| Chemical, Water and Waste Reduction in the Electroplating Industry | Indonesia | 1993 | Full scale |
MANUFACTURE OF FABRICATED METAL PRODUCTS # 19
Background:
PT. Dharma Polimetal, established in 1989, consists of four divisions, with 199 employees, producing several products including:
| Wheel chairs, mainly exported to the USA and Europe (100,000 unit/year); | |
| Motorcycle components (100,000 pieces/year); | |
| Industrial trolleys and supermarket equipment; and | |
| Metal finishing, to provide electroplating services for nickel chrome plating (270,000 m2/year) and zinc plating (150,000 m2/year). |
The company participated in Cleaner Production Program initiated by Environmental Impact Management Agency BAPEDAL. At the end of 1994, PT. Dharma Polimetal obtained the ISO 9002 certification from Q.A.S. Australia.
Cleaner Production Principle:
Housekeeping; Process modification
Cleaner Production Application:
The cleaner production program at PT. Dharma Polimetal is focused on the electroplating plant. Nickel chrome plating and zinc plating are used to protect metal from corrosion. Process flow diagrams for each process are shown below:
Nickel Chrome Plating Process
Soak Clean --> Rinse--> Acid Pickling--> Rinse -->Permanganate--> Rinse--> Rust Inhibitor-->
Soak Clean-->Rinse-->Anodic Clean 1-->Rinse-->Chatodic Clean--> Rinse-->Anodic Clean 2-->
Rinse-->Acid Dipping-->Rinse-->Semi Bright Nickle-->Bright Nickle-->Drag Out-->Rinse-->
Chrome Plating-->Drag Out-->Rinse-->Hot Rinse-->Drying Oven
Acid Zinc Plating
Soak Clean-->Rinse-->Electroclean 1-->Rinse-->Acid Pickling-->Rinse-->Electroclean 2-->
Rinse-->Acid Dipping-->Rinse-->Acid Zinc Pit-->Drag Out-->Rinse-->Nitric Acid-->
Rinse-->Chromating-->Rinse-->Hot Rinse-->Drying Oven
The cleaner production program at PT. Dharma Polimetal is focused on the electroplating plant. The aim of the cleaner production program was to:
| Reduce chemical usage; | |
| Reduce water consumption; and | |
| Reduce waste generation. |
Following cleaner production measures were initiated:
1. Reducing the Drag Out Volume
Dragout refers to transfer of the product from one chemical bath to another. During this process residual chemicals on the product drip are carried over into the next bath creating contamination problems and reducing the amount of available solution. Slowing the drag out, therefore, reduces the amount carried over into the next bath and results in savings of chemicals and reduction of contamination. These procedures have been implemented.
2. Reducing Rinse Water Velocity
Through setting valves to specific levels and controlling the flow rate of rinse water consumption has been reduced from 6 L/min to 4 L/min.
3. Improvement of the Cascade Rinsing System
After the chemical bath, there is a need for several rinses with fresh water or through a reverse osmosis water system. Using a counter current flow system in the cascade rinsing system allows for reductions in water consumption.
4. Reduce Chlorine Drag-In to the Chrome Bath
A high chlorine concentration in the chrome bath could cause rejection of plated parts (yellow chrome). The high chlorine concentration can be reduced by heating the chrome bath overnight at 80oC, instead of using Erg CO3. This process also reduces the sludge in the chrome bath and extends the lifetime of the solutions.
5. Hot Water Spray Rinse after the Soak Cleaning Process
The product quality is improved by using a hot water spray rinse after the soak cleaning process.
6. Installing Additional Anodes in the Chrome Bath
Production rejects in the form of partial plating of the difficult areas such as T-joints, knees and elbows (low current area) are caused by differences in current distribution throughout the rack. By installing additional anodes such problems can be minimized.
Environmental and Financial Benefits:
Constraints:
None mentioned.
Contacts:
Review Status:
This case study was the result of a BEPADAL cleaner production project and was taken from BEPADAL's booklet, Cleaner Production in Indonesia (see address above). It was edited for the ICPIC diskette in November 1998. It has not undergone a formal technical review by UNEP IE.
Subsequently, in March 1999 the case study underwent a technical review by Dr. Prasad Modak, Environmental Management Centre, Mumbai, India.