United States Office of Air Quality Planning EPA-340/1-82-007
Environmental Protection and Standards June 1982
Agency Washington DC 20460 ^-r-,^ ,
TJCfc?- IK 551
Stationary Source Compliance Series
o-EPA Portland Cement
Plant
Inspection Guide
-------
EPA-340/1 -82-007
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide
by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
Contract No. 68-01-6310
Task No. 35
EPA Project Officer: Joseph Gearo, Jr.
for
Office of Air, Noise and Radiation
Stationary Source Compliance Division
Washington, D.C. 20460
June 1982 y 5 Environmental Protection Ageno, r
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12th Flqor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., in fulfillment
of Contract No. 68-01-6310, Task No. 35. The contents are as
received from the contractor. The opinions, findings, and
conclusions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily
those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of
company, process, or product name is not to be considered as an
endorsement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
11
-------
CONTENTS
Figures
Tables
Acknowledgment
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose and scope 1
1.2 Industry overview 2
2. General Preparatory and Inspection Procedures 3
2.1 File review 3
2.2 Plant entry procedures and pre-inspection
interview 5
2.3 Exterior plant observations 9
2.4 Safety precautions 12
2.5 Inspection equipment 12
3. Process Description and Sources of Atmospheric
Emissions 14
3.1 Simplified chemical and physical description
of cement formation 14
3.2 Feed preparation 15
3.3 Clinker production 22
3.4 Clinker cooling 27
3.5 Finish grinding and air separation 30
3.6 Final product storage, packaging and loading 30
4. Atmospheric Emission Control Systems 31
4.1 Electrostatic precipitators 31
4.2 Fabric filters 38
4.3 Cyclone separators 41
4.4 Gravel-bed filters 46
4.5 Containment and dust suppression practices 50
111
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
5. Plant Operating Conditions and Compliance Determi-
nation
5.1 Proper operating conditions and emission prob-
lems due to process malfunctions and upsets
5.2 Startup and shutdown problems
5.3 Compliance determination and emission calcula-
tions
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
New Source Performance Standards for
Portland Cement
1981 Directory of Portland Cement Manu-
facturing Plants
Sample Forms
Method 9—Visible Emission Evaluation
Description of Atmospheric Emission
Control Systems
Appendix F A Portland Cement Inspection Report
Page
55
55
63
64
72
A-l
B-l
C-l
D-l
E-l
F-l
IV
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Sample Form for Information About Previous 4
Abatement Activities
2 Sample Form for Information on Process 6
3 Sample Form for Information on Control Equipment 7
4 Sample Visible Emission Evaluation Form 11
5 Schematic Diagram of Portland Cement Process 16
Flow
6 Types of Primary Crushing Equipment 17
7 Secondary Crusher of the Hammermill Design 19
8 Ball and Rod Mills Used for Fine Grinding 21
9 Rotary Kiln With Attached Planetary Clinker 23
Cooler
10 Two Variations of Hanging Chains as a Means of 24
Heat Exchange in the Kiln
11 Methods of Returning Collected Material to the 28
Kiln
12 Types of Clinker Coolers 29
13 Example of ESP Electrical Data Checklist for a 37
Portland Cement Kiln
14 Representative Arrangement of Gravel-Bed Filter 47
Modules
15 Portland Cement Plant Inspection Checklist 57
16 Particulate Emission Estimate From Portland 67
Cement Kiln Including Comparison to AP-42
Emission Factor
v
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Application of Emission Control Devices to 32
Portland Cement Processes
2 Detection and Solution of ESP Operating Problems 34
3 Application of Fabric Filters in the Portland 39
Cement Industry
4 Fabric Filter Malfunctions and Remedies 42
5 Cyclone Separator Malfunctions and Remedies 45
6 Dust Suppression Practices 52
7 Quantification of Fugitive Emissions From 54
Portland Cement Manufacturing
8 Summary of Inspection Points 56
9 Summary of Compliance Determination Methods for 66
Various Processes
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This inspection guide was prepared by PEDCo Environmental,
Inc., for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Division of
Stationary Source Enforcement. Mr. John R. Busik was the
Project Officer, and Mr. Joseph R. Gearo, Jr., was the Task
Manager.
Mr. Thomas C. Ponder, Jr., was PEDCo's Project Director,
and Mr. Richard Gerstle was the Project Manager. Principal
author of the guide was Mr. Douglas J. Orf. Additional tech-
nical support was provided by Mr. Donald J. Loudin and Ronald L.
Hawks.
vn
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This guide has been prepared to assist state and local
regulatory personnel in the inspection of portland cement plants
to determine whether they are in compliance with atmospheric
emission regulations. Unless otherwise indicated, atmospheric
emissions shall refer to total suspended particulate matter and
visible emissions. When plants are suspected of being out of
compliance, the guide will assist in determining reasons for
violation, which should help the plant to locate problem areas.
Offering specific process-related recommendations should be
avoided, however, so that neither the agency nor the inspector
personally can be held responsible for problems that could arise
from following these recommendations.
This guide describes each of the processes associated with
the manufacture of portland cement, the types of equipment used
to control emissions from the processes, and associated operating
and maintenance problems, and it provides procedures for in-
specting the various processes to determine compliance. Because
each jurisdiction has its own specific emission requirements,
regulations other than the Federal New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) for Portland Cement Plants (Appendix A) have
not been included in this guide. The inspector must become
familiar with the regulations appropriate to the plant and
specific sources prior to an inspection.
Portland Cement Plant 1 Introduction
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
1.2 INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
The primary process in portland cement manufacturing is the
calcining or sintering of carefully ground and mixed raw mate-
rials in an inclined rotary kiln fired by fossil fuel. The raw
materials are clay, sand, iron ore, limestone shale, feldspar,
etc., which contain calcium carbonate, silica, alumina, ferric
oxide, etc. Five types of portland cement are manufactured in
the United States. Each type differs in the composition of the
raw materials and the production methods.
0 Type I is used for general concrete construction when
the special properties of the other four types are not
required.
° Type II is used in general concrete construction ex-
posed to moderate sulfate action or where moderate
heat of hydration is required.
0 Type III is used when high early strength is required.
0 Type IV is used when a low heat of hydration is re-
quired.
0 Type V is used when high sulfate resistance is re-
quired.
Chemical reactions that occur during calcining result in
the formation of a clinker. Pulverizing these clinkers with
gypsum yields a powder called portland cement. Mixed with
water, portland cement forms a slowly hardening paste; when sand
and gravel are added to the mixture, it becomes concrete.
Approximately 1.6 tons of raw materials are required to produce
1 ton of cement. On the average, about 35 percent (0.6 ton) of
2
raw material weight is removed as carbon dioxide and water.
In 1980, a total of 89.6 million tons of portland cement
were produced by 156 plants in the United States. The States
of California, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New York, and Texas
accounted for 43 percent of this production; Puerto Rico and 34
other states produced the remaining 57 percent. Appendix B
lists portland cement manufacturing plants in the United States
according to ownership.
Portland Cement Plant 2 Introduction
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
SECTION 2
GENERAL PREPARATORY AND INSPECTION PROCEDURES
The compliance status of a plant sometimes can be determined
by visible emission observations. Frequently, however, com-
pliance determination requires detailed information concerning
the operation and maintenance of the process and abatement
equipment. Because the inspector is responsible for obtaining
this information, this guide presents a procedure for accomplish-
ing this task. In some cases, a definite conclusion on compli-
ance may require a source emission test, and the inspector must
have sufficient reason to recommend such a test.
2.1 FILE REVIEW
Before conducting an inspection, the inspector should
thoroughly review the pertinent files at the regulatory agency to
acquire the necessary regulatory information and to become
familiar with the types of process and pollution control equip-
ment used at the cement plant being inspected. Being prepared
before entering the plant saves valuable time for both the in-
spector and plant personnel. Also by reviewing the files, the
inspector becomes aware of information gaps and the inspection
provides a means of updating and completing the files. By being
informed about the source, the inspector also creates a favorable
impression of being knowledgeable and interested; such an im-
pression makes plant personnel more inclined to be helpful in
providing information.
Figure 1 is an example of a completed checklist of spe-
cific information concerning previous abatement activities that
the inspector should obtain from the files. Process and control
Portland Cement Plant 3 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
PRE-INSPECTION ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST
Name of company: A fd ft la. flit
Address: P/W/5W ; f/W 1/S.-1
Responsible person: JTahn
m - - -
Previous Inspection:
Date: rtt>r)«l«Y ,
F1 ndinos: Mii» y-> t/f. 'cA»Xtr
Process rate: /fc 70 tons
fttr vef j. -
s/day Kiln 0?:
F Gas flow
Gas temperature" 100 ^F Gas flow rate: l^^aoo acfm
Emission control equipment parameters: K///J £^P • SO A V /<./-<.' & a >**
c-linXer ccc/er fF'£p-•»./?- f>-,O, LfjshfrH>,AA fi^al'er ff ,'&f; -vm. Ht O—
Stack Test:
Testing company: PiACo
Date of test: yt!r.h
. _ . _ . - . -
Results (obtain copy 1f possible): cofy ohhunt'tJ _
Visible emissions observations: ftiifi- '.r* lo % ftvefag* /aa//^ ~u 3 9a
Compliance status: A/ fas/ie 'am € _ _^__
Action taken:
_ _ _____
Process rate: JA3r £&p :+' ^ F-*, - J/j-^/
Visible Emission Observations (other than above):
Date: 3.-J-8/a-*( 7-Jt)-g/
Average readings: }'*-gl -te ). -** -x///> ?,v^'fcWr/y r)-
Complaints:
Dates, nature, and findings: V-ff' PLatf fr&nplarf
'
.. • a*',i tit -a -
H-/3-ZI P!un>f. frw f>Ja,i} ~&ay& ifj F.F. on tJinKtr- o^/er
Malfunctions:
Dates, nature, duration, and action taken: £S/"f FF et-oi/errts, c/'/ hr& Ma action taX.*r\
Compliance Schedule:
Figure 1. Sample form for information about previous
abatement activities.
Portland Cement Plant 4 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
equipment information (described in later sections) also should
be obtained at this time and recorded as seen in Figures 2 and
3. These checklists can be duplicated and used to obtain in-
formation during the inspection. Appendix C includes blank
forms for this purpose. The comparison of past information,
particularly data recorded during stack testing and other
inspections, with information obtained during the current
inspection can be helpful. The previous information should
indicate a normal range of operating conditions for the process
and abatement equipment, so that deviations from these are
readily apparent. For example, excess visible emissions in
conjunction with a lower than previously recorded pressure drop
across a fabric filter would indicate broken or missing bags.
2.2 PLANT ENTRY PROCEDURES AND PRE-INSPECTION INTERVIEW
If the agency policy is to advise the plant of an upcoming
inspection, the inspector should give the plant ample notice.
For some plants that may be only a day's notice, whereas for
others, it may be a week or more. Advance notice to key plant
personnel can help the inspection to progress smoothly because
it allows these individuals to plan their schedules so they are
available to answer questions and take part in the inspection.
When arriving at the plant, the inspector should have
proper agency identification. Often this will include a photo-
graph and physical description of the inspector. Also, the
inspector should have the name of the official plant contact.
It is also important that the inspector bring proper pro-
tective equipment for the inspection, including hard hat, safety
glasses with side shields, steel-toed safety shoes, dust mask, a
long-sleeved-shirt, trousers, and ear plugs.
The inspector should describe the scope of the inspection
to the official plant contact. This will include the purpose of
the inspection, a listing of the processes to be observed, and
the approximate duration of the inspection.
Portland Cement Plant 5 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
CHECKLIST FOR PROCESS DATA
Kiln:
Dimensions:
Chains:
Process:
Slurry:
13.
Ye
wet
Feed rate )9O
Type cement produced:
Dry solids S3.V tons/h
Fuel:
Type:
No
Dry
gal/min Moisture
% Carbonate 73.
Quality:
/o Ib/h Source *
Flue gas:
Volume /?0j6i?e> acfm
°F
(,& tons/h
Temperature
% oxygen 3
V7.T
Clinker Cooler:
Type: osc/.'/nf'»^ grate
Flue gasi Q
Volume _ J
Temperature
3SQ
Clinker cooling rate
Finishing Mill:
Number: £
Volume handled by each:
Type: baH art rod
acfm
CF
tons/h
tons/h
Flue gas:
Vol ume
Temperature
rj^.^a? acfm
sco- °F
Crusher
Number: hl'tl-S"
Volume handled by each:
Type: gyraiory
tons/h
Flue gas
Volume h3oo
r r^'/ il
acfm
Temperature
Figure 2. Sample form for information on process.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Preparatory and
Inspection Procedures
-------
CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL
Kiln:
Fabric filter: Yes ' No
Cloth
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator: */ Yes
Total plate area 63,3*8
Wire length 3S~.<)6O
Specific collection area 'sis'. 9
Collection efficiency 97. 1
Precleaner: Type rvul+iplt cychut
Description & Uf,if-, f jy-/,,. «//fl«ek
Clinker Cooler:
Fabric filter:
Area ^?33 ft*
Air-to-cloth ratio g-. ,
Pressure drop 7. P
Collection efficiency 9?.?
ft*
acfm/ft2
in. H20
%
No
~ Ft?
ft
ft*/
1000 acfm
r
tM/S
acfm/
ft2
in. H20
5!
^ No
ft
ft2/
1000 acfm
in. H20
%
3 acfm/
ft*
in. H20
%
EQUIPMENT
Fields (f
Chambers S
Superficial velocity 1
Number T/R sets /P
Water rate
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
7" Pulse jet
Reverse air
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity
Number T/R sets
Water rate
Type of bag cleaning:
i/" Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air
s.J~ ft/s
gal/min
ft/s
gal/min
Figure 3. Sample form for information on control equipment.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Preparatory and
Inspection Procedures
-------
The plant official may request the following: the authority
for conducting the inspection, the organizational arrangement of
the agency represented, and the method for handling confidential
material. The inspector should be able to provide a satisfactory
answer to all of these questions. (In announced inspections,
this information is sometimes requested at the time the inspec-
tion is scheduled.)
The inspector should ask the plant official if there are
currently any malfunctions or unusual operating conditions at the
plant, their nature, and expected duration. Based upon the
severity and duration of any malfunction or operating condition,
the inspector should decide whether to postpone the inspection
until such time as conditions are normal.
The inspector should tell the plant official what type of
equipment (described in Section 2.5) will be used to obtain
measurements during the inspection and indicate that plant-spe-
cific Union rules (where applicable) will be honored. If nec-
essary, plant personnel can be instructed in the use of the
equipment.
If possible, the inspector should obtain a plot plan of the
facility so that, with the assistance of the plant official, a
methodical inspection itinerary can be developed.
Occasionally, the plant official may request the inspector
to sign forms waiving legal rights resulting from an accident or
restricting access to certain areas of the plant. The inspector
should immediately notify the agency supervisor and let the
supervisor describe the agency policy to the plant officials and
explain the reasons why the inspector should not sign the forms.
The inspector should advise the plant that a report will be
written describing the findings of the inspection. Depending on
the policy of the agency, a copy of the report may or may not be
provided to the plant. The inspector should not make any com-
ments concerning compliance status during the inspection.
Portland Cement Plant 8 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
If refused entry to the plant either when scheduling an
inspection or during an unannounced inspection, the inspector
should obtain a reason and the name of the person authorizing the
refusal. No attempt should be made to identify the legal ramifi-
cations of the refusal. The inspector should simply notify the
regulatory agency supervisor so that appropriate action can be
taken.
2.3 EXTERIOR PLANT OBSERVATIONS
Before entering plant property or while moving from one
process operation to another, the inspector can gain considerable
information by viewing the exterior of the plant. Sources of
fugitive dust which should be observed are raw material storage
piles, heavy equipment movement on plant property, and transfer
points for the material being moved from one process to the next.
The inspector should also note the weather conditions (especially
precipitation and windspeed) during and prior to the inspection.
Evidence of excessive cement dust in the area surrounding the
plant may indicate an emission problem. The inspector should
look for dust accumulation on parked automobiles, houses, side-
walks, etc. Some dust in the area is natural because of the
materials and processes involved. Odors resulting from the
combustion of fossil fuels and raw materials may also be detected
in the area of the kiln and should be noted if excessive.
These activities also provide an opportunity to observe the
general housekeeping practices of the plant and give the in-
spector an overall picture of the plant layout for comparison
with information obtained from the files. The inspector also can
get an idea of the level of activity by observing the raw mate-
rial and product loading operations, plant traffic, and equipment
in operation.
While off plant property, the inspector can normally use a
camera to photograph excessive visible emissions or fugitive
dust; however, some state laws prohibit the use of a camera
Portland Cement Plant 9 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
without the prior permission of the plant. Data regarding any
photographs taken (e.g., date, time of day, weather conditions,
position relative to the source) must be recorded immediately.
In all cases, permission to take photographs within must be
obtained from plant officials.
Visible emission observations are important in determining
the operating conditions of processes and associated control
equipment. When observing opacity from stacks, the inspector
should follow the procedures of Federal EPA Method 9 (Appendix
D). Windspeed, sky condition, and other weather data are im-
portant because the reading may be challenged in court. Also
important is a diagram identifying the particular source being
read (e.g., the Nordberg hammermill for secondary crushing) and
the observer's position in relation to the sun and the source.
A sample visible emission observation form is shown in Figure 4.
The inspector should record opacity readings on the obser-
vation form for a specified duration, depending upon the local
requirements. Although the regulation may specify a plume
opacity below a certain average for say a 6-minute period, the
inspector may want to take the reading for a longer period, say
30 minutes, and look for a 6-minute period that exceeds the
limit.
Opacity readings are usually obtained most easily before
entering the plant for the inspection or after leaving plant
property. The inspector should compare the recorded opacities
for a source with values obtained by the plant's continuous
emission monitoring equipment (if available) for that source
during the same time period. The frequency of calibration of
these instruments should also be checked.
If the agency's policy is to provide the plant with a copy
of the opacity readings, the plant official receiving the copy
should sign and date the original.
Portland Cement Plant 10 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
(PAIR '01
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION FORM
•OUftCE NAME
ADDRESS
STATE ZIP
PHONE
^
SOURCE ID NUMBER
OBSERVATION X X
DATE >T -X'
OBSIRVER'SNAME (PRINT)
ORGANIZATION
T^
CERTIFIEOBY
^^ VL^ \.
^^-"^ BUN SHADOW LINE ^^^
PROCESS
OPERATING MODE
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
OPERATING MODE
ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
DISTANCE TO
f MISSION POINT
EMISSION POINT HEIGHT
RELATIVE TO OBSERVER
DIRECTION TO
EMISSION POINT
DESCRIBE EMISSIONS
COLOR OF EMISSIONS
WATER VAPOR PRESENT
NO O VSS Q
CONTINUOUS D FUGITIVE C
INTERMITTENT D
IF YES. is PLUME
ATTACHED DETACHED
D D
COLOR OF BACKGROUND
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
SKY CONDITIONS
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
;
tMISSI
OBSERVER'S SIGNATURE DATE X x
START TIME
0 IB 10 45
1
2
3
4
5
6
a
9
10
1 1
1}
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
73
24
26
28
29
30
AVERAGE OPACITY
c
ATE f J
• TOP TIME
0 IB JO 48
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
36
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
49
SO
52
S3
54
66
58
G9
60
NUMBER OF READINGS ABOVE
kM/FRF
RANGE OF OPACITY
DRAW NORTH ARROW
ON PT. ^*-~ -^
1 HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THESE OPACITY OBSERVATIONS.
Figure 4. Sample visible emission evaluation form.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
11
Preparatory and
Inspection Procedures
-------
2.4 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
Although the use of proper protective equipment should
provide some degree of safety, the inspector should be aware of
the routine hazards inherent in cement plants and the following
precautions should be observed:
0 Do not touch the moving parts of any of the process
equipment.
0 Do not touch the kiln, clinker cooler, or associated
equipment; they are extremely hot.
0 Do not enter roped-off areas of the plant.
0 Do not start up a ladder until the person immediately
ahead has reached a landing.
0 Do not lean on platform guardrails; they may not be
secure.
0 Be mindful of footing at all times; there could be
obstacles.
0 Be alert; there may be moving vehicles in the area,
temporary platforms, and danger from falling objects.
0 Be aware of and obey warning signs.
0 Be aware of specific safety features governing each
type of control equipment; always let plant personnel
open doors, etc.
0 Discuss any special safety precautions peculiar to this
plant with plant personnel.
2.5 INSPECTION EQUIPMENT
The equipment used during an inspection varies according to
the time allotted and the complexity of the inspection. For
example, a detailed inspection involving several days at the
plant could require the following: a pitot tube to measure the
gas stream flows, a manometer for measuring the pressure drop
across control equipment, a thermometer for measuring stack gas
temperatures, a tachometer for measuring fan speed, an ammeter
Portland Cement Plant 12 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
for measuring fan motor current, an oxygen meter for concentra-
tion of the kiln gases, and a flashlight for observing unlighted
areas inside the control equipment. For a less detailed and
shorter inspection, the inspector may only need a camera, a
compass, and the proper protective equipment. Readings obtained
from plant instruments (e.g., oxygen monitors on the kiln,
thermocouples indicating temperatures of stack gases) should be
recorded, however.
If permitted on plant property, a camera provides a useful
tool, not only to illustrate excessive opacity levels, but also
to describe problems arising from corrosion, poor housekeeping,
missing bags or motors for the control equipment, proximity of
sources to each other, etc. Immediately after taking a photo-
graph, the inspector should write descriptions of the situation
represented in each photograph and the time, date, weather con-
ditions, and directional information.
A compass is useful in determining directions of sources
relative to each other, to the sun, and to the inspector.
The volume of heavy equipment and raw material movement
makes portland cement plants dusty and noisy by nature. Use of
the proper protective equipment is important for the safety of
the inspector. A dust mask and safety glasses with side shields
are required in the dusty environment. A long-sleeved shirt and
trousers provide some protection against hot materials. Steel-
toed shoes and a hard hat are required to protect against over-
head hazards and heavy objects. Ear plugs are required to pre-
vent hearing damage in high noise areas such as crushing and
grinding operations. Neckties, ribbons, and finger rings should
not be worn during the inspection.
Portland Cement Plant 13 Preparatory and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Inspection Procedures
-------
SECTION 3
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND SOURCES OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS
Offsite processes that contribute to air pollution in the
Portland cement industry are the quarrying of raw materials and
the transport of those materials to the plant site. Manufactur-
ing plant sources of air pollution are the crushing, grinding,
mixing, and blending of raw materials; clinker production;
clinker cooling operations; finish grinding of the clinker with
gypsum; and storage, packaging, and loadout of the finished
product. Although this guide concerns itself only with the
processes at the manufacturing site, it should be emphasized that
quarrying contributes a significant amount of atmospheric emis-
sions.
3.1 SIMPLIFIED CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF CEMENT
FORMATION
The basic raw materials in portland cement manufacturing
contain calcium carbonate, silicon oxide, alumina, and ferric
oxides with minor amounts of sulfate, alkali, and carbonaceous
materials. Chemically combined water and carbonaceous materials
are removed because of the heat from the feed end of the kiln.
As the temperature is increased, the alkali materials are vola-
tilized and removed with the kiln gases. Limestone (calcium
carbonate) dissociates to calcium oxide and carbon dioxide under
atmospheric pressure at 1650°F, and alumina begins to decompose
at about 1800°F. (These initial reactions begin before any
liquid has formed. Liquid formation takes place at the surface
and extends into the grains only by the slow process of dif-
fusion.) Interaction between CaO and SiO,, begins to occur in a
Portland Cement Plant 14 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
liquid phase when the material reaches about 2000°F. The reac-
tion speeds up at 2500°F, and dicalcium silicate forms in the
presence of liquid, which first appears at about 2350°F. The
interaction of dicalcium silicate with additional CaO to form
tricalcium silicate (which is essential for the formation of
Portland cement) is slow, even at higher temperatures, but the
presence of alumina and ferric oxide considerably increases the
rate of formation. If the temperature fails to exceed 2500°F,
only small amounts of tricalcium silicate are formed. In this
case (referred to as dusting) the cement is valueless.
3.2 FEED PREPARATION
Upon receipt from the quarry, the raw materials are crushed,
screened, and ground to the appropriate size for mixing and
blending before they are charged to the kiln. As Figure 5
shows, crushing sometimes takes place in two or three stages.
Crushing, screening, and grinding operations may be vented to
the atmosphere, and all are potential sources of particulate
emissions. The emission rate depends on the kind of raw material
and its moisture content, characteristics of the crusher, the
kind of control equipment, and its operation and condition.
3.2.1 Crushing and Screening
Crushing reduces the size of rock obtained from the quarry.
Crushing equipment typically consists of primary and secondary
crushers, but sometimes tertiary crushers also are needed. Pri-
mary crushing reduces the quarry rock (often as large as 4 to 5
feet in diameter) to 6 to 10 inches in diameter by use of jaw,
gyratory, and roll crushers. The type of crusher used depends
on the hardness, lamination, and size of rock.
Figure 6 presents schematics and illustrations of the
different types of crushers. Jaw crushers consist of two steel
jaws that accept material to be crushed. As the swing jaw moves
Portland Cement Plant 15 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
to
to
OJ
o
o
Q-
QJ
CU
O
S-
o
Q.
ns
-a
o
fO
I
o
LTJ
O)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
16
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
SCHEMATIC OF
JAW CRUSHER
JAW CRUSHER
SCHEMATIC OF
GYRATORY CRUSHER
GYRATORY CRUSHER
SCHEMATIC OF
ROLL CRUSHER
ROLL CRUSHER
Figure 6. Types of primary crushing equipment.
Portland Cement Plant 17 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
downward and toward a stationary jaw, it crushes upward and back
while allowing the crushed material to exit.
Gyratory crushers have a conical head with a gyratory (not
rotary) movement inside an outer concave bowl. The crushing
force results from the steel cone pressing the material against
an outside steel wall.
Roll crushers have a steel roller equipped with knobs that
extend 3 or 4 inches beyond the surface of the roller, and the
rock is crushed between the knobs and a steel plate.
A conveyor transports the rock from the primary crusher to
a vibrating screen where varying sizes of rock are classified
and separated according to size. The process consists of drop-
ping the crushed rock onto a screening surface with uniformly
sized apertures. Particles larger than the openings are rejected
and transported back to the crusher for further size reduction.
Smaller particles pass through the openings to a secondary
crusher, which is usually a hammermill (see Figure 7). This
crusher can reduce the diameter of the rock to less than 3/4
inch. The material is fed into a chute leading to a series of
hammers that strike the rock at a high rate of speed and force
it into a collision with a breaker plate.
Occasionally, a tertiary crusher is necessary, in which
case the material is sent through a finer hammermill operation,
which reduces it to about 5/16 inch. After each crushing opera-
tion, the rock enters a screening operation. After the last
crushing step, a bucket elevator transports each kind of raw
material to separate compartments for storage prior to fine
grinding.
Particulate emissions result from the open transporting of
the crushed material and from the crushing and screening opera-
tions that are vented to the atmosphere.
3.2.2 Fine Grinding, Mixing, and Blending
Raw materials are drawn from their separate storage compart-
ments and proportioned for the proper composition before being
Portland Cement Plant 18 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
HAMMERMILL
SCHEMATIC OF
HAMMERMILL
Figure 7. Secondary crusher of the hammermill design.'
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
19
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
charged to the kiln. Composition of the feed material depends
on whether a "wet process" or a "dry process" is to be used.
(Figure 5 depicts each of these techniques.)
In the dry process, hot gases provided by direct-firing of
separate furnaces or by the flow of exit gases from the kilns
reduce the moisture content of the crushed material to less than
1.0 percent. These crushed raw materials are proportioned as
they enter the fine grinding mill. The material must be finely
ground and thoroughly mixed to produce uniform clinker composition
(the end result of kiln calcining). In closed-loop operations,
air separators or screens return oversized material to the mill
for further grinding and the appropriately sized fraction is
transported to the storage area.
In the wet process, crushed raw materials and water are fed
to a fine grinding operation. The resulting slurry, which is
about one-third water, is discharged from the mill and stored in
open tanks, where additional mixing takes place. From the
tanks, the slurry is either pumped directly to the kilns or
dewatered first so that the kiln feed is approximately 65 per-
cent solids.
Ball and rod mills of the type shown in Figure 8 are used
in both methods of fine grinding. These consist of cylindrical
shells with protruding ridges that move either steel balls or
rods partially up the interior side of the cylinder as it rotates
at 15 to 18 revolutions per minute. The balls or rods cascade
back down into the raw material and grind it to a fine consisten-
cy. The mills are charged to about 45 percent of their volume
with steel balls up to 5 inches in diameter or with steel rods 2
to 5 inches in diameter.
Particulate emissions are only a problem in the dry grinding
and air separation processes; the water retains the particles in
the slurry during wet grinding.
In the dry process, mixing and blending of the finely
ground material occurs in silos. Open tanks are used in the wet
process.
Portland Cement Plant 2Q Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
BALL MILL
CUT-AWAY OF BALL MILL
ROD MILL
Figure 8- Ball and rod mills used for fine grinding.
CUT-AWAY OF ROD MILL
5
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
23 Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
3.3 CLINKER PRODUCTION
The rotary kiln is the major potential source of atmospheric
emissions at portland cement plants. These kilns also emit
oxides of nitrogen (NO ) and sulfur dioxide (SO9) [and possibly
X ^
some sulfur trioxide (SO ) ] , ammonia (NH3>, and hydrogen sulfide
(H S) as a result of the high temperature (2600° to 3000°F)
&
combustion of fossil fuels and the nature of the feed material.
Figure 9 depicts a rotary kiln with an attached planetary
clinker cooler.
The rotary kiln has three stages of operation: feed, fuel
4
firing, and clinker cooling and handling. The raw materials
are fed into the elevated end of a slightly inclined refractory-
lined steel cylinder which rotates at about 50 to 90 revolutions
per hour. The kiln is usually 150 to 500 feet in length and 8
to 16 feet in diameter, although some may be considerably larger.
The various burning zones within the kiln are lined with dif-
ferent types of refractory material to withstand the varying
temperature ranges in the kiln. Fuel (pulverized coal, fuel
oil, or natural gas) is blown in from the lower end with hot air
that has been pre-heated by passing over the clinker in the
coolers at the lower end of the kiln. Combustion gases pass
through the kiln counterflow to the material. '
As the kiln rotates, its slightly inclined position causes
the feed to travel slowly downward, and it becomes exposed to
increasing heat. First, the water is evaporated with the aid of
various types of heat exchangers; a bank of hanging steel chains
(Figure 10) is one of the most common types. As the temperature
of the charge increases, organic compounds are volatilized,
sulfates are decomposed, and chlorides and alkali salts are
partially volatilized. About midsection of the kiln, calcium
and magnesium carbonates are decomposed and carbon dioxide is
liberated. Calcium oxide and magnesium oxide are also formed.
In the hot zone (2700°F), about 20 to 30 percent of the charge
is converted to liquid. It is through this medium that the
chemical reactions proceed and the material turns incandescent.
Portland Cement Plant 22 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
23
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
Figure 10. Two variations of hanging chains
as a means of heat exchange in the kiln.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
24
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
At this stage, the clinker appears as round, marble-sized, hard
glass balls. ' '
The kiln is a large source of particulate emissions and
consumes large quantities of fuel (an average of one million
Btu's are required to calcine one barrel of cement—376 pounds).
Several design and operational changes are possible to reduce
these tendencies. Design features that would reduce emissions
include larger kiln diameters at the feed end and the addition
of suspension preheaters. Enlarging the kiln diameter reduces
the gas velocity and results in less dust entrainment. Sus-
pension preheaters reduce emissions by feeding the raw material
through a series of cyclones against an upward gas flow, which
results in an effective countercurrerit heat exchange.
Kiln designs vary. Some of the newer designs result in
more efficient fuel combustion. The types of kilns used in the
dry process are short rotary units (either with or without
preheaters), rotary kilns with a suspension preheater, long
rotary kilns with a built-in preheater, or an ACL kiln (Lepol)
with double gas flow. The Lepol, a semidry process, is typical
of traveling grate preheaters, where exit gas is used to heat a
layer of pelletized raw feed spread on a traveling grate.
Because the raw material is dried and preheated on the grate
before entering the kiln, the combined length of the kiln and
the grate is about 40 percent shorter than conventional units.
This process reduces energy consumption to about 700,000 Btu's
4
per barrel.
Wet process kilns are either short kilns with cyclone pre-
heaters or long kilns with internal chain preheaters. In the
United States, rotary kilns are used, and most new plants use
long kilns with chains or some other kind of preheating system.
The chains have been proved effective for heat transfer and for
improving fuel consumption. They are suspended in the preheat-
ing zone of the kiln and arranged so as to lift the slurry into
the path of the hot gases and simultaneously to convey materials
toward the burning zone.
Portland Cement Plant 25 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
Some preheating and heat exchange methods for energy con-
servation can also be used. The Humbolt preheater provides a
series of cyclones through which the gases exiting the kiln pass
before they reach the dust collectors. The dry feed enters the
top chamber, falls through each cyclone, and is swept upward by
moving gases. (The feed is heated to about 1380°F before
reaching the kiln.)
The Mieg process allows exit gases and dust from the kiln
to pass through a slowly rotating drum that contains heat
exchange members. As the slurry passes through the drum, its
moisture content is reduced from 30 percent down to 7 percent.
The Vickers desiccator is an enlarged section at the feed
end of the kiln; the slurry passes over a double screw attached
to the shell of the desiccator before entering the kiln. A
section of similar length follows the screw and contains chains
where the diameter tapers to normal. This system reduces the
moisture content of the slurry from 40 percent to 8 percent.
The Holderbank heat exchanger consists of lifters that
raise the charge and cascade it back through the hot gases. A
vortex is produced by a row of guide vanes that increase the gas
flow rate. This heat exchanger reduces fuel consumption by 21
percent.
Depending on its alkali content, dust collected in the
initial stages of the kiln control devices often can be returned
to the kiln, which reduces disposal problems and the use of raw
materials. Two methods used to return this dust are direct
return by mixing with the kiln feed and direct return parallel
to the kiln feed. The dust can also be returned by scoop feeders
in front of the chain system or by use of a leaching system in
which collected dust is mixed with large volumes of water and
then dewatered to remove water-soluble alkali material before it
is remixed with the kiln feed and spray impinged onto the chain
system. Still another method is insufflation, which returns dry
dust to the burning zone, either through the fuel pipe or by a
separate pipe running parallel to the fuel pipe. This latter
Portland Cement Plant 26 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
method results in about 8 percent fuel savings, but it can in-
crease emission levels. No one method is satisfactory for all
kilns. Figure 11 depicts these various methods of returning
collected material to the kiln.
3.4 CLINKER COOLING
The clinker leaving the lower end of the kiln has a tempera-
ture of approximately 2700°F. The clinker cooler serves a dual
purpose; it reduces the temperature of the clinker so that proc-
essing can continue; and it provides a means of recovering the
heat from the clinker to preheat primary or secondary combustion
air.
The three general types of coolers are shown in Figure 12.
The early coolers were rotary coolers, which consisted of one-
third refractory-lined cylindrical steel shells with lifters
that raised, cascaded, and advanced the hot clinker through a
stream of cooling air as it rotated. More recent designs are
planetary (or multicylinder) coolers (attached to the kiln
shell) and grate-type coolers. The planetary cooler consists of
a series of tubes located around the circumference of the
discharge end of the kiln which rotates with the kiln. The
material flows from the kiln into the tubes which contain in-
ternal baffles that transfer heat from the material to the
cooling air being pulled in. This heated air is returned to the
kiln as preheated combustion air.
In a grate cooler, the hot clinker is cooled by passing air
upward through the moving bed of clinkers on a perforated grate.
The bed is uniform in thickness. Heat may be recirculated back
to the kiln for preheating purposes. Grate coolers are a
source of particulate emissions because the air passing through
the clinker bed is vented to the atmosphere.
Portland Cement Plant 27 Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 Sources
-------
A) RETURNED
WITH
FEED
B) RETURNED
BY SCOOPS
BEFORE
CHAIN SYSTEM
C) INSUFFLATION
TO DISPOSAL
Figure 11. Methods of returning collected material to the kiln.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
28
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
ROTARY CLINKER COOLER
PLANETARY CLINKER COOLER
TRAVELLING GRATE CLINKER COOLER
c
Figure 12. Types of clinker coolers."
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
29
Processes and Emission
Sources
-------
3.5 FINISH GRINDING AND AIR SEPARATION
From the cooler, the clinker may be taken to a storage
area or transferred immediately to the finishing mills (see
Figure 5). The mills are of the rotary ball type (previously
described). The process consists of grinding the clinker
with about 5 percent gypsum to regulate the setting time of
the cement. The finishing mills are sometimes sprayed with
water to keep them sufficiently cool and to minimize dehydration
of the gypsum, which could lead to "false set" problems.
The degree of fineness desired for the final product is
controlled by air separators. Oversized material is returned
to the mill for finer grinding.
Uncontrolled, the finish grinding operation can contribute
substantial amounts of particulate emissions. If control
devices are used, the collected dust, which represents about
15 percent of the feed, is usable product. Transfer of the
material after grinding can also generate fugitive emissions.
3.6 FINAL PRODUCT STORAGE, PACKAGING AND LOADING
Some of the product leaving the finish mills is conveyed
to bulk storage silos, where it is held until bulk-loaded
onto barges, tank trucks, or hopper bottom cars. Some is
sent to a packaging building, where machines pneumatically
load the finished cement into bags (94 Ib/bag) and seal the
bags for shipment by truck. Unless properly controlled,
these operations can result in considerable loss of product
and substantial particulate emissions.
Portland Cement Plant Processes and Emission
Inspection Guide 2/82 30 Sources
-------
SECTION 4
ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS
Atmospheric emissions from portland cement manufacturing
processes can be controlled by a variety of add-on devices and by
containment practices. Table 1 presents a summary of the control
devices and their effectiveness on specific processes. As the
summary shows, fabric filters are effective on most of the
processes listed, whereas the other devices have limited appli-
cation.
Appendix E provides a description of specific operating
parameters and instrumentation necessary for proper operation of
each control device.
Containment practices include either hooding or enclosing
storage areas, processes, transfer points, and loading and un-
loading operations and application of water or chemical dust
suppressants to storage piles and roadways to reduce fugitive
dust.
4.1 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
4.1.1 Process Applications
Electrostatic precipitators can operate economically and at
high control efficiencies on exhaust gas streams with high-volume
flow rates (>20,000 cfm) and temperatures in the 300° to 600°F
range. In the portland cement industry, they are used to control
particulates in the exhaust gas flow streams from cement kilns
and clinker coolers. If exhaust gas streams contain a large
amount of moisture, such as those from wet process kilns and
Portland Cement Plant 31 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
2 o
en h
•O rt
fl> M
o PJ
rt 3
H-d,
O
3 O
0>
H-0
a rt
oo
TABLE 1. APPLICATION OF EMISSION CONTROL DEVICES TO PORTLAND CEMENT PROCESSES
Process
Raw material
crushing and
grinding
Calcining
Clinker cool ing
Finish grinding
Product storage
packaging and
loadout
General housekeeping
and fugitive controls
Effectiveness of emission control device
Cyclone
separator
Unsatisfactory
Successful
Successful c
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Impractical
ESP
Impractical
Successful
Successful
Impractical
Impractical
Impractical
Fabric
filter
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Successful
Gravel bed
f 1 1 ter
Impractical
Impractical
Successful
Impractical
Impractical
Impractical
U)
w
3
H-
CO
IQ
n
o
3
rt
i-i
o
en
rt
CO
tn
Wet collectors are generally not used for portland
Preliminary cleaning only; used with ESP or fabric
In some states multiple cyclones are effective for
they are used in conjunction with an ESP or fabric
cement processes.
filter.
achieving emission limits; in other states
filter.
-------
clinker coolers, care must be taken to maintain the gas tempera-
ture well above the dewpoint to prevent condensation in the
precipitator. Such condensation will not only cause corrosion of
precipitator elements, but will also cause cement coating of the
ESP interior and material bridging in the ESP hoppers. The gas
temperature can be maintained above the dewpoint by designing to
maintain a sufficiently high gas temperature to the ESP, by ade-
quately designed insulation of the ducts and ESP surface, and
by the use of electric heaters and insulation on the surface of
the particle collection hoppers.
4.1.2 Operating Parameters
Typical specific collection area (SCA) values range from 300
2 89
to 400 ft /1000 acfm for wet process precipitators ' and from
2 9
200 to 500 ft /1000 acfm for dry process precipitators. For a
secondary current of 1000 milli-amperes, secondary voltages would
2
typically vary from 40 to 50 kV for wet process precipitators
9
and from 20 to 30 kV for dry process units.
If gas flow rate and temperature level are within design,
high control efficiency of a precipitator can be maintained by a
steady electrode voltage and efficient removal of collected
particles from the plates and from the collection hopper. This
latter effort minimizes sparking caused by excessive particle
collection on the electrodes or the possibility of high levels of
hopper material grounding plates and wires.
4.1.3 ESP Malfunctions and Inspection
Proper operation of an ESP depends on the proper design and
on proper maintenance. Table 2 presents some of the more common
problems associated with ESP operation. It is evident from this
listing that most malfunctions result from lack of maintenance
and attention to the system. Particularly notable are malfunc-
tions caused by air leakage into the system and by inadequate
removal of collected particles from electrodes and hoppers. All
Portland Cement Plant 33 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
3 O
en n
•O rt
(D I-1
O OJ
rt 3
TABLE 2. DETECTION AND SOLUTION OF ESP OPERATING PROBLEMS
Q
(D
00
o
fl>
3
(D
0
rt
W
H-
CO
ro
H-
O
n
o
o
rt
H
o
en
rt
2
en
Control panel indicators
Primary
voltage
(a.c.), V.
350b
285
400
350-400
240
240
400
Primary
current,
A
40b
120
30
40-150
40
170
40
Secondary
current,
mA
160b
500
140
100-700
200
400
160
Condition at
precipitator/
panel
Normal operation
Gas volume and
dust load de-
decreases
Dust load
increases
In wet processes,
temperature in-
creases but re-
sistivity is
constant. In
dry processes,
temperature and
resistivity in-
crease
Gas temperature
decreases
Arcing between
electrodes
Added primary
voltage is re-
quired to main-
tain constant
current; spark
rate increases
ESP control
efficiency,3
Normal
Higher than
normal
Usually,
higher than
normal
Higher than
normal for
wet processes,
but lower than
normal for dry
processes
Normal un-
less below
dew point
Less than
normal
Less than
normal
Possible problem
Higher hopper
level
Dust bridging in
hopper
Failure of discharge
electrode rapper to
remove dust buildup
from electrodes
Probl em
solution
Raise process
temperature.
Increase dust
removal rate.
Use hopper
vibrator.
Increase rap-
ping inten-
sity.
Repair rapper
system.
(continued)
-------
O)
c:
o
o
C\J
in
O
ie
u
TJ
••-
Ol
c
s.
s
+J
c
o
o
c
15
1— +J
JD 3
CL in
1
o
L
0,
Ol
|—
£
in
0
D.
ID
"o >1
i- U
4J C
C Ol
O -i-
U U
O- H-
CO f-
LU Ol
•^
10 O
C 10
O 4J i—
•r- t- Ol
4J O. C
TJ 0 S.
0 CL
IO C
TJ Ol
C i-
O S_
L. en «
IO IO *•— ^
E <-> •
5- "5 "
0. > 10
1 L.
0. 01
IO 1 D-
i~ C 0.
Ol ID
O> 4-> S. .
in c E
IO *r- • 5- Ol
0) >."- +J
i- cn+J 10 in
(J c ••- Q. >,
C 1- V) Ol VI
1-1 Oi
coo.
O +J 3
TJ
S- 0>r-
Ol 4J-P-
0.10 3
0..— XI
10 0.
i. +J
C in
3!— O
•— •— E
i- 0 Ol
ID U i.
U_
C
ID
.C i—
4-> IB
in C
in o
Oi c
•
c c
>> O O Ol
s- in 4J o J- 01
10 t- S- +J in
E TJ C 3 IO Ol
i- 01 Oi i- L> t- in
i. cn s. 10 ID
CL (TJ -r- +J +_> .V 0>
*> 3 C C J- S-
in .— cri- 10 10 (j
in o Ol ID •+-» O. c
O> > i- E in CO -r-
1
o
IO
" —
o
*J"
o
CM
01 TJ
C T) Ol
O O U
•i- I- IO
+J 4-> i—
U U O.
Ol Ol Ol
in .— s-
Oi
Oi Oi
IO •»-
•— +J C
o c 10
in 3 u
i— »
Ol
TJ
O +-> -^
1- J- 0
4J IO IO
U CL-0
Ol £
i— CL Cn*J
Ol O C L.
4-> -r- 0
C cmt-
oi.cc
0 -r- 'i "c
i. 2 in 10
CO
O i—
•<-> ID
£c5
Ol C
IVI
1 i
IO IO
3 U
+J i- Ol
u TJ in
3 C .C i-
^•r- cno
^^2C
+J O cn
c •• c
Oi c ini-
r— o s- u
O i- O J-
•i- 4J +J 10
o
vo
1
o
o
^~
o
o
LO
n
i
o
o:
i
I—
s-
O 0)
u
i- 10
•r- i— •
IO CL4->
Q. O) Ol
Ol L. in
ce
4J '—
O 1
f 1 1— Ol 4J
in s-^-- I. 3
l#- Q) t- O
IO U O) TJ
U +J O -i- I- O)
••- •!->*- f- O TJ
I- 3 in f- c
•U O C +> "3
O S- IO L> *> O
Ol *r~ ^ O) O) L.
r—
r- 10
If- 4->
^J TT%
Ol u
te
3 CL
u
0
o
o
CM
0
.
in Oi
4J O1.C
c 10 o
o 10 10 •
Q. 01 .c in
S*~ t- "io o
O Ol TJ
I/) LO
jc ^i in
cn cn 01
3 3 -C
o • o u
S- .* i- *J
£ S. .C ID
01 *J ai c
cn o cn o
IO 3 ID •»-
.* TJ It +J
ID IO U
Ol +J Ol Ol
i— Ol •— O-
t— in
S- C 1- C
5 5 ^
c
ID
.C r—
•»J IO
in o
01 C
Ol
ID
\s
m
in
.c
cn
•r-
.
^ *
c c
•»— o
V) QJ O -r-
n i- o.4-> u
o> .3 5 *a OJ
4-* Q> f— Q. •
C ID "O ZJ D. V>
•i- t. w o i-
10 Q> O) C ^ O)
CEO "D *G
•r- 5> -O r-
S ^ c 0.1-
o +•>
+J in o s- ^*-
10 in c
ID cm 2
cn in -r- E cn o
Ol O OJ C TJ
4-> L. O-i— •>- 4->
Ol 3 S J3 S- 3
r— 4J 0) O 3 -C
C <0 TJ 1- TJ in
•-I D.
Ol
ID
•r-
•g*J
"" t
g 0)
c
•r—
r— ^"^
C 10 C
o c o
•£ Jr."
« O> 4->
O 4-> O
l_ C
in
"a>
0. g
10
+-> +J
^- 01
3 •
o-
C M-
O
Cn
"O c
01 -^
*J >
IO O
E
o*
.0
in
in
>) Ol i—
r— in Ol
C ID t-
O Ol If-
C O +J
ID O) Ol
O TJ •—
4->
in Ol 3
ST. °* °
QJ ID
e ?+,
CL 01
O »-.
10 ••- E
*> >- o
1- CL J-
5" *"
u •• cn
So. c
CO-r-
CL UU >
•s ^§
o> c
in 1-1-
4-> If-
O in
tt) Ol Ol
-------
the malfunctions listed will decrease the particulate removal
efficiency. Although the degree of efficiency loss resulting
from a specific malfunction cannot be assessed, such loss will be
reflected by increased opacity of the exhaust gas stream and
higher particulate concentrations in stack emissions.
Many malfunctions can be determined only by an internal in-
spection of the ESP, which can take place only when the unit is
deactivated and locked out to prevent inadvertent reactivation.
The unit must also be satisfactorily purged and cooled before the
inspector enters. Plant personnel should accompany the inspec-
tor, and someone should be stationed outside the unit in case of
an emergency inside.
During external inspections, the inspector should record the
primary and secondary voltage, current rate, and spark rate for
each section, as shown in Figure 13. Later these values should
be compared with values obtained during previous inspections and
stack tests. If the spark rate meter is out of order, the rate
may be estimated by noting the other gauges on the control panel,
which will jump when the field sparks. When the spark meter is
not operating, the inspector can determine the spark rate by
counting the number of times these meters oscillate in 30 seconds
and multiplying by 2. A check of the daily log of readings will
show whether readings are representative.
The inspector should also record rapping frequency and
intensity. Irregular sounds from an individual rapper indicate
improper operation or damage. He or she also should note inop-
erative meters, the number of power supplies on manual control,
and power supplies on automatic control that are set for operat-
ing voltages below design specifications (sometimes done to
reduce wire breakage).
The inspector should record the condition of the ESP rela-
tive to corrosion, leaks around seals or modules, number of
electrical fields operating, etc., to set up a cause-and-effeet
relationship for inappropriate readings.
Portland Cement Plant 36 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
§
10 E
L. 1.
|Q IB
0. Q.
/»
-------
Opacities of the gas stream from the source controlled by
the ESP should be recorded on the form previously described in
Section 2. Operating parameters for the processes being con-
trolled by the ESP also should be recorded on the form described
in Figure 3 and provided in Appendix C. This provides a means
for comparison against previously recorded data and design in-
formation.
Breakdowns or scheduled shutdowns provide an opportunity for
the inspector to perform an internal inspection of the unit. An
internal inspection enables the inspector to observe the condi-
tion of the collecting plates (warped or bowed) and the discharge
electrodes (some wires may be missing), the condition of the gas
distribution plate, corrosion of interior, and the build-up of
dust on the collecting plates and discharge wires. Problems
resulting from such conditions were addressed in Table 1 and
should be carefully noted.
4.2 FABRIC FILTERS
Fabric filter systems are widely used at portland cement
plants, for control of both large and small point sources of
emissions.
4.2.1 Process Application
Fabric filters are applied to many portland cement produc-
tion processes. Table 3 presents a listing of these applications
together with operating temperatures, fabrics used, and air-to-
cloth ratios. Temperatures range from ambient to 500°F, and all
modes of bag cleaning are represented. Selection of bag fabric
is based on the chemical and thermal capability of the fabric for
the gas be.ing handled. For example, fiberglass bags can with-
stand higher gas stream temperatures than cotton bags.
All types of collectors and cleaning methods described may
use natural or synthetic filter media. Not all collector designs
are adaptable to the use of relatively fragile fiberglass fabrics,
Portland Cement Plant 38 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
TABLE 3. APPLICATION OF FABRIC FILTERS IN THE PORTLAND CEMENT INDUSTRY
Operation
Primary
crushing
Secondary
crushing
Grinding
Storage silos
Feeders, belt
conveyors
Kilns
Clinker cooler
Finish mills
Finish mills
Air separators
Packing and
bulk loading
Coal dryer
Exhaust
temperature,
op
Ambient
Ambient
Ambient
to 225
Ambient
Ambient
500
350
170
200
200
Ambient
Type of
bag
cleaning
Mechanical
shaking
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Mechanical
shaking
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse- jet
Reverse-air
Pulse- jet
Reverse-air
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse- jet
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse-jet
Mechanical
shaking
Pulse-jet
Mechanical
shaking
Air-to-
cloth
ratio, ft
2-3
2
2.5-3
3
1.7-1.9
1.0-2.9
3.5
7
1.7
5.0-7.1
1.7
2.5
6-8
2.5
6
1.9-3.5
7
2
Common
bag
material
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton
Cotton or
Dacron
Cotton
Cotton
Fiberglass
Dacron
Fiberglass
Dacron
Dacron
Dacron
Dacron
Cotton or
polypro-
pyl ene
Dacron
Dacron
Reference
8,11
8
11
11
8
12
11
11
11
8,11
11
11,12
8,11
11
11
13,14
6,13
13
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
39 Emission Control Systems
-------
which call for avoidance of undue flexing. Felted media are
suitable for medium- and high-pressure cleaning methods that
operate at higher air-to-cloth ratios on more rapid cleaning
frequencies. Woven fabrics are largely applicable to mechanical
shaking and low-pressure gas or reverse-air cleaning methods.
4.2.2 Operating Parameters
The air-to-cloth ratio used in cement plants depends on the
filter cleaning method, the particle properties, grain loading,
etc.; for example:
Bag cleaning method A/C ratio range
Mechanical shaking 2 to 3
Reverse-air 1 to 2
Pulse-jet 5 to 7
The operating pressure of a fabric filter designed according
to these criteria is normally 2 to 10 in. HO when the filter is
clean, and 2 to 3 in. higher when the filter is coated with dust.
Therefore, monitoring fabric filter operation consists of check-
ing the pressure drop across the system, the gas flow rate and
temperature, and the opacity of the exit gases. Another import-
ant consideration is the moisture content of the exhaust gas
especially under cold startup conditions. If the temperature of
the gas falls below its dewpoint, condensation will occur within
the filter. The undesirable effects of condensation are 1) cor-
rosion of the structural metal components of the filter, 2)
muddying and blinding of the fabric filter media, and 3) bridging
of dust in the hopper. Methods of circumventing this problem are
to insulate the filter housing and structural members and to
maintain the gas temperature above its dewpoint by regulation of
process conditions or preheating.
4.2.3 Fabric Filter Malfunctions and Inspection
Efficient operation of a fabric filter for particulate
emission control depends on proper design, correct operating
Portland Cement Plant 40 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
procedures, and efficient maintenance practices. Table 4 pre-
sents a listing of the potential causes for the malfunctioning of
fabric filters.
Although some problems are caused by improper design or
selection of components, many of the problems are associated with
the operation and maintenance of the filter system. If care and
attention are given to the operation and maintenance for the
system, chances are good that the system will operate efficient-
ly. Failure to operate and maintain the system properly will
result in frequent filter downtime and atmospheric emissions of
gases with high particulate content and opacity.
While conducting the external inspection of a fabric filter,
the inspector should record production information such as in-
duced fan current and speed, gas temperature, and other informa-
tion specified earlier in Figure 3 and on the forms provided in
Appendix C. Pressure drop and opacities for each of the compart-
ments in the fabric filter should also be recorded. Manometers
or gages located on the units shown provide both clean-side and
dirty-side readings. The inspector should also use visual
observations to determine if there are leaks around seals, com-
partments, etc., and note any findings.
If an internal inspection is conducted, the same safety
precautions apply as those for ESP inspections. Problems to look
for are excess dust buildup on the clean side of the filter, bag
deterioration at the bottom thimbles, dryness of the filter cake,
plugging or corrosion problems in the hopper, and missing or
broken bags. The inspector should record all of this information
to provide a basis for poor equipment operation if such be the
case.
4.3 CYCLONE SEPARATORS
Use of cyclone separators has been somewhat limited in the
Portland cement industry. These separators are relatively inex-
pensive and easy to operate, but they cannot readily achieve high
efficiencies in the removal of small particles.
Portland Cement Plant 41 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
TABLE 4. FABRIC FILTER MALFUNCTIONS AND REMEDIES
15
Problem
Possible cause0
Remedy
High stack opacity
High filter pressure
drop
High bag failure:
wearing out
Bag holes
Bag bleeding
Insufficient filter
cake
Bag cleaning mechanism
not adjusted properly
Cleaning time failure
Failure to remove dust
from bags
Incorrect pressure
reading
Baffle plate erosion
High grain loading
Cleaning cycle too
frequent
Shaking too violent
(S)
Replace bags.
Tie off bags and replace at
a later date.
Isolate leaking compartment,
if allowable without upset-
ting system.
Reduce gas volume (A/C).
Allow greater dust buildup
on bags by cleaning less
frequently.
Increase cleaning frequency.
Clean for longer duration.
Clean more vigorously
(check with manufacturer
before implementing).
Check to see if timer is
indexing to all contacts.
Check output on all terminals,
Send sample of dust to manu-
facturer.
Send bag to lab for analysis
for blinding.
Dryclean or replace bags.
Reduce air flow.
Clean pressure taps.
Check hoses for leaks.
Check for proper fluid in
manometer.
Check diaphragm in gage.
Replace baffle plate.
Install primary collector.
Slow down cleaning cycle.
Slow down shaking mechanism
(consult manufacturer).
(continued)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
42 Emission Control Systems
-------
TABLE 4 (continued)
Problem
Possible cause0
Remedy
High bag failure:
High bag failure:
decomposition
Moisture in bag house
Material bridging in
hopper
Repressuring pressure
too high (RF)
Pulsing pressure too
high (PJ)
Failure of cooling
device
Operating below acid
dew point
System not purged
after shutdown
Wall temperature below
dewpoint
Compressed air intro-
ducing water (PJ)
Moisture in baghouse
Dust being stored in
hopper
Hopper slope insuffi-
cient
Conveyor opening too
small
Reduce pressure.
Reduce pressure.
Replace thermocouple
Increase gas temperature.
Bypass on startup.
Keep fan running for at least
10 minutes after process
is shut down.
Raise gas temperature.
Insulate unit.
Lower dewpoint by keeping
moisture out of system.
Check automatic drains.
Install aftercooler.
Install dryer.
See above.
Add hopper heaters.
Remove dust continuously.
Modify or replace hoppers.
Use a wide-flared trough.
The following code is used to refer to the specific type of fabric filter:
RF
PJ
S
Reverse-flow cleaning mechanism
Pulse-jet cleaning mechanism
Shaker cleaning mechanism
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
43 Emission Control Systems
-------
4.3.1 Process Applications
Because of its inherent removal-efficiency limitations, the
cyclone separator is used by itself only on the clinker cooler,
where the particle size range of the emissions is sufficiently
large that achievement of up to about 95 percent removal effi-
•ui 16,17
ciency is possible.
The cyclone separator is also used as an auxiliary control
device for effluent gases from operations such as kilns and fin-
ish mills. In these applications, the gases are sent first
through a cyclone separator and then through a high-efficiency
removal device such as an ESP or a fabric filter. Even though
the cyclone separator's control efficiency is only 50 to 75 per-
cent, by reducing the amount of dust entering the high-perform-
ance device, it permits more efficiency for that device. The
large dust fraction removed by the cyclone is easily recyclable
if desired. Its use can also extend the useful life of major
control devices by reducing the wear from abrasion and erosion to
which they might otherwise be subjected.
4.3.2 Operating Parameters
Pressure drop for a cyclone separator is normally designed
for a range of 2 to 5 in. H20 at the design gas flow rate. If
the operating gas flow rate is much lower than design flow, the
differential pressure across the separator will decrease mark-
edly, as will the separation efficiency. If gas flow is appre-
ciably greater than design flow, the pressure drop across the
separator will increase, but the separation efficiency will
decrease as a result of gas bypass within the separator and dust
re-entrainment.
4.3.3 Malfunctions and Inspection
Anything that interferes with the proper gas flow through
the cyclone separator will decrease separator efficiency. Table
5 lists the various symptoms of gas flow malfunction, together
with possible causes and suggested remedies.
Portland Cement Plant 44 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
TABLE 5. CYCLONE SEPARATOR MALFUNCTIONS AND REMEDIES
Symptoms
Possible causes
Remedies
Low pressure differ-
ential
High pressure differ-
ential and high
stack opacity
High stack opacity
Low process gas flow
Erosion or corrosion of
tubes causing gas to
short-circuit cyclone
High process gas flow
or plugged cyclone tubes
Air inleakage
Separator inefficiency
due to:
High dust level
Dust bridging due to
moisture condensation
Separator vane or tube
wear by abrasion
For multiple-cyclone
installations, damper
off flow to some
units.
Replace defective tubes,
Add more separators
and clean out tubes.
Seal leaks.
Increase speed of dis-
charge valve.
Insulate separator and
heat hopper.
Replace components with
abrasion-resistant
materials.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
45 Emission Control Systems
-------
Because operation of the cyclone separator is relatively
simple, malfunctions are generally minimal. The major problems
are high dust levels in the hopper or moisture condensation in
»
the hopper (which causes plugging). The use of a hopper level
indicator, hopper heating, and separator insulation helps to
avoid these problems. Blockage of the cyclone tube, especially
on those with smaller diameters (~4 inches), can also be a prob-
lem.
An external inspection of the cyclone helps to determine
possible leaks at joints, inspection doors, or corroded areas.
Leakage of air into the cyclone disrupts the internal gas flow
pattern and decreases the cyclone's efficiency. This inspection
will also reveal any plugged and eroded tubes and eroded inlet
vanes. The system must be turned off, thoroughly purged, and
cooled before an internal inspection is made.
4.4 GRAVEL-BED FILTERS
Gravel-bed filters have been used successfully in the port-
land cement industry for many years, although their application
is limited.
4.4.1 Process Application
A gravel-bed filter control system consists of 6 to 20
modules, each of which may contain from one to three gravel beds.
Figure 14 shows a typical modular arrangement. All modules are
one standard size; for a two-bed arrangement they have an outside
diameter of 9 ft, 2-5/8 inches and a straight shell height of 24
18
ft, 7-1/2 inches. The gravel beds have an effective flow area
of 40 square feet each.*
The one process point in a portland cement plant where the
gravel-bed filter has been widely used is the clinker cooler.
The cooler is frequently subjected to process upsets that cause
*
Personal communication between D. J. Loudin, PEDCo, and R.
Schumway, Rexnord Corp., November 19, 1981.
Portland Cement Plant 46 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
Figure 14. Representative arrangement of gravel-bed filter modules,
(Courtesy of Rexnord Corporation)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
47 Emission Control Systems
-------
high-temperature-gas excursions, a condition that is easily
accommodated by the gravel-bed filter. The filter does an ex-
cellent job of removing the abrasive particulate from the cooler
exhaust gases. In this application, stack tests show that the
gravel-bed filter has a particulate removal efficiency averaging
19
99.85 percent.
4.4.2 Operating Parameters
Because of the inherent ability of the gravel bed to with-
stand temperatures in excess of 1000°F, inlet gas streams require
no cooling. The gravel bed is also resistant to attrition and
therefore can be used to filter abrasive particulate materials.
The primary parameter for operation of a gravel-bed filter is the
pressure drop resulting from the gas flow through the filter bed.
The beds are designed to have a pressure drop of 6 to 12 in. H_0.
During filter operation, particulate captured on the bed plugs
the interstitial openings in the bed and causes the bed pressure
drop to rise to values 50 to 100 percent higher than normal.
When this occurs, the bed must be removed from service and
cleaned by the backflushing procedure described earlier. The
removal and cleaning operation takes about 12 to 20 minutes* and
is performed at regular (45- to 60-minute) intervals. The tran-
sition from operation to cleaning and back to operation is made
automatically via instrumentation.
Although the filter system normally is not affected by inlet
gas temperature and flow surges, these variables should be moni-
tored as a matter of record and good engineering practice.
Recorders or indicators would be normally panel-mounted at the
clinker cooler control station.
The pressure differentials across each of the modules also
should be monitored, as the differential indicates the condition
of the gravel bed. The differential pressure gages are locally
mounted at each module and calibrated from 0 to 30 in. HO.
*
Personal communication between D. J. Loudin, PEDCo, and R.
Schumway, Rexnord Corp., November 19, 1981.
Portland Cement Plant 48 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
Other instrumentation required by gravel-bed filters are
cycle timers and controls for the dampers that direct the entry
of backflushing gas to the individual filter modules. Damper
positions are indicated on a control panel for the system, but
damper activators are locally mounted at the module.
4.4.3 Malfunctions and Inspection
Because of the relative simplicity of this particulate
control system, most installations have a history of trouble-
free operation. A couple of installations, however, have had
temperature-related malfunctions that resulted in damage to the
filter-bed equipment and subsequent increases in particulate
emissions.
In one case, a system designed for a working temperature
of 400°F was subjected to long-term exposure of temperatures
20
above 1000°F. The resulting metal expansion caused the
rabble arms used to turn the bed during the cleaning cycle to
tear the gravel-bed support screen.
At another installation, the use of ambient temperature
air for backflushing the filter modules caused thermal stress
cracks to develop within the modules, which allowed dust-laden
gas to contaminate the clean gas stream. Use of hot recycled
clean gas instead of ambient air for backflush eliminated the
thermal shock to the filter system and the subsequent cracking
of the internals of the modules.
Moisture in the backflush gas or air is also a problem for
gravel-bed filters. Rain may enter through breaks in the duct-
work or flanges and be transmitted into the gravel beds. When
water enters a bed, it hydrates the cement dust and can cause
the bed to solidify. Therefore, a program of frequent checking
and preventive maintenance should be set up to prevent leakage
into the system.
During an external inspection of the gravel-bed filter,
the inspector should record the pressure differential for each
of the modules in the assembly and the opacity of gas from the
Portland Cement Plant 49 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
stacks. In addition to gas temperature and gas volume, produc-
tion information should be recorded for the clinker cooler being
controlled. These should be recorded on the form provided in
Appendix C.
An internal inspection permits the inspector to observe and
record the condition of the support screen and other internal
members for signs of cracks or fatigue. The inspector also
should note any inleakage problems or clogging in the isolating
valves or screw conveyor for removing collected material.
4.5 CONTAINMENT AND DUST SUPPRESSION PRACTICES
Many portland cement processes are not vented to emission
control equipment. Because of the volume of material processed,
these sources have the potential of contributing significant
amounts of atmospheric emissions. Containment and dust suppres-
sion practices prevent these sources from generating excessive
emissions, however.
Feeding, transfer, and discharge operations are all sources
of emission problems, and spilled product and wind are respon-
sible for entrainment of the dust. Most of the entrained dust
results from spillage and agitation of material at the transfer
points. (Movement of clinker, particularly from the coolers, is
one of the worst transfer problems.) Such emissions are con-
tained by either enclosing or hooding these transfer points.
Incomplete enclosure, however, sometimes enhances the problem by
creating a wind tunnel effect.
Loading and unloading operations of both raw materials and
final product create an emission problem because of the mechani-
cal agitation of the material as it strikes the sides and bottom
of the receiving vessel and because of displaced air during
loading or unloading. Ousting winds can intensify this problem.
Various containment practices are used, frequently in combina-
tion. Such practices include enclosing the operation, choke-
feeding or using a telescoping chute to limit the free-fall
distance of the material, and using movable hoods ducted back
into the unloading vessel.
Portland Cement Plant 50 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
Potential emission problems result from spilled product, mud
trackout from heavy equipment, and roadway and parking surface
deterioration. This material becomes reentrained by contact with
vehicle tires and air turbulence caused by passing vehicles.
This dust can be controlled by the use of sweeper trucks and the
application of water or oil coatings.
Dusting from storage piles occurs when the material is
dumped onto the pile and when wind blows across the pile. Con-
tainment methods,are enclosure of the storage area or the appli-
cation of water or chemical dust suppressants to the material.
Enclosure should be complete to prevent a tunneling effect from
the wind. The type of material stored determines which method
should be used (e.g., the application of water is not a suitable
containment method for stored finished cement). Use of tele-
scoping chutes is also an effective containment practice during
the dumping of material onto these storage piles.
Disposal of material collected by the control devices also
can be a source of emissions. The disposal process consists of
loading, unloading, and transporting of the waste, and each can
generate emissions. Containment methods for loading include en-
closing the loading area and reducing the free-fall distance into
the disposal vehicle. Containment in transport can be accom-
plished by the use of an enclosed vehicle. Containment during
the unloading of the waste at the disposal site can be accom-
plished by reducing the free-fall distance and covering or chem-
ically stabilizing the material at the site to prevent wind
erosion. Table 6 summarizes the various containment practices.
During the inspection, the inspector should note whether
these operations are causing a fugitive dust problem. If pos-
sible, visible emission readings should be obtained and recorded
on the appropriate form (Section 2). It may be possible for the
inspector to observe some containment methods in practice during
the inspection; if so, the success of the practice should be
noted.
Portland Cement Plant 51 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
TABLE 6. DUST SUPPRESSION PRACTICES
Operation
Transfer and conveying
Loading and unloading
Paved and unpaved roadways
Storage piles
Disposal
Enclosing
X
X
X
X
Hooding
X
X
Telescoping or
choke-feeding
X
X
X
Chemical or
water spray
X
X
X
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
52 Emission Control Systems
-------
Table 7 provides a summary indicating the magnitude of the
fugitive emissions problem at portland cement plants. It in-
cludes fugitive emission factors and an inventory of emissions
obtained during the inspection of a portland cement plant.
Portland Cement Plant 53 Emission Control Systems
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
3 O
W h
•d rt
fl> I-1
O JU
ft 3
H-O,
O
P n
(D
o 3
£ CD
•XI
00 3
N) rt
TABLE 7. QUANTIFICATION OF FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING
Source
Raw material unloading
Transfer points and
associated conveying
Unloading outfal 1 to
storage^
Raw blending0
Unloading—clinker/gypsum
outfall to storaged
Cement silo vents
Cement loading
Cement packaging
Paved and unpaved roads
Uncontrolled fugitive
emission factor
0.03-0.4 Ib/ton
0.2-0.4 Ib/ton
3.0-5.0 Ib/ton
0.05 Ib/ton
5.0-10.0 Ib/ton
Negligible
0.236 Ib/ton
0.01 Ib/ton
6.1 g/VMTe
Plant fugitive emission inventory
Operating parameter,
tons/year
177,576
651,338
650,687
649,355
446,059
-
413,485
30,980
-
Uncontroi led
emissions,3
tons/year
19
98
1,300
13
1,671
-
49
Negligible
-
en
W
H-
tn
en
H-
O
n
o
rt
o
M
cn
rt
0)
3
tn
aBased on average of emission factors.
Emissions include raw material storage and transfer to conveyor.
Emissions include blended materials storage.
Emissions include clinker/gypsum storage and loadout.
eGrams per vehicle miles travelled.
-------
SECTION 5
PLANT OPERATING CONDITIONS AND COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
The plant inspection effort will depend on the main purpose
of the inspection. While a detailed internal and external
inspection of all process and control equipment could take a few
days, a "walk through" inspection, where only major emission
sources are observed, can be accomplished in less than one day.
The main potential emission problem areas in any cement
plant relate to the calcining operations and their control. The
kiln and its control system should thus be carefully inspected.
Inspection of material handling systems should receive the next
highest priority followed by the various crushing and grinding
operations. Table 8 provides a summary of items to be observed,
and Figure 15 is an inspection checklist to be used during the
inspection.
5.1 PROPER OPERATING CONDITIONS AND EMISSION PROBLEMS DUE TO
PROCESS MALFUNCTIONS AND UPSETS
The inspector should be able to distinguish between a
smoothly operating plant and one that is experiencing malfunc-
tions or upsets that could lead to excess atmospheric emissions.
Movement of raw materials from quarrying operations should
occur without entraining fugitive dust, either from vehicle
movement in the plant or from the dumping of the raw material.
The delivered raw material should be stored in an enclosed area
so that wind cannot dislodge loose particles and create a fugi-
tive dust problem. If necessary, the stored material should be
sprayed with a dust suppressant. Dust generation is generally a
function of the type and moisture content of the raw materials.
Portland Cement Plant 55 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF INSPECTION POINTS
Operation
Inspection items
Kilns and clinker coolers
Kiln and clinker cooler emission
control systems
Material handling systems
Crushing and grinding systems
Production rate
Exhaust gas flow rate and temperature
Percent 02 in exhaust gas
Fuel type, firing rate, and composition
in the kiln
Degree of dust recycled to the kiln
Opacity
Leaks in control system housing
(corrosion and other reasons)
ESP voltage and power levels
Pressure drop across control equipment
Exhaust flow rate and temperature
Percent 02 in exhaust gas
Rapping frequency and intensity in ESP
Operative vs. inoperative instruments
Manual vs. automatic ESP power supplies
Operative vs. inoperative ESP fields
Internal observations (wires, bags,
tube blockage, full or plugged hopper,
efficiency of cleaning operation, etc.)
Moisture content of gas stream
Fan current and speed for flow calculations
Placement and condition of covers
and hoods
Operation of exhaust fans
Evidence of spills and leaks
Opacity of exhaust air
Volume of material handled
Fugitive emissions
Handling practices
Covers and seals in position
Evidence of leaks
Volume of material handled
Exhaust gas flow rate
Opacity of exhaust gas
Material handling practices
Fugitive emissions
If controlled: pressure drop across
device
Full or plugged dust collection
hoppers
Internal observations (bags, tube
blockage, efficiency of cleaning
operation)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
56
Operating Conditions and
Compliance Determination
-------
Name of company:
Address:
Responsible person:
Date of inspection:
Time in:
Time out:
Inspection group:
A. Kiln
Slurry feed rate tons/h
Dry solids feed rate tons/h
Moisture content X
Feed end temperature °F
Burner end temperature °F
Firing rate 106 Btu/h
Firing rate (coal) tons/h
(oil) tons/h
(gas) tons/h
If ESP control:
Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
Production Equipment
ID fan pressure drop _
ID fan speed rpm
(calculated) gas volume
Oxygen content (ESP exit) %
Outlet temperature °F
in.H20
acfm
Corona power
watts
watts/10 acfm
Specific power density
Rapper condition
Hopper discharge
For information not applicable, indicate N/A.
Kiln rotation rate rev/h
Carbonate content %
Alkali content X (Na, K)
Water cooling rate gal/min
• Clinker production rate tons/h
Insufflation rate
Recycle rate
Oxygen content %
Opacity %
If Fabric Filter Control:
Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
_in.H20
Power output:
No. 1 Field
No. 2 Field
No. 3 Field
No. 4 Field
1 "current
1 "voltage
2°current
2°voltage
ID fan pressure drop
ID fan speed rpm
(calculated)gas volume acfm
Outlet temperature "F
Moisture content %
Pressure drop per
compartment in. H20
Bag condition
If precleaner:
Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
ID fan pressure drop in. H^O
ID fan speed rpm
(calculated) gas volume acfm
Moisture content %
Figure 15. Portland cement plant inspection checklist.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
57
Operating Conditions and
Compliance Determination
-------
Figure 15. (continued)
Name of company:
Address:
Responsible person:
Date of inspection:
Time in:
Time out:
Inspection group:
B. Clinker Cooler8
Clinker process rate
Inlet temperature
Outlet temperature
tons/h
Condition of equipment
Opacity t
If ESP control:
Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
ID fan pressure drop in. ^0
ID fan speed rpm
(calculated) gas volume acfm
Outlet temperature °F
If gravel bed control:
Inlet temperature
Exhaust flow rate
Corona power
watts
Specific power density
Rapper condition
Hopper discharge
watts/10 acfm
°F
acfm
Pressure drop per
module in. H20
If fabric filter control:
Inlet temperature
ID fan current
amperes
ID fan pressure drop
in. H20
(calculated) gas volume acfm
Outlet temperature °F
Moisture content %
Pressure drop per
Power output:
No. 1 Field
No. 2 Field
No. 3 Field
No. 4 Field
1 "current
1 "voltage
2°current
2°voltage
compartment
Bag condition
in. H20
If precleaner:
Inlet temperature
ID fan current
amperes
ID fan pressure drop
ID fan speed rpm
(calculated) gas volume
Moisture content %
in. H20
acfm
For information not applicable, indicate N/A.
(continued)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
58
Operating Conditions and
Compliance Determination
-------
Figure 15, (continued)
Name of company:
Address:
Responsible person:
Date of inspection:
Time in:
Tine out:
Inspection group:
C. Other Processes8
Process rate per unit:
Crushing _
Grinding _
Conveying
tons/h
tons/h
tons/h
Mixing and blending
Packaging, loading,
and unloading
tons/h
tons/h
Storage:
Raw material
tons
Processed material
Finished product _
tons
tons
If fabric filter control: per unit
Inlet temperature °F
ID fan current amperes
ID fan pressure drop in. H,0
ID fan speed rpin
(Calculated) gas volume acfm
Outlet temperature °F
Bag condition
Opacity *
Pressure drop in. HjO
Crushing
Grinding
Conveying
Mixing/
Blending
Packaging/
loading.
Unloading
Storage
For information not applicable, indicate N/A.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
59
Operating Conditions and
Compliance Determination
-------
Sometimes the material is extremely wet, in which case fugitive
dust is not a problem. As the wet material enters subsequent
crushing and grinding operations, however, wet bags in the
fabric filters controlling these processes can create problems
that render the control device ineffective.
In the crushing and grinding operations, fugitive dust can
be released through leaks in worn seals around nuts and bolts in
the walls of the crushers and grinders. Such leaks will occur
regardless of the efficiency of a control device.^ Fugitive
emissions may also escape from the charging end of some crushers.
Occasionally, crushers are enclosed to eliminate the dust prob-
lem, but in principle, the amount of fugitive dust generated
depends on the type and moisture content of the raw material,
and the type and characteristics of the crusher. Properly
operated plants should be able to eliminate these potential
problems.6
The transfer of material at various stages of processing is
also critical. Leaks in conveying ductwork, hoods, and enclo-
sures and spillage of material that can become reentrained by
wind or vehicle movement can contribute substantially to fugitive
emissions. Efficiently run plants, realizing how abrasive 'the
material can be to equipment, correct these items by performing
timely maintenance before they become a serious problem.
Leaks around seals and in ductwork also create problems in
the mixing and blending operations. Preventive maintenance can
reduce malfunction and upset occurrences in these operations.
The occurrence of malfunctions in the kiln system is not
uncommon. For example, the introduction of improperly prepared
feed material to the burning zone can increase kiln exhaust gas
temperatures to the point that fabric filter bags are damaged
and ESP collection plates become warped. Both of these problems
increase atmospheric emissions.
Portland Cement Plant 60 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
Nonuniform feeding of the kilns also results in excess
atmospheric emissions and less efficient kiln operation. A
plugged feeding system can result in a loss of flame, which
leads to incomplete combustion, a condition that can produce an
explosion hazard in ESP's. (Occasionally combustion analyzers
are wired to the ESP so that if an explosive condition exists,
the ESP will be automatically deenergized.)
Spillage of feed materials also contributes to the genera-
tion of fugitive dust. Spilled material should be picked up
and reused before becoming entrained via wind and vehicle
movement in the area.
Leaks in the seals and ductwork ahead of the control
system can result in excess emissions, for a control device
cannot be effective unless the contaminated gases enter it.
Inleakages can also be a problem, in that they lead to corrosion
and excessive gas volumes to be handled by the equipment.
The injection of collected material from wet process kilns
is a source of concern in that it contributes to the tendency
for the cement dust to hydrate and solidify in the presence of
21
the slurry water.
A problem that occurs in the kiln itself results from a
tendency of layers of particulate to build up and form rings on
the inside of the kiln. This buildup decreases the cross-sec-
tional area, which causes an unstable kiln flame. When these
kiln rings break off, the clinker rolls down the kiln and
causes heavy particulate loading. (Ring formation is considered
to be a normal occurrence, not a malfunction. )
Malfunctions also can result from some of the preheating
improvements used to reduce kiln emissions. For example,
chains may break or suspension preheaters and grate preheaters
may no longer operate efficiently and thus not fulfill their
purpose.
Because of the abrasive nature of the material being pro-
cessed, the inspector should check cyclones being used in clinker
coolers for deterioration. The occurrence of excessive visible
Portland Cement Plant Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
emission from the cooler probably also indicates a pollutant mass
rate problem resulting from the large size of particles emitted
by this process.
The abrasiveness of clinker can cause problems during the
transfer of the product to storage. This abrasiveness can cause
ductwork and storage vessels to develop leaks, and fans and
bearings to become less efficient because of the wear, which can
in turn result in spilled product becoming airborne and creating
a fugitive dust problem. The use of telescoping or ladder chutes
in storage areas to reduce freefall distances during clinker un-
loading is a means of reducing emissions, but to be effective,
these devices must be free of splits, holes, or breaks.
Partially enclosed storage areas do not eliminate dust en-
trainment resulting from wind and loading and unloading opera-
tions. Complete enclosure is necessary.
The inspector should note the method used to dispose of col-
lected particulate not returned for processing. The use of open
trucks (a common occurrence) results in reentrainment of the col-
lected material. The proper removal method is by enclosed
trucks. Over-loaded collection hoppers also can result in in-
efficient operation of the control equipment.
The inspector should note the condition of paved and unpaved
roads in the plant. At properly operated plants, fugitive dust
is suppressed with water or chemical coatings. Larger quantities
of spilled material on the roads are picked up and reused.
The inspector should note the condition of the plant's pro-
cess monitoring equipment. Malfunctions can occur if it is not
operating properly. Frequently, instruments are not properly
maintained or used, or have not been calibrated recently. The
mere presence of the instruments can give a plant a false sense
of security until a serious problem of excess emissions results
from lack of proper attention.
Portland Cement Plant g2 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
5.2 STARTUP AND SHUTDOWN PROBLEMS
For economic reasons, scheduled startup and shutdowns of ce-
ment kilns are kept to a minimum (usually about once every 100
days), but malfunctions in some part of the kiln system can
22
result in unplanned shutdowns. When a kiln has been shut down
long enough to become cold, some type of preheating is necessary
before restarting it. (Such preheating is not required to start
up a kiln that has been down for only 3 or 4 hours because it
will still be hot.) The preheating procedure normally requires
4 to 12 hours, but it can take as long as 48 hours. The firing
temperature is gradually raised to prevent damage to the refrac-
tory material lining the kiln. The length of time required for
this depends upon the age of the refractory. Newer refractory
takes less time because it has a greater resistance to thermal
stress.
In coal-fired units equipped with ESP's, the heat-up proce-
dure usually begins by firing with natural gas or fuel oil,
rather than coal. During this initial period, the ESP is not
energized because of the explosion hazard created by subjecting
incomplete combustion products (CO) to sparking. Feed material
is not introduced until the temperature of the kiln has stabi-
lized and coal firing has begun and become stabilized. The ESP
is energized only after the temperature stabilizes above the
dewpoint and the CO levels are considered safe.
Heat-up time can be drastically reduced if the CO levels
are monitored. One major ESP manufacturer indicates that the
ESP can be partially energized throughout the entire heat-up
procedure if CO and temperature are carefully monitored. Of
course, should the monitor detect an explosion hazard or a
22
critical temperature increase, the ESP must be de-energized.
Excessive particulate and visible emissions usually occur
during the startup of kilns equipped with ESP's, either because
the units are not completely energized or not energized at all.
In this situation, the ESP functions simply as a settling cham-
ber. The use of fuel oil or natural gas as the preheating fuel
Portland Cement Plant 63 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
will not only reduce the time needed for heat-up, but also
reduce the atmospheric emissions.
During the preheating period, particulate emissions normally
are not significant until rotation of the kiln begins and the
feed material is introduced; however, preheating the kiln with
coal while introducing feed material and operating a de-energized
ESP will result in significant visible emissions.
Also important to the reduction of particulate and visible
emissions during startup is the retention of heat within the kiln
during the shutdown. This reduces the time needed for heat-up
and thus, total emissions. Techniques for keeping dust within
the kiln during these shutdowns are also important. Chains have
been effective for this purpose. Pre-cleaners before the ESP
(such as cyclones and multiple cyclones, which can operate
throughout the entire preheat) also provide a good method for
reducing emissions. They can remove 85 percent of the particu-
late that would normally be emitted if the ESP were not ener-
??
• -\ £* £*
gized.
The shutdown procedure can also increase particulate and
visible emissions. One way to alleviate this problem is to op-
erate the ESP until coal firing ceases or until the CO in the gas
22
stream approaches the explosive level.
Normally, kilns controlled by fabric filters do not have a
problem with excessive emissions during startup and shutdown, as
the collector continues to operate at full capacity during these
periods. It should be noted, however, that a plant occasionally
could choose to bypass the fabric filter during startup proce-
dures to prevent the bags from being overloaded. When this
occurs, excessive particulate emissions could result.
5.3 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION AND EMISSION CALCULATIONS
The ultimate objective of portland cement plant inspections
is to determine the compliance status of each of the sources.
Federal, state, and local regulations set limits on atmospheric
particulate emissions, usually according to process weight and
Portland Cement Plant 64 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
opacity. Occasionally, plants also must meet production rate
requirements.
A variety of methods can be used to determine compliance
status. Table 9 provides a summary of methods that can be used
for various processes. The greatest variety apply to the kiln.
The inspector should record opacity readings according to the EPA
Method 9 procedures (presented in Appendix D). These readings
should not include the uncombined water (steam) fraction of the
plume that frequently forms some distance from the stack outlet.
Stack test data and transmissometer readings are based only on
the primary formation within the stack. The inspector should
also record opacity readings of fugitive emissions from the kiln
and compare these readings with the applicable Federal, state, or
local limit. The inspector's report should describe compliance
of the kiln based on the opacity limit.
If opacity readings were obtained from the kiln during
previous stack tests, opacity readings taken during this inspec-
tion provide an indication of control equipment operation and can
be related to mass emissions. Conditions during the inspection
must be identical to those during the stack test. The source must
be operating at the same production level, gas flow rate must be
the same, and the plume must be of the same diameter and observed
from the same path, angle, and location. If the plant inspection
opacity readings significantly exceed opacities recorded during
the stack test, the mass emission rate is also likely to be
higher. This is particularly critical as the measured mass
emission rate approaches the limit of the emission regulation.
This situation warrants further stack tests to determine com-
pliance .
Material balance calculations for the kiln also can indicate
whether emissions are approaching the allowable limits and a
stack test is warranted. Figure 16 shows calculations for
determining allowable and uncontrolled emissions, and then (by
application of the Deutsch-Anderson equation for electrostatic
precipitator efficiency) gives an estimate of controlled (actual)
65
Portland Cement Plant Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
TABLE 9. SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
METHODS FOR VARIOUS PROCESSES
Opacity
Relate opacity to mass emission rate
Material balance
Change in operating parameters:
Decreased ESP power
Reduction in ESP fields
Decreased gas stream moisture
content
Increased flow rate
Increased insufflation
Increased 0^ content
Increased fuel consumption or
production rate
Deteriorated bags
Kiln
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Clinker cooler
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Finish mill
X
X
X
X
Other
X
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
66
Operating Conditions and
Compliance Determination
-------
PARTICULATE EMISSION CALCULATION FOR KILN
Given: Wet process kiln producing 31 tons/h of clinker or 62,000 Ib/h.
Kiln feedrate (volume) at 190 gal/min and a slurry density of
106.9 Ib/ft3. Thus, the wet weight is 162,922 Ib/h and dry solids
are 106,876 Ib/h because there is 34.4 percent moisture in the feed.
Kiln controlled by ESP, designed for 250,000 acfm and 103,680 ft?
of collecting area.
1. Allowable Emissions (AL)
Per NSPS: kiln is permitted 0.30 Ib/ton of dry feed
Per Section 1.2 of this report: 1.6 tons dry feed per ton cement produced
Based on kiln producing 31 tons per hour
AL = 31 tons/h x 1.6 tons/ton x 0.3 Ib/h
AL * 14.9 Ib/h
2. a) Uncontrolled Emission Rate Per Mass Balance (UN)
Dry feed = 162,922 Ib/h wet feed x (0.656) dry solids = 106,876 Ib/h
CO- lost during calcining = dry feed (Ib/h) x carbonate content (0.7275)
x C02 loss to oxidation (0.44)
CO., lost = 106,876 (0.7275)(0.44)
c = 34,211 Ib/h
UN = dry feed - (C02 lost + clinker production rate)
= 106,876 Ib/h - (34,211 Ib/h + 62,000 Ib/h)
= 10,665 Ib/h
b) Uncontrolled Emissions Per AP-42 (UN1)
AP-42 emission factor for uncontrolled wet process kilns is 228
Ib/ton of clinker produced
UN1 = 31 tons/h x 228 Ib/ton
= 7068 Ib/h
3. Actual Emissions Per Deutsch Anderson Equation for ESP Efficiency (AE)
a) Design efficiency for ESP per Deutsch-Anderson equation:
u *
r, = 0 - e V)100
where: n = collection efficiency, %
W = migration velocity, ft/s ,
A = electrode collecting area, ft
V = gas volume, acfs
Assume: Migration velocity of 0.34 ft/s per reference.
(The Mcllvaine Company, the Electrostatic Precipitator
Manual, 1975, plus updates.)
Given: Electrode plate area is 103,680 ft2 and gas flow is 250,000 acfm.
Specific collection area is 103,680 T 250 = 414.7 ft2/103 acfm
Calculation:
Convert V of 250,000 acfm to 4166.66 acfs by dividing by 60.
r 103,680,
n = (1 -
n = (1 - e-8'46)loo
n = (1 - 4723)10°
n = (1 - 0.0002117)100
n = 99.98% collection efficiency
Figure 16. Particulate emission estimate from portland cement
kiln including comparison to AP-42 emission factor.
Portland Cement Plant 67 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
Figure 16 (continued)
b) Actual Efficiency for ESP Per Deutsch-Anderson equation
„ - 100 (1 - e-°-06 K $)
where: K = constant value
P = corona power, watts
Q = flow, 103 ft3/min
K is derived from previous stack tests where inlet and outlet values
have been measured and an efficiency for the ESP determined at a given
power input. The efficiency is substituted into the above formula
along with the power input and solved for K.
In this case, we will assume an efficiency of 99 percent was measured
1n the test, where p = 69,993 watts and Q = 170 x 10^ acfm
Therefore K = 0.186 for this kiln
During the inspection, p = 66,250 watts and Q = 125 x 10 ft /min
Therefore n Ml - e'0'06 <°'186) ^100
n • (1 - e-5'9148)100
n Ml - 0.0026992)100
n = 99.73% collection efficiency
AE = UN x (100 - collection efficiency)/100
AE = 10,665 Ib/h x 0.0027
AE = 28.80 Ib/h or 0.54 Ib/ton of dry feed
Portland Cement Plant 68 Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 Compliance Determination
-------
emissions from the kiln. The Deutsch-Anderson equation is also
presented in a manner that shows the ESP was designed for ade-
quate control efficiency. Figure 16 also shows that the average
emission factor from AP-42 for wet-process kilns is not accurate
for this case. It may be a valid average for several kilns, but
it does not represent an accurate emission value for an indi-
vidual kiln.
The material balance calculation shown in Figure 16 for
uncontrolled emissions is also valid if the kiln is controlled by
a fabric filter. The control efficiency of the fabric filter
(actual emissions) is based on the amount of dust removed from
the collection hoppers of the device per unit of time. The plant
routinely maintains data on the amount of material removed from
the control device. Actual emission estimates from the ESP or
fabric filter can then be compared with allowable emissions. If
the estimated values exceed or approach allowable values, an
emission test is warranted.
Other indicators of potential compliance problems are lower
power levels to the ESP, increased fuel usage or production
rates, reduction in ESP operating fields, increased exhaust flow
rate, deterioration of fabric filter bags, increased insuffla-
tion, and increased oxygen to the control device. The combina-
tion of one or more of these parameters and an increase in opac-
ity indicates that the mass emission rate may be higher than the
values measured during the stack test. Stack tests for verifica-
tion of compliance are needed.
Fewer clear-cut methods are available for determining the
compliance status of clinker coolers. Regardless of the control
method used by source, opacity readings generally are not a good
indicator. For example, a significant increase in the mass
emission rate is not alway detectable because of the size of the
particles. If visible emissions are observed, however, an in-
crease in mass emissions is likely, and stack tests are necessary
for final compliance determination.
Portland Cement Plant Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 69 Compliance Determination
-------
A better indicator of compliance for clinker coolers is to
compare the operating parameters observed during the emission
test with parameters recorded during this inspection. The
nature of the clinker cooler prohibits material balance calcu-
lations. If the unit is controlled by an ESP, parameters that
can contribute to higher mass emissions are lower power levels to
the ESP, reduction in ESP operating fields, increased process
rate, increased exhaust flow rate, and decreased moisture content
in the gas stream. Moisture content of less than 4 to 10 percent
causes resistivity problems and lowers collection efficiency.
Depending on how closely the mass emission rate obtained from the
stack tests compared with the standard and how widely operating
parameters varied during the inspection, additional stack tests
may be necessary to determine clinker cooler compliance.
If the clinker cooler is controlled by a fabric filter,
pressure drop across the modules is not highly definitive.
Several bags must be broken before the pressure drop decreases
significantly. In general, the best parameter for determining
compliance, short of stack testing, is to check the condition of
the bags inside the fabric filter. Bag deterioration or excess
dust buildup on the clean side of the bag may indicate an in-
crease in mass emissions over those measured in the last stack
test. A current stack test is warranted for definitive compli-
ance determination.
The inspector can determine the compliance status of finish
mills by comparing opacity readings made during the inspection
with the opacity limit. Another method is to note if operating
parameters differ from those recorded during previous compliance
stack tests. These parameters include production level, exhaust
flow rate, and the condition of the bags in the fabric filter.
If there is significant variation in any one parameter or some
variation in several parameters, additional stack tests are
necessary for compliance determination.
As indicated in Section 4.5, fugitive emissions can present
a problem in several areas of a plant, particularly around ele-
vators, transporting areas, and storage piles. The inspector
Portland Cement Plant Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 70 Compliance Determination
-------
should take visible emission readings at these sources. The
following calculation shows an emission estimate of uncontrolled
fugitive emissions resulting from unloading, storing, and trans-
fer of raw materials.
Emission factor (per Section 4.5) = 3.0 to 5.0 Ib/ton
Assume 4.0 Ib/ton of uncontrolled emissions.
Emission estimate based on 650,000 tons per year delivered:
650,000 tons/yr x 4.0 Ib/ton x ton/2000 Ib = 1300 tons/yr.
The final product of a compliance inspection is a report.
Appendix F provides an example format for presenting the in-
spector's observations, calculations, assumptions and conclu-
sions .
Portland Cement Plant Operating Conditions and
Inspection Guide 2/82 71 Compliance Determination
-------
REFERENCES
1. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Terminology. Second
completely revised edition. Volume 4. Cement. 1967.
2. Ackerson, Dennis H. Compilation of Air Pollution Emission
Factors. Third Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Office of Air and Water Programs. Portland Cement
Manufacturing.
3. Mineral Industry Surveys. U.S. Department of Interior.
Bureau of Mines. November 12, 1981.
4. Midwest Research Institute. Particulate Pollutant System
Study. Vol. Ill, Handbook of Emission Properties. Cement
Manufacture U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1971.
5. Pit and Quarry Handbook and Buyers Guide 1975/1976. Pit and
Quarry Publications, Inc. Chicago. 1976.
6. Kulujian, N. J. Inspection Manual for the Enforcement of
New Source Performance Standards: Portland Cement Plants.
PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-02-1355, Task'No. 4.
January 1975.
7. U.S. Department of Interior. Mineral Facts and Problems.
1980 Edition. Cement. U.S. Bureau of Mines. 1980.
8. Hawks, R., and J. Richards. Field Inspection Report—Martin
Marietta Cement Co., Martinsburg, West Virginia. Prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by PEDCo
Environmental, Inc., under Contract No. 68-02-4147. November
1980.
9. The Mcllvaine Co. The Electrostatic Precipitator Manual.
Northbrook, Illinois. December 1976.
10. PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Industrial Boiler Inspection
Guide. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency under Contract No. 68-01-6310, Task No. 9. October
1981.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
72
References
-------
11. The Mcllvaine Company. The Fabric Filter Manual. North-
brook, Illinois. 1975 plus updates.
12. Szabo, M., and J. Richards. Field Inspection Report--
Columbia Cement Company, Bellingham, Washington. Prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by PEDCo
Environmental, Inc., under Contract No. 68-01-4147, Task No.
89. January 1980.
13. Szabo, M. F., and Y. M. Shah. Inspection Manual for Eval-
uation of Electrostatic Precipitator Performance. PEDCo
Environmental, Inc. EPA-340/1-79-007. February 1979.
14. Oglesby, S., Jr., and G. B. Nichols. Electrostatic Pre-
cipitation In: Air Pollution, 3rd Edition, Vol. IV. Engi-
neering Control of Air Pollution. Academic Press, New York.
1977.
15. PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Inspection and Operating and
Maintenance Guidelines for Secondary Lead Smelters. (Draft)
Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under
Contract 68-03-2924. November 1981.
16. PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Inspection Report for Visit to
Ideal Cement Co. Plant, Okay, Arkansas. Prepared for Region
VI of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. August 3, 1979.
17. PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Inspection Report for Visit to
Arkansas Cement Corporation Plant, Foreman, Arkansas. Pre-
pared for Region VI of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
August 3, 1979.
18. Rexnord Corporation. Plan and Elevation drawings dated
January 1979.
19. Jefferson County Air Quality Control Department. Stack test
data for Universal Atlas Corp., Portland Cement Plant, Lead,
Alabama. September 30, 1976.
20. PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Source Evaluation of Region IV
Nonattainment Areas to Determine TSP Emission Reduction
Capabilities. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency under Contract No. 68-02-2603, Task No. 2. June
1978.
21. Katari, V. Preparation of Process Description for Engineer-
ing Manual—Cement Plants. (Preliminary Draft.) Prepared
by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. December 1978.
Portland Cement Plant 73 References
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
22. Szabo, M., and Y. Shah. A Review of Particulate Emission
Problems During Startup of Cement Kilns Equipped with Elec-
trostatic Precipitators. Prepared by PEDCo Environmental,
Inc., for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March
1979.
Portland Cement Plant 74 References
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
APPENDIX A
New Source Performance Standards for Portland Cement
Subpart F—Standards of Performance
for Portland Cement Plants
160.60 Applicability and designation of
affected facility.
[42 FR 37936, July 25, 1977J
. (a) The provisions of this subpart are
applicable to the following affected fa-
cilities in Portland cement plants: kiln,
clinker cooler, raw mill system, finish
mill system, raw mill dryer, raw material
storage, clinker storage, finished product
storage, conveyor transfer points, bag-
cing and bulk loading and unloading sys-
tems.
(b) Any facility tinder paragraph (a)
of this section that commences construc-
tion or modification after August 17,
1971, is subject to the requirements of
this subpart.
(60.61 Definition*.
As used in this subpart, all terms not
defined herein shall have the meaning
given them In the Act and in Subpari A
.of this part.
.(a) "Portland cement plant" means
any facility manufacturing Portland ce-
ment by either the wet or dry process.
§ 60.62 Standard for paniculate matter.
(a) On and after the date on which
the performance test required to be con-
ducted by {-608 is completed, no owner
or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart shall cause to be discharged
Into the atmosphere from any kiln any
gases which:
(1) Contain particulate matter in ex-
cess of 0.15 kg per metric ton of feed
(dry basis) to the kiln (0.30 Ib per ton).
(2) Exhibit greater than 20 percent
opacity.
[39 FR 39872, November 12, 1974|
(b) On and after the date on which
the performance test required to be con-
ducted by 5 60.8 Is completed, no owner
or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart shall cause to be discharged
Into the atmosphere from any clinker
cooler any gases which:
< 1) Contain particulate matter ui ex-
cess of 0 050 kg per metric ton of feed
(dry basis) jo the kiln (040 Ib oer ton^
(2) Exhibit 10 percent opacity., or
greater.
(c) On and after the date on which
the performance test required to be con-
ducted by § 60 8 is completed, no owner
or operator subject to the provisions of
this subpart shall cause to be discharged
into the atmosphere from any affected
facility other than the kiln and clinker
cooler any gases which exhibit 10 percent
opacity, or greater.
(d) (Deleted).
[39 FR 20790, June 14, 1974, 40 FR
36250, October 6, 1975J
§ 60.63 Monitoring of operations.
(a) The owner or operator of anv
Portland cement plant subject to the pro-
visions of this part shall record the daily
production rates and kiln feed rates.
[39 FR 20790, June 14, 1974]
(Sec. 114 of the dean Air Act as tmended
(42 U.S.C. 7414).)
§ 60.64 Test methods and procedure*.
(a) The reference methods In Appen-
dix A to this part, except as provided for
In J 60.8(b), shall be used to determine
compliance with the standards pre-
scribed in { 60.62 as follows:
(1) Method 5 for the concentration
of particulate matter and the associated
moisture content;
(2) Method 1 for sample and velocity
traverses;
(3) Method 2 for velocity and volu-
metric flow rate; and
(4) Method 3 for gas analysis.
(b) For Method 5, the minimum sam-
pling time and minimum sample volume
for each run, except wnen process varia-
bles or other factors justify otherwise to
the satisfaction of the Administrator,
shall be as follows:
(1) 60 minutes and 0.85 dscm (30.>
dscf) for the kiln.
(2) 60 minutes and 1.15 dscm (40.6
dscf) for the clinker cooler.
(c) Total kiln feed rate (except fuels),
expressed in metric tons per hour on a
dry basis, shall be determined during
each testing period by suitable methods;
and shall be confirmed by a material bal-
ance over the production system.
(d) For each run, particulate matter
emissions, expressed in g 'metric ton 'of
kiln feed, shall be detejmmH by divid-
ing the emission rate in g/hr b the kiln
feed rate. The emission rate .*M»U be
determined by the equation, g/hr=QiX
c, where Q.=volumetrtc flow rate of the
total effluent In dscm/hr as determined
in accordance with paragraph Xa> (3) 01
this section, and c=particulate concen-
tration in g/dscm as determined in ac-
cordance with paragraph (a)(D of this
section.
[39 FR 20790, June 14, 1974)
(Sec. 114 of the Clean Air Act as amendec
(42 U.S.C. 7414).)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
A-l
Appendix A
-------
APPENDIX B
1981 DIRECTORY OF PORTLAND CEMENT MANUFACTURING PLANTS
Company (Division)
Alpha Portland Industries,
Inc. (Alpha Portland Cement
Co.)
Alpha Portland Industries,
Inc. (Alpha Portland
Cement Co.)
Alpha Portland Industries
Inc. (Alpha Portland
Cement Co.)
Alpha Portland Industries
Inc. (Alpha Portland
Cement Co.)
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co.
(Arkansas Cement Corp.)
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Ash Grove Cement Co.
Canada Cement Lafarge Ltd.
(Citadel Cement Corp.)
California Portland Cement
Co.
California Portland Cement
Co.
California Portland Cement
Co. (Arizona Portland Cement
Co.)
Centex Corp. (Illinois
Cement Co.)
Location
Lime Kiln, Maryland
St. Louis, Missouri
(to be closed end of
1981)
Cementon, New York
Orange, Texas
Foreman, Arkansas
Chanute, Kansas
Louisville, Nebraska
Demopolis, Alabama
Colton, California
Mojave, California
Rillito, Arizona
LaSalle, Illinois
Process
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet-Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
B-l
Appendix B
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Centex Corp. (Sevada
Cement Co.)
Centex Corp. (Centex Cement
Corp.)
Centex Corp. (Texas Cement
Co.)
Crane Co. (Medusa Corp.)
Crane Co. (Medusa Cement
Co.)
Crane Co. (Medusa Cement
Co.)
Crane Co. (Medusa Cement
Co.)
Cyprus Mines Corp. (Cyprus
Hawaiian Cement Corp.)
Filtrol Corp. (Columbia
Cement Corp.)
Filtrol Corp. (Columbia
Cement Corp.)
General Portland, Inc.
(California Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Florida Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Florida Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Victor Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Peninsular Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Whitehall Cement)
General Portland, Inc.
(Signal Mountain Div.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location
Fernley, Nevada
Corpus Christi, Texas
Buda, Texas
Clinchfield, Georgia
Charlevoix, Michigan
Wampum, Pennsylvania
York, Pennsylvania
Barbers Point, Hawaii
Zanesville, Ohio
Bellingham, Washington
Los Robles, California
Miami, Florida
Tampa, Florida
Fredonia, Kansas
Paulding, Ohio
Cementon, Pennsylvania
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Process
Dry
Wet
Dry
Dry-Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Appendix B
B-2
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
General Portland, Inc.
(Trinity North Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Trinity North Div.)
General Portland, Inc.
(Trinity North Div.)
Genstar Corp. (Genstar
Cement and Lime Co.)
Genstar Corp. (Gala Veras
Cement Div.)
Giant Portland and Masonry
Cement Co.
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
(Phoenix Cement Co.)
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
(Riverside Cement Co.)
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
(Riverside Cement Co.)
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
(Peerless Cement Co.)
Gifford-Hill and Co., Inc.
(Gifford-Hill Portland
Cement Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Location Process
Dallas, Texas Wet
Fort Worth, Texas Wet
New Braunfels, Texas Dry
Redding, California Dry
San Andreas, California Wet
Harleyville, South Wet
Carolina
Harleyville, South Dry
Carolina
Clarkdale, Arizona Dry
Crestmore, California Dry
Oro Grande, California Dry
Detroit, Michigan Wet
Midlothian, Texas Wet
Rockmart, Georgia Dry
Oglesby, Illinois Dry
Hagerstown, Maryland Dry
Brandon, Mississippi Wet
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
B-3
Appendix B
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
(Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Gulf & Western Industries,
Inc. (Marquette Co.)
Heidelberger Zeraent AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Heidelberger Zement AG
(Lehigh Portland Cement Co.)
Location
Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Catskill, New York
Superior, Ohio
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Leeds, Alabama
Buffington, Indiana
Mitchell, Indiana
Mason City, Iowa
Independence, Kansas
Union Bridge, Maryland
Hannibal, Missouri
Alsen, New York
Process
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Grinding
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Wet
Dry
Northhampton, Pennsylvania Wet
Waco, Texas
Wet-Dry
Metaline Falls, Washington Dry
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Grinding
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix B
B-4
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
H.B. Zachry Co. (Capitol
Aggregates, Inc.)
H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
(Missouri Portland Cement
Co.)
H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
(Missouri Portland Cement
Co.)
H.K. Porter Co., Inc.
(Missouri Portland Cement
(Co.)
Holderbank Group
(Dundee Cement Co.)
Holderbank Group
(Dundee Cement Co.)
Holderbank Group
(Santee Portland Cement
Corp., Dundee Cement Co.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Location Process
San Antonio, Texas Wet
Joppa, Illinois Dry
St. Louis, Missouri Wet
Sugar Creek, Missouri Dry
Dundee, Michigan Wet
Clarksville, Missouri Wet
Hollyhill, South Carolina Wet
Theodore, Alabama
Okay, Arkansas
Boettcher, Colorado
Portland, Colorado
Trident, Montana
Superior, Nebraska
Tijevas, New Mexico
Castle Hayne, North
Carolina
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
B-5
Appendix B
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.
(Cement Div.)
Institute Finanziano Indus-
trial (Hercules Cement Co.)
Institute Finanziano Indus-
trial (River Cement Co.)
Kaiser Cement Corp.
Kaiser Cement Corp.
Kaiser Cement Corp.
Kaiser Cement Corp.
Kaiser Cement Corp.
Keystone Portland Cement Co.
Lake Ontario Cement Ltd.
(Aetna Cement Corp.)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location
Ada, Oklahoma
Knoxville, Tennessee
Galena Park, Texas
Devils Slide, Utah
Seattle, Washington
Process
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Wet
Stockertown, Pennsylvania Dry
Festus, Missouri
Dry
Lucerne Valley, California Wet
Permanente, California Wet
Waianae, Hawaii Wet
Montana City, Montana Wet
San Antonio, Texas Dry
Bath, Pennsylvania Wet
Essexville, Michigan Grinding
Santa Cruz, California Dry
Dixon, Illinois Dry
Greencastle, Indiana Wet
Bonner Springs, Kansas Wet
Appendix B
B-6
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
I,
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc.
(Cement and Construction
Mat. Group)
Lone Star Industries, Inc,
(Portland Cement Co. of
Utah)
Lone Star Industries, Inc,
(Lonestar Florida
Pennsuco, Inc.)
Louisville Cement Co.
Louisville Cement Co.
Louisville Cement Co.
(Bessemer Cement Co.)
Marmac Corp. (Gulf Coast
Portland Cement Co.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location
New Orleans, Louisiana
Pryor, Oklahoma
Nazareth, Pennsylvania
Houston, Texas
Maryneal, Texas
Roanoke, Virginia
Seattle, Washington
Salt Lake City, Utah
Miami, Florida
Logansport, Indiana
Speed, Indiana
Bessemer, Pennsylvania
Houston, Texas
Calera, Alabama
Process
Wet
Dry
Dry
Wet
Dry
Dry
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Dry
Appendix B
B-7
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
Martin Marietta Corp.
(Martin Marietta Cement
Div.)
The Monarch Cement Co.
The Monarch Cement Co.
Monolith Portland Cement Co.
Monolith Portland Cement Co.
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Florida Mining & Materials
Corp.)
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Kosmos Cement Co., Inc.)
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Glens Falls Portland
Cement Co., Inc.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location Process
Lyons, Colorado Dry
Atlanta, Georgia Dry
Davenport, Iowa Wet
West Des Moines, Iowa Wet
Thomaston, Maine Wet
Tulsa, Oklahoma Dry
Northhampton, Pennsylvania . Dry
Martinsburg, West Virginia Wet
Des Moines, Iowa
Humboldt, Kansas
Monolith, California
Laramie, Wyoming
Brooksville, Florida
Kosmosdale, Kentucky
Glens Falls, New York
B-8
Wet
Dry
Wet
Wet
Dry
Dry
Dry
Appendix B
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Glens Falls Portland
Cement Co., Inc.)
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Dixie Cement Co., Inc.)
Moore McCormack Cement, Inc.
(Dixie Cement Co., Inc.)
National Gypsum Co.
(Allentown Cement Div.)
National Gypsum Co.
(Huron Cement Div.)
National Gypsum Co.
(Huron Cement Div.)
National Portland Cement Co.
of Florida, Inc.
Newmont Mining Corop.
(Atlantic Cement Co., Inc.)
Northwestern States Portland
Cement, Co.
Oregon Portland Cement Co.
Oregon Portland Cement Co.
Oregon Portland Cement Co.
(Idaho Portland Cement Div.)
Penn-West Cement Co., Inc.
Presa S.P.A. Cementeria di
Robilante (Alamo Cement
Co.) (joint venture)
Puerto Rican Cement Co., Inc.
Rinker Materials Corp.
(Rinker Portland Cement
Corp.)
San Juan Cement Co., Inc.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location
Howes Cave, New York
Kingsport, Tennessee
Richard City, Tennessee
Evansville, Pennsylvania
Alpena, Michigan
Superior, Wisconsin
Bradenton, Florida
Ravena, New York
Mason City, Iowa
Durkee, Oregon
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Inkom, Idaho
West Winfield, Pennsyl-
vania
Cementville, Texas
Ponce, Puerto Rico
Miami, Florida
Dorado, Puerto Rico
B-9
Process
Grinding
Wet
Wet
Dry
Dry
Grinding
Grinding
Wet
Dry
Dry-Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Wet
Appendix B
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Societe Anonyme des Ciments
Vicat (National Cement Co.,
Inc.)
Societe des Ciments Francais
(Coplay Cement Co.)
Societe des Ciments Francais
(Coplay Cement Co.)
Societe des climents Francais
(Coplay Cement Co.)
South Dakota Cement Plant
Commission
Southdown, Inc.
(Southwestern Portland
Cement Co.)
Southdown, Inc.
(Southwestern Portland
Cement Co.)
Southdown, Inc.
(Southwestern Portland
Cement Co.)
Southdown, Inc.
(Southwestern Portland
Cement Co.)
Southdown, Inc.
(Southwestern Portland
Cement Co.)
Standard Machine and Equip-
ment Co. (SME Cement, Inc.)
Standard Machine and Equip-
Co. (SME Cement, Inc.)
St. Mary's Cement Ltd
(Wyandotte Cement Inc\) •
Texas Industries, Inc.
Texas Industries, Inc.
(TXI Cement Co.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Location
Ragland, Alabama
Coplay, Pennsylvania
Nazareth, Pennsylvania
Nazareth, Pennsylvania
Process
Dry
Grinding
Dry
Grinding
Rapid City, South Dakota Wet-Dry
Victorville, California
Fairborn, Ohio
Amarillo, Texas
El Paso, Texas
Odessa, Texas
Middlebranch, Ohio
Sylvania, Ohio
Wyandotte, Michigan
Midlothian, Texas
New Braufels, Texas
Dry-Wet
Dry-Wet
Wet
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Grinding
Wet
Dry
Appendix B
B-10
-------
APPENDIX B (continued)
Company (Division)
Texas Industries, Inc.
(United Cement Co.)
Location Process
Artesia, Mississippi Wet
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix B
B-ll
-------
APPENDIX C
SAMPLE FORMS
Portland Cement Plant C-l Appendix C
Inspection Guide 2/82 Appendix C
-------
PRE-INSPECTION ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES CHECKLIST
Name of company: . .—
Address: ____
Responsible person:
Previous Inspection:
Date: .
Findings:
Process rate: tons/day Kiln 03: %.
Gas temperaturel "F Gas flow rate: acfm
Emission control equipment parameters:
Stack Test:
Testing company:
Date of test:
Results (obtain copy 1f possible): _.
Visible emissions observations:
Compliance status: ,
Action taken: -
Process rate: tons/day Kiln 02 %
Gas temperature: °_f_ Gas flow rate: acfm
Gas moisture content: *
Emission control equipment parameters:
Visible Emission Observations (other than above):
Date:
Average readings:
Complaints:
Dates, nature, and findings:
Malfunctions:
Dates, nature, duration, and action taken:
Compliance Schedule:
Portland Cement Plant C-2 Appendix C
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
CHECKLIST FOR PROCESS DATA
Kiln:
Dimensions:
Chains:
Process:
Slurry:
Feed rate
Yes
Wet
Type cement produced:
Dry sol Ids tons/h
Fuel:
Type:
__
Dry
gal/min Moisture
ft
% Carbonate
Quality:
ash;
% sulfur;
Firing rate tons/h
Alkali content of feed:
Btu/lb heat
content
Volume of clinker production:
Dust reentrainment:
Volume Ib/h Source
Flue gas:
Volume acfm
°F
J,
tons/h
Temperature
% oxygen
Clinker Cooler:
Type:
Flue gas:
Volume
Temperature
Clinker cooling rate
Finishing Mill:
Number:
acfm
°F
tons/h
Volume handled by each:
Type:
tons/h
Flue gas:
Volume
Temperature
acfm
CF
Crusher
Number:
Volume handled by each:
Type:
tons/h
Flue gas:
Volume
Temperature
acfm
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
C-3
Appendix C
-------
CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL
Kiln:
Fabric filter: Yes No
Cloth
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator:
Total plate area
Wire length
Specific collection area
Collection efficiency
Precleaner: Type
Description
Clinker Cooler:
Fabric filter: Yes
Cloth type
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Multiple cyclone: Yes
Number of tubes
Tube diameter
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
Electrostatic precipitator:
Plate area
Wire length
Specific collection area
Collection efficiency
Gravel bed: Yes
Pressure drop
Number of compartments
Collection efficiency
Finishing Mill :
Fabric filter: Yes
Cloth type
Area
Air-to-cloth ratio
Pressure drop
Collection efficiency
ft*
acfm/ft^
in. H?0
%
Yes No
ft^
ft
,Aft'X
1000 acfm
%
No
acfm/
ft*
in. H?0
%
No
in.
in. H20
%
Yes No
ftz
ft
ft*/
1000 acfm
%
No
in. H20
%
No
ft*
acfm/
ft*
in. H20
%
EQUIPMENT
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity ft/s
Number T/R sets
water rate qal/min
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air
Fields
Chambers
Superficial velocity ft/s
Number T/R sets
Water rate gal/min
Type of bag cleaning:
Shaker
Pulse jet
Reverse air
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
C-4
Appendix C
-------
APPENDIX D
Method 9 - Visible Emission Evaluation
lOETHOD • VISUAL DETERMINATION OF THE
OPACITY OP EMISSIONS PROM 8TATIONABT
SOURCES
Many stationary sources discharge visible
•missions into the atmosphere; these emis-
sions are usually in the shape at a plume.
This method involves the determination of
plume opacity by qualified observers. The
method includes procedures for the training
and certification of observers, and procedures
to be used in the field for determination of
plume opacity. The appearance of a plume as
viewed by an observer depends upon a num-
ber of variables, some of which may be con-
trollable and some of which may not be
controllable In the field. Variables which can
be controlled to an. extent to which they no
longer exert a significant influence upon
plume appearance include: Angle of the ob-
server with respect to the plume; angle of the
observer with respect to the sun; point of
observation of attached and detached steam
plume; and angle of the observer with re-
spect to a plume emitted from a rectangular
stack with a large length to width ratio. The
method Includes specific criteria applicable
to these variables.
Other variables which may not be control-
lable in the field are luminescence and color
contrast between the plume and the back-
ground against which the plume is viewed.
These variables exert an Influence upon the
appearance of a plume as viewed by an ob-
server, and can affect the ability of the ob-
server to accurately assign opacity values
to the observed plume. Studies of the theory
of plume opacity and field studies have dem-
onstrated that a plume Is most visible and
presents the greatest apparent opacity when
viewed against a contrasting background. It
follows from this, and is confirmed by field
trials, that the opacity of a plume, viewed
under conditions where a contrasting back-
ground Is present can be assigned with the
greatest degree of accuracy. However, the po-
tential for a positive error is also the greatest
when a plume is viewed under ouch contrast*
Ing conditions. Under conditions presenting
a less contrasting background, the apparent
opacity of a plume is less and approaches
cero as the color and luminescence contrast
decrease toward zero. As a result; significant
negative bias and negative errors can b»
made when a plume Is viewed under less
contrasting conditions. A negative bias de-
creases rather than increases the possibility
that a plant operator will be cited for a vio-
lation of opacity standards due to observer
error.
Studies have been undertaken to determine
the magnitude of positive errors which can
be made by qualified observers while read-
ing plumes under contrasting conditions and
using the procedures set forth in this
method. The results of these studies (field
trials) which involve a total of 769 sets of
26 readings each are as follows:
(l) For black plumes (133 sets at a smoke
generator), 100 percent of the sets were
read with a positive error1 of less than ".5
percent opacity; 99 percent were read with
a positive error of less than 5 percent opacity.
(2) For white plumes (170 sets at a smoke
generator, 168 sets at a coal-fired power plant,
298 sets at a sulfurlc acid plant), 99 percent
of the sets were read with a positive error of
less than 7.5 percent opacity; 95 percent were
read with a positive error of less than 6 per-
cent opacity.
The positive observational error associated
with an average of twenty-five readings is
therefore established. The accuracy of the
method must be taken into account when
determining possible violations of appli-
cable opacity standards.
1 For a set, positive error=average opacity
determined by observers' 25 observations —
average opacity determined from transmte-
soometor's 26 recordings.
1. Principle and applicability.
U Principle. The opacity of emissions
from stationary sources is determined vis-
ually by a qualified observer.
1.2 Applicability. This method Is appli-
cable for the determination of the opacity
of emissions from stationary sources pur-
suant to $60.ll(b) and for qualifying ob-
servers for visually determining opacity of
•missions.
2. Procedures. The observer qualified in
accordance with paragraph 8 of this method
shall use the following procedures for vis-
ually determining the opacity of emissions:
2.1 Position. The qualified observer shall
stand at a distance sufficient to provide a
clear view of the emissions with the sun
oriented in the 140' sector to his back. Con-
sistent with maintaining the above require-
ment, the observer shall, as much as possible,
make hl3 observations from a position such
that his line of vision Is approximately
perpendicular to the plume direction, and
when observing opacity of emissions from
rectangular outlets (e.g. roof monitors, open
baghouses, noncircular stacks), approxi-
mately perpendicular to the longer axis of
the outlet. The observer's line of sight should
not include more than one plume at a time
when multiple stacks are Involved, and In
any case the observer should make his ob-
servations with his line of sight perpendicu-
lar to the longer axis of such a set-of multi-
ple stacks (e.g. stub stacks on baghouses).
2.2 Field records. The observer shall re-
cord the name of the plant, emission loca-
tion, type facility, observer's name and
affiliation, and the date on a field data sheet
(Figure 9-1). The time, estimated distance
to the emission location, approximate wind
direction, estimated wind speed, description
of the sky condition (presence and color of
clouds), and plume background are recorded
on a field data sheet at the time opacity read-
ings are initiated and completed.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
D-l
Appendix D
-------
a.3 Observations. Opacity observation.
shall be made at the point of greatest opacity
In that portion of the plume where con-
densed water vapor Is not present. The ob-
server shall not look continuously at the
plume, but Instead shall observe the plume
momentarily at 16-second Intervals.
2.S.1 Attached steam plumes. When con-
densed water vapor Is present within the
plume as It emerges from the emission out-
let, opacity observations shall be made be-
yond the point In the plume at which con-
densed water vapor Is no longer visible. The
observer shall record the approximate dis-
tance from the emission outlet to the point
In the plume at which the observations are
made.
2.32 Detached steam plume. When water
vapor in the plume condenses and becomes
visible at a distinct distance from the emis-
sion outlet, the opacity of emissions should
be evaluated at the emission outlet prior to
the condensation of water vapor and the for-
mation of the steam plume.
2.4 Recording observations. Opacity ob-
servations shall be recorded to the nearest 6
percent at 15-second Intervals on an ob«
servatlonal record sheet. (See Figure 9-2 for
-an example.) A minimum of 24 observations
shall be recorded. Each momentary observa-
tion recorded shall be deemed to represent
the average opacity of emissions for a 15-
second period.
2.6 Data Reduction. Opacity shall be de-
termined as an average of 24 consecutive
observations recorded at 15-sccond intervals,
Divide the observations recorded on the recj
ord sheet into sets of 24 corsecutlve obser-
vations, A set Is composed of any 24 con-
secutive observations. Sets need not be con-
secutive In time and IB no case shall two
sets overlap. For each set of 24 observations,
calculate the average by summing the opacity
of the 24 observations and dividing this sum
by 24. If an applicable standard specifies an
averaging time requiring more than 24 ob-
servations, calculate the average, for all ob-
servations made during the specified time
period. Record the average opacity on a record
she2t. (See Figure 9-1 for an example.)
3. Qualifications and testing.
3.1 Certification requirements. To receive
certification as a qualified observer, a can-
didate must be tested and demonstrate the
ability to assign opacity readings In 6 percent
increments to 26 different black plumes and
26 different white plumes, with an error
not to exceed 15 percent opacity 'on any one
reading and an average error not to exceed
7.5 percent opacity in each category. Candi-
dates shall be tested according to the pro-
cedures described In paragraph 3.2. Smoke
generators used pursuant to paragraph 3.2
shall be equipped with a smoke meter which
meets the requirements of paragraph 3.3.
The certification shall be valid for a period
of 6 months, at which time the qualification
procedure must be repeated by any observer
In order to retain certification.
3.2 Certification procedure. The certifica-
tion test consists of showing the candidate a
complete run of 50 plumes—26 black plumes
and 25 white plumes—generated by a smoke
generator. Plumes within each set of 25 black
and 25 white runs shall be presented In ran-
dom order. The candidate assigns an opacity
value to each plume and records his obser-
vation on a suitable form. At the completion
of each run of 60 readings, the score of the
candidate is determined. If a candidate falls
to qualify, the complete run of 50 readings
must be repeated In any retest. The smoke
test may be administered as part of a smoke
school or training program, and may be pre-
ceded by training or familiarization runs of
the smoke generator during which candidates
are shown black and white plumes of known
opacity.
3.3 Smoke generator specifications. Any
smoke generator used for the purposes of
paragraph 3.2 shall be equipped with a smoke
meter installed to measure opacity across
the diameter of the smoke generator stack.
The smoke meter output shall display in-
stack opacity based upon a pathlength equal
to the stack exit diameter, on a full 0 to 100
percent chart recorder scale. The smoke
meter optical design and performance shall
meet the specifications shown in Table 9-1.
The smoke meter shall be calibrated as pre-
scribed In paragraph 3.3.1 prior to the con-
duct of each smoke reading test. At the
completion of each test, the zero and span
drift.shall be checked and if the drift ex-
ceeds ±1 percent opacity, the condition shall
be corrected prior to conducting any subse-
quent test runs. The smoke meter shall be
demonstrated, at the time of Installation, to
meet the specifications listed In Table 9-1.
This demonstration shall be repeated fol-
lowing any subsequent repair or replacement
of the photocell or associated electronic cir-
cuitry Including the chart recorder or output
meter, or every 6 months, whichever occurs
first.
TABLE •-!—SMOKE METES DESIGN AND
PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS
Parameter: Specification
a. Light source Incandescent lamp
operated at nominal
rated voltage.
b. Spectral response Photoplc (daylight
of photocell. spectral response of
the human eye—
reference 4.3).
c. Angle of view 15* maximum total
angle.
d. Angle of projec- 15* maximum total
tlon. angle.
e. Calibration error. ±3% opacity, maxi-
mum.
f. Zero and span ±1% opacity, 30
drift. minutes.
g. Response tune... £5 seconds.
3.3.1 Calibration. The smoke meter Is
calibrated after allowing a minimum of 30
minutes warmup by alternately producing
simulated opacity of 0 percent and 100 per-
cent. When stable response at 0 percent or
100 percent is noted, the smoke meter is ad-
justed to produce an output of 0 percent or
100 percent, as appropriate. This calibration
shall be repeated until stable 0 percent and
100 percent readings are produced without
adjustment. Simulated 0 percent and 100
percent opacity values may be produced by
alternately switching the power to the light
source on and off while the smoke generator
Is not producing smoke.
8.3.2 Smoke meter evaluation. The smoke
meter design and performance are to be
evaluated as follows:
3.3.2.1 Light source. Verify from manu-
facturer's data and from voltage measure-
ments made at the lamp, as Installed, that
the lamp is operated within ±6^ percent of
t.v>A nominal rated voltage.
3.3.2.2 Spectral response of photocell.
Verify from manufacturer's data that the
photocell has a photoplc response: I.e., the
spectral sensitivity of the cell shall closely
approximate the standard spectral-luminos-
ity curve for photopic vision which is refer-
enced In (b) of Table 9-1.
3.3.2.3 Angle of view. Check construction
geometry to ensure that the total angle of
view of the smoke plume, as seen by the
photocell, does not exceed 15*. The total
angle of view may be calculated from: 9=9
tan-' d/2L, where 9=total angle of view;
d = the sum of the photocell diameter+the
diameter of the limiting aperture; and
L=the distance from the photocell to the
limiting aperture. The limiting aperture ta
the point in the path between the photocell
and the smoke plume where the angle of
view Is most restricted. In smoke generator
smoke meters this Is normally an orifice
plate.
3.3.2.4 Angle of projection. Check con-
struction geometry to ensure that the total
angle of projection of the lamp on the
smoke plume does not exceed 16°. The total
angle of projection may be calculated from:
6=2 tan-1 d/2L, where 9= total angle of pro-
jection; d= the sum of the length of th*
lamp filament + the diameter of the limiting
aperture; and L= the distance from the lamp
to the limiting aperture.
3.3.2.5 Calibration error. Using neutral-
density filters of known opacity, check the
error'between the actual response and the"
theoretical linear response of the smoke
meter. This check is accomplished by first
calibrating the smoke meter according t»
S.3.1 and then inserting a series of three
neutral-density filters of nominal opacity of
20, 60. and 76 percent in the smoke meter
pathlength. Filters callbarted within ±3 per-
cent shall be used. Care should be takea
when inserting the filters to prevent stray
light from affecting the meter. Make a total
of five nonconsecutlve readings for each
filter. The maximum error on any one read-
Ing shall be 3 percent opacity.
3.3.2.6 Zero and span drift. Determine
the zero and span drift by calibrating and
operating the smoke generator in a normal
manner over a 1-hour period. The drift is
measured by checking the zero and span at
the end of this period.
3.3.2.7 Response time. Determine the re-
sponse time by producng the series of five
simulated 0 percent and 100 percent opacity
values and observing the time required to
reach stable response. Opacity values of 0
percent and 100 percent may be simulated
by alternately switching the power to the
light source off and on while the smoke
generator is not operating.
4. References.
4.1 Air Pollution Control District Rules
and Regulations, Los Angeles County Air
Pollution Control District, Regulation IV,
Prohibitions, Rule 60.
4.2 Welsburd, Melvln I., Field Operations
and Enforcement Manual for Air, UJ3. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Research Tri-
angle Park. N.C., APTD-1100, August 1972.
pp. 4.1-4.36..
4.3 Condon, E. XT., and Odlshaw, H., Hand-
book of Physics, McGraw-Hill Co., N.T., N.T,
1068, Table 3.1, p. 6-52.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
D-2
Appendix D
-------
Jj
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
RE
COMPANY
LOCATION
TEST NUMBER
DATE
TYPE FACILITY
CONTROL DEVICE
FIGURE 9-1
CORD OF VISUAL DETERMINATION or OPACITY PAGE of
HOURS OF OBSERVATION
OBSERVER
OBSERVER CERTIFICATION DATE
OBSERVER AFFILIATION
POINT OF EMISSIONS
HEIGHT OF DISCHARGE POINT
u
00
0>
3
d.
H-
X
O
CLOCK TIME
OBSERVER LOCATION
Distance to Discharge
"Direction from Discharge
Height of Observation Point
BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Wind Direction
Wind Speed
Ambient Temperature
SKY CONDITIONS (clear,
overcast, % clouds, etc.)
PLUME DESCRIPTION
Color
Distance Visible
OTHER I;;FOR;JATJOII
Initial
Final
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Set
Number
Urn*
Start—End
Opacity
Sum
"verage
Readings ranged from to X opadiy
The source v/as/was not 'In compliance with .at
the time evaluation was made.
-------
ortland Cement
nspection Guid<
COMPANY
LOCATION
tEST NUMBER
DATE
FIGURE 9-2 (
N)
\
00
•5
•d
fD
OBSERVATION RECORD
OBSERVER
PAGE
OF
TYPE FACILITY
POINT OF EMISSlMT
Hr.
M1n.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
71
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
0
Seconds
15
30
£b
STEAM PLUME
(check 1f applicable)
Attached
Detached
COMMENTS
FIGURE 9-2 C
(Cor
COMPANY
LOCATION
TEST
DATE
Hr.
NUMBER
M1n.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Seconds
0
Ib
30
4b
(cf
At
OBSERVATION RECORD
PAGE
OF
OBSERVER
TYPE FACILITY
POINT OF EMISSWT
-------
APPENDIX E
DESCRIPTION OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS
I. ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS
The mechanism by which an electrostatic precipitator (ESP)
removes particulate matter from a gas stream consists of three
steps: 1) the suspended particles in the gas stream are given a
charge, 2) the electrically charged particles are attracted to an
oppositely charged surface, and 3) the collected particles are
discharged from the surface and fall into a hopper.
The electrostatic precipitator (as shown in Figure E-l)
consists of a shell of metal, tile, or some similar material in
which are suspended grounded steel plates, which act as collect-
ing electrodes, and negatively charged metal wires or rods, which
act as discharge electrodes. The wires are suspended between
the plates, and weights are attached to them to keep them taut.
A high-voltage transformer-rectifier (TR) system provides
the wires with a high-voltage direct current (dc) power source.
The transformer steps up the alternating current (ac) supply
generated at the plant to the desired value before the rectifier
converts it to dc voltage. Each T-R set forms one field; thus
the unit pictured has three fields (i.e., three T-R sets). Gas
flow uniformity across the precipitator cross section is regu-
lated by the use of perforated distribution plates in the gas
inlet to the precipitator. Particles are removed from the col-
lecting electrodes by periodic rapping or vibration of the
plates. The plate cleaning mechanism is activated either pneu-
2
matically or electrically.
The design of an electrostatic precipitator is based on a
specific collection area (SCA) measured in terms of collecting
Portland Cement Plant E-l Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
TRANSFORMER-RECTIFIER
TOP END
FRAMES
HIGH VOLTAGE
CONDUCTOR
HIGH TENSION
SUPPORT INSULATORS
PERFORATED
DISTRIBUTION
PLATES
GROUND SWITCH BOX
OR TRANSFORMER
BOTTOM END
FRAMES
UPPER HIGH TENSION
HANGER ASSEMBLY
(HANGER AND HANGER
FRAME)
UPPER HIGH TENSION
WIRE SUPPORT FRAME
HORIZONTAL
BRACING STRUT
WIRE WEIGHTS
STEADYING BARS
DISCHARGE ELECTRODE
VIBRATOR
COLLECTING
ELECTRODE
RAPPERS
TOP HOUSING
HOT ROOF
ACCESS DOOR
HOT ROOF
SIDE
FRAMES
DISCHARGE
ELECTRODE
WIRES
ACCESS DOOR BETWEEN
COLLECTING PLATE
SECTIONS
PRECIPITATOR
BASE PLATE
SLIDE PLATE
PACKAGE
SUPPORT STRUCTURE
CAP PLATE
LOWER HIGH TENSION
STEADYING FRAME
COLLECTING
ELECTRODE
PLATES
Figure E-l. Typical electrostatic precipitator
assembly with top housing.
(Courtesy of Research-Cottrell)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-2
Appendix E
-------
electrode plate area required per unit of gas flow rate (square
feet per 1000 actual cubic feet of gas per minute), the gas flow
rate and temperature, and the power density required by particle
resistivity and size. The Deutsch-Anderson equation sets the
relationship between required collection efficiency, velocity
migration of the dust particles toward the collecting electrode,
and the ratio of plate collection area to the gas volume:
A
n - (1-e w V) 100
where n = efficiency, %
w = particle migration velocity, ft/s
2
A = plate area, ft
V = gas flow, ft3/s
In operation, the precipitator efficiency is affected by the
gas flow rate, gas temperature, and the electrical voltage and
amperage used to create the electrostatic fields in the precipi-
tator. The gas flow and temperature are established by the
process unit from which the exhaust gas stream emanates. Nor-
mally, the voltage and current applied to the discharge elec-
trodes are automatically controlled by the electrical rectifier
circuit in response to an established electrical spark rate in
the precipitator. As voltage increases, both precipitator effi-
ciency and spark rate increase until excessive sparking overrides
the efficiency gains from high voltage. A spark is a short cir-
cuit that causes a momentary voltage drop and efficiency loss.3
Figure E-2 illustrates the instrumentation required for
monitoring and controlling an electrostatic precipitator instal-
lation. These instruments fall into two classifications: 1)
direct instrumentation (directly involved in ESP operation), and
2) indirect instrumentation (indirectly associated with ESP
operation).
Portland Cement Plant E-3 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
to
en
O
O
O)
I/)
c:
CM
I
O)
13
en
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-4
Appendix E
-------
Direct Instrumentation
The instruments directly involved with ESP operation are
those that relate to the electrical power used to charge the
precipitator electrodes. These instruments measure the supplied
voltage and current, the electrode voltage and current, and the
spark rate for the electrodes for each transformer-rectifier set
in the ESP. Figure E-3 shows the arrangement of meters on a
typical control panel.
Indirect Instrumentation
Those instruments indirectly associated with ESP operation
are those that measure parameters that affect or are affected by
ESP performance. These instruments measure the inlet gas flow
rate and temperature, the oxygen and carbon monoxide content of
the exhaust gas, outlet gas opacity, and levels of particles in
the collecting hoppers (see again Figure E-2). Measurement
readouts are made at the ESP control panel. Figures E-4 and E-5
show examples of these panel meters.
II. FABRIC FILTERS
A fabric filter system consists of a woven or felted textile
material, usually in the shape of a cylindrical bag, housed in a
metal enclosure having inlet and outlet gas connections, a dust
discharge hopper, and a means for periodic cleaning of the fab-
ric. Figure E-6 depicts a fabric filter system.
The particulate-laden gas enters the filter through the
inlet gas connection and passes through the filtering medium,
where the particulate matter is retained. The gas then leaves
the filter via the outlet gas connection.
The operation cycle of most fabric filters has two phases:
1) a filtration phase during which material is deposited on the
fabric while the pressure drop across the deposited material in-
creases and the total flow decreases; 2) a cleaning phase, with
Portland Cement Plant E-5 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82 Appendix E
-------
Figure E-3. Typical ESP control panel.
(Courtesy of Babcock and Wilcox Co.)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-6
Appendix E
-------
Figure E-4. Photograph of an oxygen meter
on a control board.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-7
Appendix E
-------
EMISSION
CONTROL
EQUIPMENT
GAS FLOW
TRANSITION
DUCT
LIGHT SOURCE
! :
! i
DUCT TO STACK
Xn
DETECTOR
O
O
o
CONTROL UNIT
O
o
o o
STRIP CHART RECORDER
Figure E-5. Connection diagram of the opacity monitoring system.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-8
Appendix E
-------
SHAKER
MOTOR
DUST CONVEYING
SYSTEM
HANGERS
CLEAN AIR
SIDE
OUTLET
PIPE
FILTER
BAGS
TUBE
SHEET
HOPPER
Figure E-6. Typical fabric filter arrangement with shaker
for dust removal.
(Courtesy of Wheelabrator-Frye Corporation [Wheelabrator Dust-Tube])
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-9
Appendix E
-------
no filtration flow during dust removal. One at a time, compart-
ments of bags are shut down and isolated from the gas flow for
cleaning; this allows the total gas flow from the process to be
maintained reasonably constant. This cleaning procedure, which
can be automatic, permits continuous operation of the fabric
filter. The residual dust deposited and retained within the
fabric interstices gradually reaches an equilibrium after numer-
ous filtration and cleaning cycles, and the residual filtering
pressure drop remains more or less constant throughout the useful
life of the fabric.
Three methods are generally used to remove dust from the
surfaces of the filter bags. The dust may be removed by vigor-
ously oscillating the suspension rack through an amplitude of a
few inches (mechanical shaking). Reverse-air cleaning and pulse-
jet cleaning are two other common methods. In reverse-air clean-
ing, a bag is taken out of filtering service and air is intro-
duced to flow through the bag in reverse direction to the normal
filter flow path. In pulse-jet cleaning, a jet of high pressure
air is released into a bag in the reverse direction to the regu-
lar filter flow. This jet of reverse air momentarily distends
the bag wall, and this distension, coupled with reverse flow,
dislodges the dust collected on the bag surface. In all of these
methods the dust falls to the hopper situated below for removal.
Fabric filters have an 'inherently high efficiency for remov-
ing both fine and coarse particles from a gas stream. An effi-
ciency of 99+ percent is normal for a properly designed unit.
The filter is sized in terms of cloth area as a function of
the amount of gas handled and the method of filter cleaning. The
area is determined from the air-to-cloth (A/C) ratio, which is
arrived at by dividing total air flow (in acfm) by the cloth area
2
(in square feet). Thus, the ratio is expressed in acfm/ft .
The instrumentation required for monitoring a fabric filter
installation consists mainly of differential pressure gages.
Each isolatable compartment should be equipped with such a gage
Portland Cement Plant E-10 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
so that the condition of the bags within the compartment can be
determined. The pressure gages are locally mounted on the filter
units, as illustrated in Figure E-7. The photograph in Figure
E-8 shows the total instrument array as viewed from the end of a
fabric filter installation.
Awareness of the flow rate and temperature of the inlet gas
stream is also essential to the proper operation of a fabric
filter. The gas stream temperature is normally a part of the
information gathered for process control purposes and appears
on a central control panel of the process to which the filter
unit is attached. Measuring the fan motor current gives an
indication of fan horsepower, which can be used to determine the
flow rate by using gas stream temperature, the fan speed in rpm,
and fan curves provided by the fan manufacturer. Where the gas
temperature is critical by reason of its proximity to the upper
operating limit of the fabric used, temperature limit switches
are used to activate dampers on the inlet side of the fabric
filter unit or water spray nozzles. The dampers admit ambient
air to the filter unit and thus prevent thermal damage. The
nozzles introduce water to evaporatively cool the gas stream.
III. CYCLONE SEPARATORS
A cyclone separator uses centrifugal force to remove partic-
ulate from a gas stream. As shown in Figure E-9 the dust-laden
gas enters the upper cylindrical section tangentially, which
produces a centrifugal force that preferentially throws the
larger, heavier particles outward to the walls of the cylinder.
The gas spirals downward into the conical section, where the gas
velocity increases and greater centrifugal force is generated.
The particulate matter collected at the walls is swept to the
bottom of the cone section, where it is discharged through a
valve into a collection hopper or drum. The cleaned gas exits
from the unit through an outlet at the top center of the cylin-
drical section.
Portland Cement Plant E-ll Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
BAG
TENSION SPRINGS
BAG CAPS -
TUBESHEET
CLEAN SIDE
IilT
PRESSURE
GAGE
DUST HOPPER
Figure E-7. Cross section of fabric filter, showing
filter internals and a pressure gage.^
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-12
Appendix E
-------
Figure E-8. Photograph of fabric filter, showing upper and lower
catwalk, compartment access doors, and Magnehel ic®gages.3
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-13
Appendix E
-------
CLEAN AIR
OUT
•:.'•*-
TOP VIEW OF CYCLONE
DIRTY AIR
IN
OUTLET PIPE EXTENDS
INTO THE CYCLONE
TO PREVENT INLET AIR
FROM SHORT-CIRCUITING
DIRECTLY TO THE OUTLET
CLEAN AIR OUT
'? it
••• i —
SLEEVE TO
PREVENT
PARTICULATE
FROM BLOWING OUT
DIRTY AIR
INLET
THE SPINNING AIR FORCES THE
PARTICULATE TO THE WALL
OF THE CYCLONE
A SLOW-SPEED MOTOR TURNS
THE "STAR" VALVE THAT SEALS
THE COLLECTION HOPPER FROM
THE CYCLONE
PARTICULATE
COLLECTION
HOPPER
OR DRUM
Figure E-9. Flow diagram of a dry cyclone collector.3
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-14
Appendix E
-------
A single cyclone separator unit may be utilized for partic-
ulate removal from a given gas stream, but the use of several
smaller separators in a parallel arrangement enhances separation
efficiency. When multiple cyclone separators are used, gas dis-
tribution and pressure drop across them must be relatively equal
to achieve the maximum efficiency benefit.
The comparative advantages of cyclones include the rela-
tively small amount of space occupied, low capital investment and
operating costs, and modest pressure drop. Figure E-10 shows
the fraction of dust emitted (penetration) for three sizes of
multiple cyclones at various particle sizes. The larger-sized
tubes have a lower pressure drop and lower collection efficiency.6
The performance of the cyclone separator is not sensitive to
temperatures or such particulate properties as electrical resis-
tivity or filterability. Particulates with high moisture con-
tent, however, tend to plug the discharge tube. The operating
parameters of interest are the gas flow rate and the pressure
drop across the separators.
Because the design of the cyclone separator is such that op-
eration at an optimum gas flow rate is necessary for the most ef-
ficient separation of particulates from the gas, the gas flow
rate and pressure differential across the separator provide indi-
cators of the relative efficiency of the separator's operation.
Figure E-ll presents a data sheet of typical information on a
cyclone separator.
The only instrumentation required for cyclone separators is
a differential pressure gage calibrated in inches of water for
each separator. The gages should be locally mounted where they
are relatively accessible and easy to read. Gas stream tempera-
ture readings can be obtained from the instrumentation at the
appropriate process control panel, and gas flow rate can be cal-
culated by recording fan motor current and speed.
Portland Cement Plant E-15 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
S o
en i-l
•d rt
01 M
o su
rt
D.
3 O
0)
O 3
CD
to
\
oo
to
M
(B
H-
IX
c
i
o
c.
cr -a
ro ro
to 3
CD
o f+
-t> -s
01
Q. rh
-h O
-h 3
fD
-s n
fD C
3 -S
r+ <
n>
eu -h
3 O
n> -s
-s c:
•a
—i
a>
o
o
o
3
ro
PENETRATION
o oooo oooo
-------
CYCLONE DESCRIPTION
Source Name
Inspector
X YZ r
Date
Cyclone No.
C- /
Type of cyclone.
Manufacturer.
Installation date
Number of tubes.
Dimensions i_
Gas flow, acfm
Gas temperature, °F
Pressure drop across the collector, in. water
Audible air leakage at hatches /I/O
Design
. <)do
Actual
Solids discharge rate,
K
Comments:
SKETCH THE CYCLONE SYSTEM
f\
Figure E-ll. Example of cyclone description data sheet.0
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-17
Appendix E
-------
IV. GRAVEL-BED FILTERS
The gravel-bed filter applies the principles of centrifugal
force and impingement to the removal of particulates from an
exhaust gas stream. As depicted in Figure E-12, as the particu-
late-laden gas enters the gravel-bed filter, it is subjected to
centrifugal forces which move the larger particulates outward to
the walls, from which they subsequently fall to the bottom for
removal via an air lock. The partially cleaned gas first flows
up through a riser to one or more filter chambers located above
and then passes down through gravel beds, which are each approxi-
mately 4-1/2 inches in depth and supported on wire mesh screens.
The particulate in the gas impinges upon the gravel surface and
is captured by deposition. The cleaned gas stream from the beds
is exhausted through a clean-gas chamber into an exhaust duct
that conveys it to a stack for discharge to the atmosphere.
After a module has been in service a while, the gravel-bed
filter becomes clogged with collected particulate. It must be
removed from service at regular intervals and subjected to clean-
ing by backflushing it with air. The agglomerated dust is blown
from the bed and the bed rake mechanism is used to stir the bed.
The entrained particles from the bed pass down through the riser
tube into the collector section, where a major portion of them
settle out and are removed via the air lock at the bottom. The
remaining particles enter the dirty gas duct, where they either
settle out and are removed by screw conveyor or are removed by
the other operating modules.
Portland Cement Plant E-18 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
VALVE
CYLINDER
BACKFLUSH DUCT
BACKFLUSH
CONTROL VALVE
EXHAUST
PORT
DIRTY
GAS
DUCT
STIRRING RAKE
MOTOR/REDUCERS
GAS CHAMBER
STIRRING RAKE
GRAVEL BED
CLEAN GAS
CHAMBER
SCREEN
SUPPORT
FOR BED
RISER TUBE
PRIMARY
COLLECTOR
(CYCLONE)
DOUBLE TIPPING GATE
(DUST DISCHARGE)
Figure E-12. Gas flow diagram for a gravel-bed filter. 7
(Courtesy of Rexnord Corporation)
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
E-19
Appendix E
-------
REFERENCES fOR APPENDIX E
Szabo, M. F., and Y. M. Shah. Inspection Manual for Evalua-
tion of Electrostatic Precipitator Performance. PEDCo
Environmental, Inc. EPA-340/1-79-007, February 1979.
Oglesby, S., Jr., and G. B. Nichols. Electrostatic Precipi-
tation In: Air Pollution, 3rd Edition, Vol. IV. Engineer-
ing Control of Air Pollution. Academic Press, New York.
1977.
PEDCo Environmental, Inc. Industrial Boiler Inspection
Guide. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency under Contract No. 68-01-6310, Task No. 9. October
1981.
The Mcllvaine Company. The Fabric Filter Manual. North-
brook, Illinois. 1975 plus updates.
Barrett, K. W. A Review of Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources—Portland Cement Industry. Metrek Divi-
sion of MITRE Corporation. EPA-450/3-79-012. October 1978.
Theodore, L., and A. Buonicore. Industrial Air Pollution
Control Equipment for Particulates. CRC Press. 1976.
Rexnord Corporation. Descriptive Brochure for Rex Gravel-
Bed Filters. Air Pollution Control Division.
Portland Cement Plant E-20 Appendix E
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
APPENDIX F
A PORTLAND CEMENT
INSPECTION REPORT
PLANT, USA
by
Inspector
Environmental Protection Agency
Portland Cement Plant F-1 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
A PORTLAND CEMENT INSPECTION REPORT
PLANT, USA
I. INTRODUCTION
On April 8, 1981, Inspector i in-
spected A Portland Cement Company, plant,
, Texas. The mailing address of the firm is the
same. The Vice President of A Portland is ;
the corporate mailing address is
I met with Mr. , Plant
Manager, and / Production Manager, and informed
them of the nature of the inspection.
II. ACTIVITY SUMMARY
I arrived at the plant at 10:15 a.m. and observed the cement
operations. I contacted and
and discussed the plant operations and air pollution control
equipment. I then inspected , the cement
plant, and the particulate control devices with
I inspected the cement plant Kiln No. 3 with regard
to New Source Performance Standards. During the inspection, I
read visible emissions from the Kiln 2 clinker cooler. The VEO
form is in Appendix A.
III. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This cement plant (Photograph No. 1) uses about 180 tons/h
of limestone, shale, sand, and iron ore in a water slurry to make
cement by the wet process. The limestone and shale are quarried
Portland Cement Plant F-2 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
at the site. Sand, iron ore, and gypsum are purchased from
outside sources.
Raw materials (limestone and shale) are mined in a quarry
(Photograph No. 2). The quarried materials are transferred to
the primary crusher by truck or conveyor (Photograph No. 3). A
Stanler feeder breaker reduces the limestone to a size suitable
for conveyor handling (8 inches or less in diameter). The pri-
mary crushing facility (Photograph No. 5) is equipped with a
hammermill. The hammermill particulate emissions are controlled
by a fabric filter (Photograph No. 6). The crushed material
(3/4-inch diameter or less) is conveyed to the raw material
storage building (Photograph No. 7).
Sand, iron ore, and gypsum are received by truck or railcar.
Iron ore is stored in the raw mill feed bins or raw material
storage building. The gypsum is stored in another silo.
Limestone, shale, sand, and iron ore are milled and combined
with water into a 40 weight percent water slurry. The slurry is
stored in the kiln feed storage tanks (Photograph No. 8). Slurry
is fed into one of three coal-fired rotary kilns (Photographs No.
8 and 9). Particulate emissions from each kiln are controlled by
an ESP on the feed inlet of the kiln (Photograph No. 9). Cement
clinker cooler particulate emissions at the outlet of the kiln
are controlled by fabric filters. The fabric filter stack out-
lets are shown as EPN 3, EPN 7, and EPN 13 (Photograph No. 9).
Clinker is generally stored in silos (Photograph No. 10). During
the winter the company makes excess clinker, which is stored in
an outside pile (Photograph No. 11) adjacent to the raw material
storage building. Clinker and gypsum are fed to two finish mills,
where the materials are milled into finish cement. Two fabric
filters control emissions from these mills. One fabric filter
exhaust vent is shown in Photograph No. 12. Finished cement from
the mills is transferred to storage silos and then shipped out by
truck (occasionally by railcars) (Photograph No. 13). Two fabric
filters control emissions from the finished cement storage silos.
The fabric filter vents are shown in Photographs No. 14 and 15.
Portland Cement Plant F~3 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
The company uses coal to fuel the kilns. Coal is received
by railcars which are unloaded at a maximum of 1700 tons/8 hours
(Photograph No. 16). Particulate emissions during unloading are
controlled by a water spray system. The coal is stored in piles
(Photograph No. 17). The company blends 85 to 90 percent low-
sulfur (0.5 percent) coal with 10 to 15 percent high-sulfur (2.5
to 4.0 percent) coal. After the coal is blended, it is conveyed
to coal storage silos (Photograph No. 18) before it is crushed
and fed into the kilns.
IV. OBSERVATION OF PROCESS
I inspected the following operations:
1. Quarry operations
2. Raw material crushing
3. Three kilns and clinker coolers
4. Two finish mills
5. Two truck loading facilities
6. Coal unloading and storage
The company normally hauls about 850 tons of limestone and
shale per hour out of the quarry. The raw material is crushed to
a size less than 3 inches in diameter at about 640 tons per hour.
A fabric filter controls particulate emissions from the crusher.
Raw material was being fed to Kilns 2 and 3 at a rate of 58
tons/h each. Kiln 1 was not operating. The two kilns were
burning about 17 tons of coal per hour. The visible kiln stack
emission in Photograph No. 1 is a steam plume. The clinker
cooler stack on Kiln 2 had visible emissions from 0 to 10 percent
opacity. The finish mills were operating at 59 tons/h each.
Truck loading was operating at 250 tons/h during the inspection.
There was no coal being conveyed during the inspection.
On August 11, 1978, the company was issued a PSD permit to
add a dry kiln process to the existing wet plant operation. The
company has not begun construction of the plant for economic
reasons.
Portland Cement Plant F-4 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
INSPECTION CHECKLIST
Date(s) of Inspection
April 8, 1981
Company name _
Mail ing address
Time In 10:15 a.m. Out 3:00 p.m.
A Portland Cement Company, Inc.
Location of facility
Plant, USA
(Include county or parish)
Type of industry Portland Cement Company
Form of ownership
Company personnel
Responsible for
facility
Responsible for
environmental
matters
Company personnel
contacted
Confidential ity
Statement given to
EPA personnel
Inspector
State or local
agency personnel
Name
Title
Phone
Production Manager
Manager
Plant Manager
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
F-5
Appendix F
-------
•0 rt
0> M
O fU
rt 3
0
H* f~\
OS
H-O
CD
Ni I—1
00 0
N) rt
i
en
>
V
a>
H-
X
PARTICULATE
PARTICULATE T
50 ,n(J ,IA',HL
X A x FABRIC
1 FILTERS PARTfriii flTF
PARTICULATE c • o i
ESP'S f 5 * 9 t
7, fiT X 1 i | 1 ,
1? FABRIC FABRIC
' i FILTERS FILTERS
3, 7, & 13 10 4 11
, '
^nipRY KIINC ritNKFR FINISH FINISHED ToADOUT
SLURRY KILNS CLINKtK ^ MILL ». rFMFriT
4 STORAGE 1,2, S3 tuuLLK ' COOT -J^j.
X y 4< " LOADOUT
/ X| GYPSUM
sr , COAL
plLt * SIOKAGE
TANKS
PARTICULATE
FABRIC
FILTER 1 SAND AND IRON
• ORL
1 IMESTONE .?Ct!,.i .. Mflirpini *• MATERIAL
rMAir ~* MAILRIAL * MATLKIHL
SHALE CRUSHING STORAGE "ILUNG
1 • 0 JLU' 1
Process Flow Diagram.
-------
13 O
tn hj
>d rt
(D I-1
O 0>
rt 3
H- CL
O
3 O
CD
0 3
fD
N>
\
00
•a
CD
3
a
H-
x
PRODUCTION INFORMATION
1
Process/Unit
Raw material
crushing
Raw material
grinding mil'
Raw material
grinding mi 1 '
Kiln 1
Kiln 2
Kiln 3
Finish mil 1
Fi nish mil 1
Truck loadout
No. 1
Truck loadout
No. 2
Coal feed to
kilns
Production r;
Process Input
Rate
640
108
108
38
38
38
59
59
300
300
25
:cs are in ton/h
Product
Raw feed
Raw feed
Raw feed
C1 inker
Clinker
Cl inker
Cement
Cement
Cement
Cement
Hp.it
unless stated (
Production Rate
Design
850.0
120.0
120.0
39.5
39.5
39.5
65.0
65.0
300.0
300.0
25.0
therwi se
Actual
Avg.
640. n
108.0
108.0
38.0
33.0
33.0
59.0
59.0
250.0
250.0
20. C
-Max
850.0
120.0
120.0
39.5
39.5
39.5
65.0
65.0
300.0
300.0
25.0
Emission Point
(including fugitive
emissions)
1
--
--
2,3
6,7
12,13
5,9
5,9
10,11
10,11
2,6,12
Status of Process
at time of inspec-
tion
Not operating
108
103
Not operating
38
38
59
59
250
Not operating
16.6
-------
3 O
CO hi
•0 rt
(!) I-1
O fU
ft 3
p-a
O
3 n
(D
C 3
c n
0)
hj
M M
00 (3
NJ rt
I
00
EMISSION POINT INFORMATION
Emi 55 ion
Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Proces j/Uni t Description
Raw material crushing
Kiln No. 1
Kiln Mo. 1 clinker cooler
Cl inker storage
Finished cement mill
Kiln No. 2
Kiln No. 2 clinker cooler
Cl inker storage
Finished cement mill
Cement storage
Cement storage
Kiln No. 3
Kiln No. 3 clinker cooler
Stack D
-------
O
t—
<
o
UJ
^
Q.
o-
ca
: O. QJ
' — * E v^-
ra
D.
m
C
21 --^
' — '"- U
. ^
LL.
LLJ >— ~-
*— JD
2 Si QJ
a- 3
-p
X
o S
>- j-j
3
QJ
;- in
z; c
in u
QJ C
Q_ ^— '
Q.
•^
OJ
c:
0
un
in
o
10
o o o
r— O O
en o \o
CO •— r-
ro ro
CM
i
o
•4-J
ro
-(-J
CL
(J
QJ
S_
o.
S- 0 S-
QJ T- QJ
-!_> 4-> -t-"
•r- -U T-
U- I/I <4-
o
O S- O
•i — 4-^ >i —
U U U
-Q GJ JD
fO f~~ H3
U- UJ U_
Q)
C"
O
LO
ID
0
V£>
O O O O O
o o c o o
o in o ro o
co r~-. o en co
in o CM
CM
VD to 1 1 — VO
1
o
4-1
ro
4->
CL
U
QJ
s_
CL
S- 1- U S- 5-
QJ QJ -r- QJ QJ
J-> 4-> 4-> 4-1 4->
• r- -r- 4J -r- -r-
4— H— 1/1 <+- V-
o
o o i- u o
•i- -t- 4J -^- -r-
S- S_ U S- S-
-Q -Q QJ -Q -Q
ro rrj r— ro ro
Li- U- LU lJ_ Lu
QJ
C
O
o
CO
^J-
0
1 —
o o o o
o o o o
LT> O O O
I — i — CM O
LO i— r- ro
r~
1
S-
o
4_)
ro
•»->
Q.
O
QJ
^_
CL
i- S_ I- (J
GJ QJ QJ T-
4-> 4-> 4-> 4->
M — H— H— un
O
U O O S_
•r- .,- -i- 4-1
s- s- s- o
-Q _O J3 Q)
rO ro ro i —
1 1 l i i i i i t
II
O
O
CO
CM
ro
1
1
^
S-
QJ
4J
7^.
*+-
U
• , —
s_
JD
'ro
U-
QJ
E GJ
•i- 4~>
-)-> TJ
S-
GJ
o 3
c o
GJ i—
•a •*-
ui "C
QJ C
- C
QJ O
S- T-
ro J-
S- 4->
QJ C
a. cj
E u
QJ c
r— O
U
01
c c
••- o
/-^. *J •!-
U ro 4->
- — - !- 3
^^ QJ ,—
ro Q. o
< — ' O CO
I
I
I
c
O
CJ
U
••-
>
QJ
•o
n
o
to c
s- o
QJ -^
^2 4-> U
E (J rtJ
ro ro GJ
jz QJ ce
o a:
>,• — ro
-»-> ro u
00 ._ E .r-
S- > S- E
QJ ro QJ QJ
jz s- jr jc.
*-> U L)
O ro ro ro U
QJ
S-
S-
Ql
CT r—
ft) -r- LO
S- U- S_
QJ QJ
LA f- 1 1 O
QJ •— S- 3
*J U J3 S- C^
QJ >, ro (_! <-/>
E CJ Ll_ OO UJ
ro
Q_
*
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix F
F-9
-------
This checklist should be filled out only for hydrocarbons with vapor pressures
greater than 1.5 psia at storage conditions.
STORAGE
Tank No.
21
' Capaci ty
(units)
2000
Type (1)
U
Product
Stored
Gasol ine
Vapor
Pressure
(units)
@ Max.
Storage
Temp
6.2
Maximum
Storage
Temp.
70
Vapor (2)
Controls
SF
-Remarks*
Footnotes:
(1) C-= fixed roof; F = floating roof; p = pressure; 0 - open top; S =
spheroid; H = horizontal; U = underground
(2) N = None, CV = conservation vents; F = floating roof (SS - single seal;
DS = double seal); VR = Vapor recovery (describe); VD = vapor disposal
(describe); VB = vapor balance; SF = submerged fill.
* Date installed, etc.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix F
F-10
-------
0 O
W H
•O rt
CD M
O PJ
ft D
H-a
O
2 O
(D
O 3
£ fD
H- »
O. ft
(D
00
I
I—1
M
I
(t
H-
X
VOLATILE HYDROCARBON LOADING/UNLOADING FACILITIES
Loddnig
Faci1ity
Des ign.it ion
Source
lypt1 Trjust IM 7'j i IP
(RH C.ir-,, Tiuck-,)
None
Monthly
rin u-|uit
(100(1 G.il )
Type Vii
ControI
Syo toni
ProrjiK t s
Type Vapor Pressure
(ps ia)
-------
STATIONARY GASOLINE STORAGE CONTAINER(S)
Emission
Point
None
Container Size
Date
Installed
Submerged
Fill Line
Type
Roof
Vapor Recovery
System Type
WATER SEPARATOR
Emi ssion
Point
None
Volatile Hydrocarbons
Type
Separated
Vapor
Pressure
(psia)
Amount
Volatile
Hydrocarbon
Entering/day
Type Vapor Control
ORGANIC SOLVENT EMISSIONS
Types of Operation None
Max. Amount Emitted Per Hour:
Method Used To Determine
Max. Amount Emitted Per Day:
Method Used To Determine:
Controls On Emissions:
/Hr
/Day
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix F
F-12
-------
FIELD OBSERVATIONS SUMMARY
Emi ssion
Point
Opaci ty
Reading IStarT
line
Comments
End; (Instantaneous Reading, 6 min. Reading etc.)
0 to 5
1:11 1:26 Opacities from Kiln No. 2 clinker cooler fabric
p.m. a.m filter ranged from 0 to 10 percent over 15 min-
utes.
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
Appendix F
F-13
-------
CEMENT KILN EMISSIONS
Plant burn = a combination of 85 to 90 percent low sulfur coal
with 10 to 15 percent high sulfur coal. Average properties of
the coal mixture are:
Sulfur = 0.7 to 0.8%
Ash = 10 to 13%
Heat content = 12,500 Btu/lb (dry basis)
The maximum kiln production is 38 ton/h cement. Using ESP's with
efficiencies of 99.8 percent (from 1976 EIQ) and AP.42 emission
factors* the kiln and dryer emissions are:
Particulate: Kiln emission factor = 228 Ib/ton
228 Ib/ton x 38 ton/h x 10°~Q9'9 =17.3 Ib/h
Dryer emission factor = 32 Ib/ton
32 Ib/ton x 33 ton/h x 10°Q99'8 =2.4 Ib/h
Total = 17.3 + 2.4 = 19.7 Ib/h
Sulfur dioxide: Mineral source emission factor = 10.2 Ib/ton
75% adsorption of S02 by limestone dust
10.2 Ib/ton x 8 ton/h x 10°QQ5 =96.9 Ib/h
Coal combustion emission factor = 6.85
(S = 0.8%) Ib/ton
6.8 Ib/ton x 0.8 x 35 ton/h x 1Q^~Q5 =51.7 Ib/h
Total = 96.9 + 51.7 = 148.6 Ib/h
Nitrogen oxides: Emission factor =2.6 Ib/ton
2.6 Ib/ton x 36 ton/h =98.8 Ib/h
Using AP.42 emission factors kiln particulate emissions are 25.9
Ib/h. Regulation I limits emissions to 84.8 Ib/h. At a kiln
feed rate of 58 ton/h, kiln emissions from stack tests are:
6-5 lb/h x 58 ton/h = °'11 lb/ton of kiln feed
NSPS limits kiln emissions to 0.3 lb/ton of kiln feed.
*
AP.42, Page 8.6-3, Table 8.6-1, cement manufacturing emissions.
Portland Cement Plant p-14 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION
Portland Cement Plant F_15 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
BOURCt NAME
/I \0(.JifttJD
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION FORM
^^^ A
ADDRESS p . ,. _ _ '
f>. jfrjf L/^/J'
BTATE ZIP P
HONE
^
C
SUN SHAC
PROCESS A/Q-2~ /''/K, OPERATING MODE
6 Pe-fA TI^G--
CONTROL EQUIPMENT
DESCRIBE EMISSION POINT
(MISSION POINT HEIOHT
ABOVE OROUND LEV4L ,
f MISSION POINT ,
3oo (V€^'"
DESCRIBE EMISSIONS ^
COLON OF EMISSIONS
L I $ k f" & /~\. p K
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
"73 T
COMMENTS
f
SKY CONDITIONS
WIND DIRECTION
RELATIVE HUMIDITY
3 £"%
SOURCE LAYOUT SKETCH
OBSERVER:* SIGNATURE/
DATE
IMISI
/*A
VERIFIED BY
V /£/fo
5RGANIZATION srP/l)-
>-
OW LINE .
"" //
START TIME / ' / / Jri
0 IS 30 «S
4
14
17
20
21
22
73
24
2S
76
27
28
29
30
O
o
*r
/<>
a
s~
/O
un-
c>
o
y
-^=-
Q
6"
,»fj.
_5~
_^
^r
r
*
-V
— ^~
_5~
_s~
O
s.
o
*r
AVERAGE OPACITY
S.A V0
STOP TIME/ £(,, arf
0 IS '»0 «
32
34
36
37
38
39
41
42
44
45
47
48
49
SO
SI
\
S3
65
se
57
SS
S9
SO
NUMBER OF READINGS ABOVE
RANGE OF OPACITY
READINGS FROM £2 .TO 1±
ION FT.
0 bsW
~£d 5(M
DRAW NORTH ARROW
4V
J
1 HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THESE OPACITY OBSERVATIONS.
SIGNATURE -/^l/il iff . 'f/st"^-^^
TITLt
t
DATE X /
r s>t/r/
Portland Cement Plant
Inspection Guide 2/82
F-16
Appendix F
-------
PHOTOGRAPHS
Portland Cement Plant F-17 Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82
-------
STACK TEST RESULTS
Portland Cement Plant Appendix F
Inspection Guide 2/82 F-18
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1 REPORT
3^0/1-82-007
I. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5 REPORT DATE
Portland Cement Plant Inspection Guide
June 1982
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
D. J. Orf, R. W. Gerstle, D. J. Loudin
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
PN 3560-1-35
9. PERFORMING ORG "^NIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-6310, Task No. 35
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Division of Stationary Source Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
DSSE Project Officer:
John R. Busik, EN 341
(202) 382-2835
16. ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT
The inspection guide describes the procedures that an inspector should follow
before, during, and after conducting an inspection of a portland cement plant. The
specific areas addressed are: 1) review of agency files prior to plant inspection,
2) procedures for entering the plant and conducting the preinspection interview, 3)
information to be obtained from the plant exterior, 4) safety precautions, and 5)
equipment needed to conduct an inspection. The guide describes each of the processes
and sources of atmospheric emissions: feed preparation, clinker production, clinker
cooling, finish grinding, and final product storage, packaging, and loading. Means
for controlling atmospheric emissions are detailed along with specific descriptions
of ESP's, fabric filters, cyclone separators, gravel bed filters, and containment
and dust suppression practices. Also described are proper plant operating conditions,
emission problems due to malfunctions and upsets, and startup and shutdown problems.
After all information has been gathered, example emission calculations are provided
to assist in determining the compliance of a plant.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution Control
Portland Cement
Inspection Guide
Control Equipment
Kilns, clinker, coolers
crushers, grinders,
Malfunction, Startup,
shutdown.
ESP, fabric filter,
cyclone, gravel bed
filters
13B
11B
14D
13H, 13K
13 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
138 p.
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12tft Flop
Chicago. IL 60604-3590
-------
If your address is incorrect, please change on the above label
tear off; and return to the above address.
If you do not desire to continue receiving these technical
reports, CHECK HERE CD, tear off label, and return it to the
above address.
------- |