Final Design Report:

Plastic Recycling Discriminator

Sina Analoui, Brian Cha, Danielle Fakler, Jeremy Johnson, Tu Uyen Vo
Giles J1
 1

Table of Contents
Table of Contents 1

Executive Summary: 2

Introduction: 2

Design Alternatives: 3

Evaluation of Results: 6

Appendix: 8
 2

Executive Summary
Our project in this class is to create a plastic recycling discriminator that can discriminate
between PVC and PET plastic. From the list of potential ways to detect PVC versus PET plastic,
we decided on UV radiation, a form of “spectrometric sorting” (Maris 1). Our mechanism
consists of an Adafruit light sensor, an Arduino, a LED light, and a black box. The plastic
flakes/shards will be hit with UV light. The light sensor senses the fluorescence from these
plastic flakes, and the Arduino interprets the sensor data and switches on the LED light if PVC is
detected. Our results indicate that our device can adequately detect the difference between PVC,
PET, and mixed pile of plastics. These results shows that UV spectrometry is a viable method for
detecting and sorting PVC from PET. This method can replace the need for manual separation of
PVC from PET, since UV spectrometry can be more efficient and potentially cheaper (Arenas 1).

Introduction
PVC contamination in PET plastics is an environmental issue that complicates the
recycling process. PVC-- even in small concentration-- causes issues in PET recycling. Its low
melting point temperature and chemical composition make it near incompatible with other
commonly used polymers. PVC degrades into hydrochloric acid and chlorine during processing,
making the recycled plastic useless. There are some reasons that PVC weaves its way into PET
recycling: PVC bottles can be confused with PET bottles due to their resemblance, PET bottles
can be made with seals and/or caps the contain PVC, and PVC can be found in the labels on PET
bottles. In addition, high end applications such as top grade polyester fibers require plastics with
low PVC concentrations to be made. Because of this, the following problem statement was
formed: ​PVC contamination in PET recycling must be detected and reduced in order to make the
recycled material reusable.
In order to create a prototype to tackle this problem, some objectives, metrics, and
constraints had to be defined. First and foremost, the prototype must be capable of detecting and
discriminating between pure PVC samples, pure PET samples, and mixed PET and PVC
samples. In order to improve the efficiency of detecting the plastics, the device should be
automated, but for the the purposes of this prototype, the device should integrate into a larger
conveyor belt system that would deal with automation and sorting, making the primary focus of
the prototype detection. The prototype must be able to detect PVC in plastic as large as a
two-liter bottle, but per the client for this project the prototype should focus on only small,
shredded shards of plastic. The prototype must remain relatively inexpensive and not exceed the
budget of $400.00. The prototype should be operator-friendly, not putting the machinist at risk,
and should be able to be operated by only one person.
 3

Design Alternatives
The main function of this product is to discriminate between PVC and PET plastics.
There are many means under which this can be achieved of varying degrees of feasibility. The
means that were considered are as follows: difference in densities/floating, difference in melting
points, x-ray reflection, and luminescence in UV light. Each of these means came with unique
benefits and drawbacks that were selected under the criteria provided. This criteria required the
mean to achieve the function of discriminating between PVC and PET plastics while costing
under 400 dollars, being automated, and being able to be implemented as part of larger machine.
One means involves using the different densities of PVC and PET in a tank of an appropriate
fluid (typically water) to allow PVC containing plastics to float to the top for removal. This
method was discarded because it is difficult to automate with the given budget. Additionally,
having fluids as part of a larger mechanism that does not get wet means that extra means would
need to be taken to contain and dry wet plastics.Another means involves using the difference in
melting points of PVC and PET to discriminate between the two (PVC’s melting point is around
140-160​°​C while PET’s is more around 250-260​ °​C) (Moroni 1) . Although easier to implement
than the floatation method, it is riskier than the other options as it requires an environment that
can withstand at least 160​°​C without damaging other parts of surrounding machinery. Building
this environment would cost more than building a tank or box for the other methods since it has
to be insulated and able to apply and withstand such high heats. The plastics can be also be
discriminated through exposure to x-rays. The chlorine atoms in PVC provide a characteristic
peak on the x-ray spectrum. While this option is faster and safer than those aforementioned, the
cost of the hyperspectral camera required to detect this peak exceeds the budget provided, so this
means was disregarded. The final means considered was UV light detection. When exposed to
UV light, PVC fluoresces much more than PET does. In conjunction with RGB/light sensors,
which are cheap, this mean is the best of those considered.

Basis For Design Selection

Once the UV light method was chosen as our method of detection, we needed to choose
an appropriate sensor and light source to accommodate the plastic metrics. The light source is a
30W blacklight that emits ultraviolet (purple) light from a grid of 3x10 LEDs surrounded by a
metal pyramid shape. This allows for the light to focus on a specific location, namely, in the light
sensors line of sight. The light sensor chosen was the Adafruit TCS34725, which contains a red,
blue, and green light filter over a photodiode. The photodiode converts the amount of light to a
current and then to a voltage that the Arduino can read.
In order to minimize external light, a black box was built to shelter the light sensor with
black flaps at the entrance and exit to allow the plastic material to pass through while keeping
light out. The position of the sensor had to be able to consistently read the same values, which is
 4

why it is positioned directly overhead the passing material at an elevation of about 3 inches. The
sensor is also angled at approximately 20 degrees from the horizontal so that its shadow is not in
the way of the ultraviolet light. The entrance and exit each have a width of 6 inches because a
bigger entrance would require multiple sensors for detection. Using this design, the plastic
detected is at the same spatial distance every time from the sensor which helps to reduce
variability in calibrating.
Calibrating the light sensor involved multiple methods of data collection and analysis. In
order to normalize the data, the ratio of each color component (red, green, blue) was considered
for both the PVC and PET plastic. The collected data used to calibrate the light sensor is
presented in Table 1.
PVC Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 PET Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Red Ratio*
Max 0.2276 0.2262 0.227 0.2267 0.2270 0.2273 0.2278 0.2279 0.2270 0.2278
Min 0.2051 0.2037 0.2051 0.2063 0.2056 0.2089 0.2084 0.2093 0.2083 0.2100
Control 0.2183 0.2189 0.2181 0.2184 0.2187 0.2195 0.2196 0.2186 0.2192 0.2192
Green Ratio*
Max 0.0842 0.0837 0.0843 0.0842 0.0846 0.0916 0.0912 0.0912 0.0903 0.0900
Min 0.0663 0.0659 0.0670 0.0663 0.0663 0.0663 0.0663 0.0662 0.0663 0.0667
Control 0.0727 0.0733 0.0734 0.0721 0.0729 0.0725 0.0722 0.0722 0.0719 0.0723
Blue Ratio*
Max 0.699 0.7036 0.7052 0.7030 0.7009 0.6958 0.7018 0.7076 0.6903 0.6975
Min 0.6585 0.6584 0.6604 0.6585 0.6527 0.6518 0.6566 0.6548 0.6528 0.6567
Control 0.6728 0.6731 0.6734 0.6721 0.6731 0.6712 0.6722 0.6719 0.6705 0.6713
Table 1: RGB Measurements for PVC and PET Passing Under the Light Sensor
*Each color ratio is the fraction of that color intensity out of the entire RGB intensity

Through its chemical properties, PVC reflects higher levels of blue light, while PET
reflects yellowish-green light. This shows in Table 1 where the blue light ratio increases for the
PVC and the red light decreases. The PET shows similar increases in blue (because green is a
mixture of blue and yellow) and also a significant increase in green, where the PVC does not
increase as much. These differences in RGB light ratio can be visualized in Figure 1. Figure 1
shows the measured blue and green light ratio as PVC and PET pass under the light sensor at
varying rates. Each plot contains the data from five independent trial. From these figures, the
Arduino was coded to only turn the LED on where the light ratio for all three colors matched that
of PVC while discriminating against PET. The functional analysis is diagrammed in Figure 2.
 5

(a)

(b)

(c)
 6

(d)
Figure 1: RGB Sensor Reading for (a) Green Emitted from PET (b) Green Emitted from PVC
(c)Blue Emitted from PET (d) Blue Emitted from PVC

Figure 2: Functional Analysis of the PVC Recycling Discriminator

Evaluation of Results
We evaluated our design based on how it accomplished the objectives and metrics. These
objectives included whether the design could distinguish between PVC and PET plastics, be
integrated with a sorting machine, be inexpensive, be aesthetically pleasing, and most
importantly, be safe to operate. To consider our design successful and functional, we had to
 7

achieve these objectives while remaining within our constraints. Our client wanted the design to
work with plastic shards, to be automated within the system it is implemented in, to detect only
PET and PVC plastics, and to remain under a budget of $400. Looking at our design alongside
these objectives and constraints, we can say that our design is successful. For our first objective,
the device needed to be able to distinguish between PET plastics and PVC plastics; this was the
main function for the device. We used a UV light method to achieve this objective, and built a
black box to make it as effective and controlled as possible. By measuring the fluorescence from
the PET versus the PVC plastic, the device can distinguish and signal whether PVC is present.
The black box maintains a dark environment in the testing place, which allows for external light
to have little to no effect on the functionality of the device. The Arduino and RGB sensor are the
driving forces which allow the device to accomplish this objective. We created an Arduino code
that utilized the reflected red, green, and blue light in a ratio with the total light reflected that our
sensor could detect, and used these ratios as a mean of distinguishing between the two plastics.
When PVC is detected from the light levels, we used our code to trigger a red LED, which acts
as an external signal. These means were implemented into our design to detect and display when
PVC was contaminating PET plastics. Most of our work went towards accomplishing this main
objective.
For the second objective, which requires our device to be integrated with a sorting
machine, our design checks this off because it can be paired with a conveyor belt. Our design
was intended to be a step in the further process of separation. If there is a sorting mechanism
somewhere along the conveyor belt, then this qualifies our device for integration with a sorting
machine. Next, we aimed towards making the device inexpensive, while maintaining its effective
functionality. We were able to create a functioning final design while remaining in budget, so
this objective was clearly met. The box is compact and does not require many parts aside from its
apparatus; the UV light, breadboard, arduino, and sensor make up the entirety of the device’s
technical composition. Because it does not require many parts, it does not look clunky or
complicated, but rather is aesthetically pleasing to look at. The simplicity of its design also
contributes to its high safety rating. The UV light is contained within the boundaries of the box,
and any sharp edges have been sanded down to prevent accidental cuts or lacerations.
Because all of the above objectives have been met we can objectively call our design
successful, however, this does not mean that there is no room for improvement. Some limitations
for our design include that it can only detect shards, and cannot work with colored plastics
(non-clear). This restrains our design from being used in a variety of real life scenarios.
Improving upon these two limitations would very clearly boost the functionality and versatility
of the device. If we had more time to continue improving upon our base design, we would most
likely implement more than one of the inexpensive RGB sensors. Placing more sensors along an
axis in the box would allow for more data to work with for distinguishing purposes, and also
would most likely make the design’s accuracy increase. Each sensor in a different location
providing additional light readings for each color would allow for bottles of different shapes to
 8

be measured. A stronger UV light would also make our readings clearer and more accurate. We
acknowledge that our design has its limitations and can definitely be improved upon to optimize
its function and usability. However, the work we accomplished in the cost and time that we did it
in is functional and fulfills its purpose.
The concept and design of the product we built contributes a significant function in our
world. It can prove to be useful in the process of PVC separation from PET, which would
improve the recyclability and resale of clear plastics. The ability to distinguish between PVC and
PET using UV light provides a simple, inexpensive, but demonstrably effective method of
making an impact on the practice of recycling. Because the design is cheap, its use can be more
widespread. And with improvements made to the current design and concept we have, the real
world impact will definitely be apparent and significant.

Appendix
A. Preliminary Sketch of Prototype

Note:​​ The decision was made to not include the glass lense as a way to refocus the UV light, it
was found that placing the RGB light sensor closer to the plastic itself while remaining on an
angle read accurate results.
 9

B. Final Sketch of Prototype

C. Prototype
 10

D. Budget

Item Cost ($)

6W Portable UV LED Bar Light 12.99

Microtivity 400 Breadboard w/ Male-to-Male Wires 3.99

30W YQL UV LED Flood Light 38.99

Elmer’s Foam Board (Black), 16 x 20 In., 3-Pack 15.94

3 1/16” Thick ¾” Tall 4 ft. Long Aluminum Corners 14.46

Premium Grade Gaffer Tape (Black) 21.99

Arduino Uno-R3 24.95

RGB Color Sensor w/ IR filter and White LED 7.95

TOTAL COST 141.26

E. Specification
i. Discriminating PVC from PET
ii. Detecting PVC in a pile of plastic
iii. Is automated

Bibliography
Arenas, A, et al. ​Fluorescence Labeling of Polymers for Automatic Identification in Mixed
Plastic Waste Streams. Thermal and Photochemical Stability.
uest.ntua.gr/cyprus2016/proceedings/pdf/J_Martinez_Urreaga_Arenas_Fluorescense_lab
eling_polymering_automatic_identification.pdf.
Maris, Elizabeth, et al. “Polymer Tracer Detection Systems with UV Fluorescence Spectrometry
to Improve Product Recyclability.” ​HAL,​ hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01202756.
Moroni, Monica, Alessandro Mei, Alessandra Leonardi, Emanuela Lupo, and Floriana La Marca.
"PET and PVC Separation with Hyperspectral Imagery." (n.d.): n. pag. Abstract. (n.d.): n.
pag. Print.