime availability on an industrial kiln by neural networks,” Int. Jt. Conf. Neural Networks, Proc., IEEE World Congr. Comput. Intell., IEEE, New York, 1998, p. 1987. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.1998.687164. DOI: 10.1109/IJCNN.1998.68716410.1109/IJCNN.1998.687164 ↗
7. 7. Tran, H., Vollicks, S., Gauthier, M., et al., TAPPI J. 6(4) : 9(2007). DOI: 10.32964/TJ6.4.910.32964/TJ6.4.9 ↗
8. 8. Oikonomou, D., Leontaris, L., Dimitriou, N., et al., IEEE Sens. J. 25(4): 7681(2025). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2025.3526362. DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2025.352636210.1109/JSEN.2025.3526362 ↗
9. 9. Belisário, A.B., Edberg, A., Björk, M., et al., TAPPI J. 22(3):162(2023). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ22.3.162. DOI: 10.32964/TJ22.3.16210.32964/TJ22.3.162 ↗
10. 10. Suárez, V.M.G., García-Gonzalo, E., Bayón, R.M., et al., Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 100: 1549(2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2773-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-018-2773-410.1007/s00170-018-2773-4 ↗
11. 11. Lianhua, H., Xinping, L., Wei, T., et al., “The application of fuzzy control in pulp washing process,” ICMTMA 2011, IEEE, New York, 2011, p. 686. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMTMA.2011.743. DOI: 10.1109/ICMTMA.2011.74310.1109/ICMTMA.2011.743 ↗
12. 12. Shan, W.J., Liu, B., and Tang, W., J. Korea TAPPI 54(4): 57(2022). https://doi.org/10.7584/JKTAPPI.2022.08.54.4.57. DOI: 10.7584/JKTAPPI.2022.08.54.4.5710.7584/JKTAPPI.2022.08.54.4.57 ↗
13. 13. Karlström, A., Hill, J., and Johansson, L., BioResources 19(1): 1030(2024). https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.19.1.1030-1057. DOI: 10.15376/biores.19.1.1030-105710.15376/biores.19.1.1030-1057 ↗
14. 14. He, Z., Qian, J., Li, J., et al., J. Cleaner Prod. 372: 133803(2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133803. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13380310.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133803 ↗
15. 15. Guzzo, G.S., “Prediction of calcination efficiency based on lime kiln input variables in a pulp mill,” Annu. Pulp Pap. Congr., 57th, ABTCP, São Paulo, 2025.
16. 16. Borges, A.S., Luiz, A.C., Medeiros, C.C.R.M., et al., “Lime kiln opti-mization using Aspen DMC3 advanced control: energy consumption reduction and process stabilization,” Annu. Pulp Pap. Congr., 57th, ABTCP, São Paulo, 2025.
17. 17. Liu, F.T., Ting, K.M., and Zhou, Z.H., “Isolation forest,” IEEE Int. Conf. Data Min., 8th, IEEE, New York, 2008, p. 413. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2008.17 DOI: 10.1109/ICDM.2008.1710.1109/ICDM.2008.17 ↗
18. 18. Savitzky, A. and Golay, M.J.E., Anal. Chem. 36(8): 1627(1964). https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60214a047. DOI: 10.1021/ac60214a04710.1021/ac60214a047 ↗
19. 19. Russell, S.J. and Norvig, P., Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 4th edn., Pearson, London, 2022.
20. 20. Scikit-learn developer, “Inspection,” in Scikit-Learn 1.7.2 Documentation,” scikit-learn.org, 2025, Chap. 5. Available [Online] https://scikit-learn.org/stable/inspection.html <08May2025>.
21. 21. Berg, E., Hermansson, S., Wetterling, J., et al., TAPPI J. 23(6): 315(2024). https://doi.org/10.32964/TJ23.6.315. DOI: 10.32964/TJ23.6.31510.32964/TJ23.6.315 ↗
22. 22. Liu, X., Hong, J., Zhang, M., et al., Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 40(1): 149(2025). https://doi.org/10.1515/npprj-2024-0066. DOI: 10.1515/npprj-2024-006610.1515/npprj-2024-0066 ↗
23. 23. Rodrigues, J.A., Farinha, J.T., Mendes, M., et al., Energies 15(17): 6308(2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/en15176308. DOI: 10.3390/en1517630810.3390/en15176308 ↗
24. 24. Fernández, J.R., Turrado, S., and Abanades, J.C., React. Chem. Eng. 4: 2129(2019). https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RE00361D. DOI: 10.1039/C9RE00361D10.1039/C9RE00361D ↗
25. 25. Cui, Y., Yu, C., Shi, D., et al., Appl. Therm. Eng. 235: 121299(2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.121299. DOI: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.12129910.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.121299 ↗
26. 26. Teguh, N.H., Yuliati, L., Siswanto, E., et al., Data Brief 52: 109931(2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109931. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2023.10993110.1016/j.dib.2023.109931 ↗
27. 27. Lee, H.J., Park, J., and Lee, S.H., Mater. Trans. 58(9): 1322(2017). https://doi.org/10.2320/matertrans.M2017148. DOI: 10.2320/matertrans.M201714810.2320/matertrans.M2017148 ↗
28. 28. Ryan, J., Bussmann, M., and DeMartini, N., Processes 10(8): 1516(2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10081516. DOI: 10.3390/pr1008151610.3390/pr10081516 ↗