EVALUATION OF PARTICULATE MATTER
CONTROL EQUIPMENT FOR COPPER SMELTERS
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL
-------
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL
11499 CHESTER ROAD
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45246
(513) 782-47OO
EVALUATION OF PARTICULATE MATTER
CONTROL EQUIPMENT FOR COPPER SMELTERS
Prepared by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc,
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
Contract No. 68-01-4147
Task No. 24
EPA Task Manager: Larry Bowerman
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Enforcement Division
Region IX
215 Freemont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
February 1978
BRANCH OFFICES
CHESTER TOWERS
Crown Center
Kansas City. Mo
Professional Village
Chapel Hill. Nl-C
-------
This report was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio,
under Contract No. 68-01-4147, Task No. 24. Its contents
are reproduced herein as received from the contractor. The
opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of
the contractor and not necessarily those of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
11
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This interim report was prepared under the direction of
Mr. Timothy W. Devitt. Mr. Lario Yerino was the Project
Manager and Mr. Vishnu S. Katari was the Assistant Project
Manager. Messrs. Vishnu S. Katari and Edmund S. Schindler
were the principal investigators of this report. Task
Manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was Mr.
Larry Bowerman.
EPA personnel at several locations were most helpful in
arranging for background information and reports of test
data. The authors especially appreciate the contributions
of Messrs. Larry Bowerman, and Frank L. Bunyard. Also, the
contributions of Mr. S. Orem and members of the IGCI com-
mittee are gratefully acknowledged.
111
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
gage
SUMMARY X
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 PLANT AND PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS 2-1
2.1 Magma Copper Smelter - San Manuel, 2-1
Arizona
2.2 Phelps Dodge Copper Smelter - Ajo, 2-7
Arizona
3.0 EMISSIONS AND CONTROLS 3-1
3.1 Analysis of Electrostatic Precipitator 3-1
Performance Data on Reverberatory Furnace
at Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona
3.2 Analysis of Electrostatic Precipitator 3-10
Performance Data on Reverberatory Furnace
at Phelps Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona
4.0 ADD-ON CONTROL SYSTEM FOR PARTICULATE EMISSIONS 4-1
4.1 Add-On Control Systems for Magma 4-6
Copper Company, San Manuel, Arizona
4.2 Add-On Control Systems for Phelps 4-30
Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona
APPENDIX A - Conversion Factors A-l
APPENDIX B - Technical Specification for Add-On B-l
Control Systems for Reverberatory
Furnace at Magma Copper Company,
San Manuel, Arizona
APPENDIX C - Technical Specifications for Add-On c-1
Control Systems for Reverberatory
Furnace at Phelps Dodge Corporation
Ajo, Arizona
APPENDIX D - New Source Performance Standards for Q_^
Primary Copper Smelters and EPA Process
Weight Regulation
APPENDIX E - Trip Report - Visit to Magma Copper E-i
Company San Manuel, Arizona on 7/22/77
IV
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
No.
2-1 Simplified process flow diagram of Magma Copper 2-2
Company plant, San Manuel, Arizona
2-2 Process flow diagram for Phelps Dodge Corpora- 2-11
tion plant, Ajo, Arizona
3-1 Average inlet and outlet particle size distribu- 3-33
tions, particle size vs. cumulative percent, for
the ESP at the Phelps Dodge smelter
3-2 Measured and theoretical fractional efficiency 3-34
curves prepared by SRI for the ESP on the re-
verberatory furnace at Phelps Dodge Corporation
v
-------
LIST OF TABLES
No. Paqe
1 Capital and annual operating costs for add-on xi
control systems on Magma Copper smelter
2 Capital and annual operating costs for add-on xii
control systems on Phelps Dodge smelter
2-1 Smelter process equipment and operating data 2-3
for Magma Copper Company, San Manuel, Arizona
2-2 Reverberatory furnace air pollution control 2-4
equipment and operating data, Magma Copper
Company - San Manuel, Arizona
2-3 Chronology of enforcement actions - Magma 2-8
Copper Company, San Manuel, Arizona
2-4 Smelter process equipment and operating data 2-12
- Phelps Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona
2-5 Reverberatory furnace air pollution control 2-13
equipment and operating data, Phelps Dodge
Corporation - Ajo, Arizona
2-6 Chronology of enforcement actions - Phelps 2-18
Dodge Copper Company, Ajo, Arizona
3-1 Summary of particulate emission data for 3-2
electrostatic precipitator on reverberatory
furnace - Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona
3-2 Particulate emission data 3_5
3-3 Analysis of metallic elements in gas sample 3-6
run 2
3-4 Sulfur dioxide emissions 3-7
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
No. Page
3-5 Summary of particulate emission data for 3-11
electrostatic precipitator in reverberatory
furnace - Phelps Dodge Copper smelter, Ajo,
Arizona
3-6 Summary of the sampling effort (July 7 through 3-14
July 16, 1976) by radian
3-7 Instack vs. outstack particulate loading 3-18
Phelps Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona
3-8 Analyses of total particulate and vapor 3-21
phase particulate in flue gas at ESP inlet
or outlet (by Radian Corporation)
3-9 Element flow rates in the feed and discharge 3-22
streams of reverberatory furnace
3-10 Summary of sampling times - reverberatory ESP 3-25
3-11 Total solid input to the reverberatory furnace 3-27
during shift "A" (8-hr period) on July 26,
1976 (estimated by the Phelps Dodge staff)
3-12 Summary of sampling data using EPA methods 3 3-28
and 4 - Phelps Dodge reverberatory furnace ESP
3-13 Summary of particulate, S03/H2SO4 and S02 3-29
emission data for reverberatory furnace ESP
3-14 Test results - sulfur oxide concentration 3-36
4-1 Design parameters of add-on control fabric 4-8
filter system for Magma Copper smelter
4-2 Capital cost data for add-on control fabric 4-10
filter system for Magma Copper smelter
4-3 Annual operating cost data for add-on fabric 4-11
filter for Magma Copper smelter
4-4 Add-on control scrubber system design para- 4-13
meter for Magma Copper smelter
VII
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
No. Pagt?
4-5 Capital cost data for add-on control scrubber 4-17
system for Magma Copper smelter
4-6 Annual operating cost data for add-on control 4-19
scrubber for Magma Copper smelter
4-7 Design parameters of add-on dry electrostatic 4-22
precipitator system for Magma Copper smelter
4-8 Capital cost data for add-on dry electrostatic 4-23
precipitator system for Magma Copper smelter
4-9 Annual operating cost data for add-on control 4-24
dry electrostatic precipitator for Magma
Copper smelter
4-10 Add-on control wet electrostatic precipitator 4-26
system design parameters for Magma Copper
smelter
4-11 Capital cost data for add-on wet electrostatic 4-28
precipitator system for Magma Copper smelter
4-12 Annual operating cost data for add-on wet 4-29
electrostatic precipitator for Magma Copper
smelter
4-13 Design parameters of an add-on fabric filter 4-32
system for the Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter in Ajo, Arizona
4-14 Capital cost data for add-on control fabric 4-35
filter system for Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter
4-15 Annual operating cost data for add-on control 4-37
fabric filter for Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter
4-16 Design parameters of add-on scrubber system 4-40
for Phelps Dodge Corporation smelter
Vlll
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
No. Page
4-17 Capital cost data for an add-on scrubber 4-43
system for Phelps Dodge Corporation smelter
4-18 Annual operating cost data for add-on scrubber 4-44
for Phelps Dodge Corporation smelter
4-19 Design parameters for add-on dry electrostatic 4-46
precipitator for Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter
4-20 Capital cost data for add-on dry electrostatic 4-48
precipitator system for Phelps Dodge Corpora-
tion smelter
4-21 Annual operating cost data for add-on control 4-49
dry electrostatic precipitator for Phelps
Dodge Corporation smelter
4-22 Design parameters of an add-on control wet 4-51
electrostatic precipitator system for the
Phelps Dodge Corporation smelter
4-23 Capital cost data for an add-on wet electro- 4-55
static precipitator system for Phelps Dodge
Corporation smelter
4-24 Annual operating cost data for Add-on control 4-57
wet electrostatic precipitator for Phelps
Dodge Corporation smelter
IX
-------
SUMMARY
The Magma Company smelter at San Manuel, Arizona, and
the Phelps Dodge smelter at Ajo, Arizona, are not in com-
pliance with the EPA Process Weight Regulation 40 CFR
52.126(b), according to EPA Test Method 5.
Substantial technology was available to the copper
industry in 1973 to comply with EPA Process Weight Regulation
40 CFR 52 126(b). It is possible for these smelters to
achieve compliance with this regulation by applying control
technology that is presently available. The following add-
on control systems could be installed in series with the
existing ESP's at the subject smelters:
1. Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a dry ESP to reduce the
flue gas dust loading to an allowable level;
2. Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a wet ESP to reduce the
flue gas dust loading to an allowable level;
3. Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a fabric filter to
reduce the flue gas dust loading to an allowable
level;
4. Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture and a wet scrubber system to reduce the flue
gas dust loading to an allowable level.
Tables 1 and 2 present estimated capital costs and
annual operating costs of the add-on control systems for
Magma Copper Company and Phelps Dodge Corporation, respectively.
Magma Copper's add-on control system costs are based on
x
-------
X
H-
Table 1. CAPITAL AND ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS FOR ADD-ON
CONTROL SYSTEMS ON MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
System Description
1
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Spray water cooling of gas to 120°C (250°F) ,
fabric filter followed by a fan
Air dilution of gas to 120°C (250°F), fabric
filter followed by a fan
Two units, each containing a quencher, an
adjustable venturi, a flooded elbow, and
a mist eliminator followed by two fans
Two units, each with a fan and a separate
quencher followed by a venturi scrubber
One unit scrubber system consisting of
a prequench section, a venturi, and a
separator section followed by a fan
Two parallel systems, each containing
a fan, a cooling system, and an ESP
Two parallel systems each containing
a fan, a cooling system, and an ESP
Two parallel systems each containing
a fan, a cooling system, and an ESP
Two parallel systems consisting of a fan,
an evaporative cooling tower, and a NEP
Evalu-
ation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Turnkey Capital
Cost, $
6,168,300
15,607, 000
4 ,824, 100
3,986,000
5,090,000
6,665,500
8,441,200
7,378,900
6,990,400
Annual Operating
Cost,3 $
1,845,700
4,468,000
4,466,100
2,762,800
1,685,500
1,604,000
2,072,900
1,633,500
2,147,100
a) Includes operating cost and fixed capital charges.
-------
X
H-
M-
Table 2. CAPITAL AND ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS FOR ADD-ON
CONTROL SYSTEMS ON PHELPS DODGE SMELTER
System Description
1
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Spray water cooling of gas to 120°C (250°F) ,
fabric filter followed by a fan
Air dilution of gas to 120°C (250°F) , fabric
filter followed by a fan
An adjustable throat venturi, a flood elbow,
and an entrainment separator, followed by
a fan
A prequencher, an adjustable-throat venturi
scrubber, and a separator section followed
by a fan
A prequencher, an adjustable-throat venturi
scrubber, and a separator section followed
by a fan
A fan, an evaporative cooling tower to cool
gas to 120°C (250°F) , followed by a dry ESP
A fan, a combination of heat exchanger and
dilution air to cool gas to 120°C (250°F)
and two dry ESP's in parallel
A fan, a spray water tower to cool gas to
120°C (250°F) and a dry ESP
A fan, an evaporative cooling tower
followed by a WEP
Evalu-
ation
J
K
L
M
N
P
Q
R
S
Turnkey Capital
Cost, $
2,003,200
3,960,800
724,300
842,800
2,056,800
1,933,800
2,452,400
1,734,700
2,023,400
Annual Operating
Cost,3 $
586,600
1,062,700
878,600
914,000
745,400
621,000
626,900
429,400
564,500
a) Includes operating cost and fixed capital charges.
-------
electrostatic precipitator outlet gas flow conditions of
18,264 m /min (645,000 acfm) at 300°C (573°F) and an average
of 1.76 g/m (0.77 gr/scf) and a maximum of 2.86 g/m (1.25
gr/scf) particulate content measured at 120°C (250°F). The
system is sized for a minimum of 98.2 percent control
efficiency. The Phelps Dodge add-on control system costs
3
are based on outlet gas flow conditions of 5270 m /min
(186,000 acfm) at 314°C (598°F) and an average of 1.28 g/m'
(0.56 gr/scf) and a maximum of 3.14 g/m (1.37 gr/scf)
particulate content measured at 120°C (250°F). This system
is sized for a minimum of 93.0 percent control efficiency.
The following conclusions are based on a review of the
information available on particulate testing on the rever-
beratory furnace control systems at the Phelps Dodge Copper
Company, Ajo, Arizona, and Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona.
Magma Copper Company, San Manuel
NEIC tested emissions from the reverberatory furnace
stacks for particulate compliance; they also did some ancillary
testing to evaluate the effect of temperature on particulate
formation. Prior to NEIC testing, Magma also tested emis-
sions from the reverberatory furnace stack. However, since
proper isokinetic conditions were not maintained during the
company testing, these test results cannot be considered
valid.
The following is a brief summary of NEIC test results:
1. Three compliance test measurements by NEIC on May
14 to May 22, 1976, indicate that the reverberatory
furnaces emitted an average of 989 kg/hr (2180
Ib/hr) of particulate, which is over 50 times the
allowable 18 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr) for the observed
process weight rates. Data are not available on
ESP dust collection during the testing; however,
company data show an average of 113.4 metric tons
(125 tons) per day were being recycled from both
the reverberatory and converter electrostatic
Xlll
-------
precipitators to the reverberatory furnaces. Th3
indicates that the electrostatic precipitator
efficiency, measured according to EPA Method 5, i
lower than the design efficiency, which is based
f"i n 7± C MT? -4-^-**-«4- «* A j_ i 3
2. Stack volume flow rates are about 15 percent
higher than volume flow design of the electro-
static precipitator.
3. Average sulfur dioxide and sulfur trioxide emis-
sions during compliance testing were 5400 ppm
(8083 kg/hr or 17,820 Ib/hr) and 15.0 ppm (30
kg/hr or 66.1 Ib/hr), respectively. The measured
sulfur dioxide and sulfur trioxide emissions
during ancillary testing were 2600 to 5000 ppm and
31 to 93 ppm, respectively.
4. During the compliance tests with an inert glass
probe liner, no sulfates were found in the filter
or acetone catches. However, ancillary tests
showed that particulate sulfate appears to be
formed as the reverberatory furnace gases pass
through the instack filter and glass frit support
(a considerable amount of sulfate was deposited on
the outstack filter). Measured values of moisture
content in the gas averaged 8 percent. Because of
the 8 percent average moisture content of the
gases, NEIC believes that most of the sulfur
trioxide would be in the form of sulfuric acid
mist (H2SO4) at a temperature of (120° + 14°C)
(248° + 25°F). However, it is possible that some
or all of the sulfuric acid would be in the gaseous
form rather than the liquid (mist) form.
5. No data are available on metallic elements in the
gases other than one measured analysis at the ESP
outlet. Copper, arsenic, and zinc were the
principal elements detected in the analysis of the
reverberatory furnace stack gas.
6. Most of the arsenic was collected on the filter
during the compliance tests. The amount collected
in the impinger was negligible.
xiv
-------
Phelps Dodge Copper Company, Ajo
Radian Corporation, Southern Research Institute, and
Aerotherm Corporation conducted the testing. The following
is a brief summary of the results:
1. Particulate matter in the gases released from the
furnace is very cohesive and hygroscopic.
2. Apparently, chemical composition differs with par-
ticulate size. The ESP inlet and outlet particu-
late size distribution is bimodal. The mass
median diameter of the inlet particle size distri-
bution was greater than 10 urn. One component of
the bimodal inlet particulate distribution had a
mass median diameter less than 1 pm.
3. The ESP may be handling volumes more than 10
percent over design rate.
4. It may be necessary to find out how loadings vary
as a function of furnace operation cycle. Three
test runs by Radian Corporation on July 15, 1976,
using an instack/outstack filter train determined
a particulate emission rate of 323 kg/hr (712
lb)/hr at the ESP outlet. However, two test
measurements by Aerotherm on July 29 and 30, 1976,
determined the particulate emission rate at the
ESP outlet to be 192.1 kg/hr (423.5 Ib/hr).
Approximately the same amount of input material
was charged to the furnace during these tests.
5. The difference in dust loadings in the gas through
the two parallel inlet ducts leading to the ESP is
significant according to several measurements by
Radian Corporation. Both Radian Corporation and
SRI reached the conclusion that gas velocity
distribution is good.
6. Only Aerotherm Corporation particulate sampling
test results are based on EPA Test Method 5. The
average of seven particulate emission measurements
on the ESP outlet was 129.5 kg/hr (285.4 Ib/hr)
(extrapolated weight) and the corresponding
allowable emission rate was 14.2 kg/hr (31.2
Ib/hr). Therefore, compliance with the EPA par-
ticulate emission regulation requires the instal-
lation of an additional control system with an
xv
-------
89.07 percent efficiency [measured at 120°C
(250°F)] in series with the existing ESP [designed
to operate at 98.8 percent efficiency at 316°C
(600°F)] .
7. During the three tests by Radian Corporation, the
particulate collection on the outstack filter at
120°C (250°F) was about 96.0 percent of the total
collected by the instack/outstack train. However,
the corresponding measurements in two runs by
Aerotherm determined that only 50 percent of the
total particulate is collected on the outstack
filter of the instack/outstack filter train. This
difference could be due to the fact that Aerotherm
included the probe wash with "instack particulate,"
whereas Radian included the probe wash with
"outstack" particulate. The Radian definition is
the most logical.
8. It is not clearly explained why consistently
higher amounts of particulate are collected using
instack/outstack filter train than using only an
outstack filter according to EPA Method 5. An
average of 129.5 kg/hr (285.4 Ib/hr) particulate
was measured during seven test runs using EPA
Method 5, and an average of 192.2 kg/hr (423.8
Ib/hr) particulate was measured during two test
runs by Aerotherm using instack/outstack filter
train.
9. Arsenic in the gas is present as arsenolite.
10. Nearly all of the arsenic, 50 percent of the
selenium, and 30 percent of fluorine are dis-
charged together with the reverberatory furnace
off-gases. Arsenic and selenium escaping the
electrostatic precipitator are partly in the vapor
state, and nearly all of the fluorine escapes in
a gaseous state. Radian tests on an ESP inlet and
outlet wet electrostatic precipitator showed that
only about 28 percent of arsenic measured at
atmospheric temperature is collected by the exist-
ing ESP. Almost all the arsenic collected in the
ESP at the outlet was present as condensed mate-
rial. Arsenic measurements by Radian at 120°C
(250°F), using EPA Method 5, also showed the
efficiency of the existing ESP for arsenic to be
about 28 percent.
xvi
-------
11. Measurement of particulate collection efficiency
of waste-heat boilers will help to define emission
characteristics of copper reverberatory furnace
gases. According to Radian Corporation measure-
ments of the total 86.2 kg/hr (190 Ib/hr) of
arsenic entering the furnace, about 0.73 kg/hr
(1.6 Ib/hr) is present in matte, 0.86 kg/hr (1.9
Ib/hr) in slag, 34.5 kg/hr (76 Ib/hr) in the ESP
outlet, and 13.6 kg/hr (30 Ib/hr) in ESP hopper.
Another test measurement showed 63.5 kg/hr (140
Ib/hr) arsenic in the ESP off gases. That means
about 8 to 40 percent of the total arsenic in the
furnace gases may be precipitating in the waste-
heat boilers and flue leading to the ESP.
xvii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As a result of Petitions for Review filed by the Magma
Copper Company and Phelps Dodge Corporation, the Enforcement
Division of Region IX of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is coordinating a study of copper smelters in
the region. The purpose of this study is to review and
analyze the basis for and the reasonableness of the EPA
Process Weight Regulation [40 CFR 52-126(b)] as it applies
to the Magma smelter in San Manuel, Arizona; to the Phelps
Dodge copper smelter in Ajo, Arizona; and generally to all
copper smelters in Region IX.
EPA Region IX provided us with the following documents
which contain emission data of existing control systems on
the smelters at Magma Copper Company and at Phelps Dodge
Corporation:
1. National Enforcement Investigations Center and
Region IX. Emission Testing at the Magma Copper
Company Smelter, San Manuel, Arizona, May 12-22,
1976. EPA-330/2-76-029, U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, August 1976.
2. National Enforcement Investigations Center.
Ancillary Tests at Magma Copper Company Smelter,
San Manuel, Arizona, conducted on May 14-18, 1976.
3. Chronology of Enforcement Actions by EPA on Magma
Copper Company, San Manuel, Arizona.
4. Environmental Protection Agency. State Imple-
mentation Plan Inspection of Phelps Dodge Cor-
poration New Cornelia Branch Smelter, Ajo, Arizona,
May 1976.
1-1
-------
5. Radian Corporation. Trace Element Study Around
the Reverberatory Furnace and the Electrostatic
Precipitator of a Primary Copper Smelter (Pre-
liminary draft). EPA Contract 68-01-4136, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,
May 9, 1977.
6. Acurex Corporation/Acrotherm Division. Stack test
results at Phelps Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona.
EPA-68-01-3158, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, San Francisco, California
94111, March 1977.
7. Chronology of Enforcement Actions by EPA on Phelps
Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona.
8. Southern Research Institute. Performance Evaluation
of an Electrostatic Precipitator Installed on a
Copper Reverberatory Furnace. EPA Order No. CA-6-
99-2980-J, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
IERL, Cincinnati, Ohio, January 14, 1977.
From time to time EPA Region IX also supplied additional
information as requested.
It should be noted that many of these documents contain
data on tests conducted for compliance purposes, and they
lack information on conditions at the inlet of the smelter
control systems. These data can be used to evaluate addi-
tional control requirements for the smelters' compliance
with the process weight regulation. They are, however,
insufficient to determine any new control system alternatives
for smelter compliance.
Based on available information of the process weight
rates to the reverberatory furnace, the allowable emission
rates have been determined by the process weight regulation
40 CFR 52.126(b) for the Magma Copper Company and Phelps
Dodge Corporation. Using emission test data on the existing
control system exit and on the allowable emission rate, the
required additional control efficiency has been estimated.
1-2
-------
After discussing available emission test data with members
of the Industrial Gas Cleaning Institute (IGCI), it was
decided to evaluate dry and wet electrostatic precipitators,
fabric filters, and wet scrubbers as an add-on control
system for each smelter. The process weight regulation
requires the flue gas particulate content to be measured at
about 120°C (250°F). When the flue gas temperature is
reduced from a higher temperature to about 120°C (250°F) ,
its particulate matter consists of material that has con-
densed from the vapor phase to the solid phase. For these
reasons it was also decided to cool the gas from the existing
control system to 120°C (250°F) before treating it in an
additional system.
Specifications for each add-on control system on
individual smelters were prepared on the basis of emission
data from available reports. The data included such informa-
tion on inlet conditions as gas volume flow rate, temperature,
moisture content, gas composition, and particulate size
analysis, as well as the required control efficiency and the
allowable emission rates. The specifications were sent to
selected IGCI members with a request for capital and annual
operating cost data and design data for the add-on controls.
These data were tabulated.
PEDCo Environmental, Inc., inspected the operation,
existing control equipment, and space available in the
vicinity of each smelter.
Section 2.0 of the report describes the reverberatory
furnace process and control systems of the Magma and Phelps
Dodge copper smelters. The section also presents the
chronology of EPA enforcement actions on these smelters.
Section 3.0 summarizes emission test data obtained from
the available documents.
1-3
-------
Section 4.0 presents evaluations of the different add-
on control systems designed for the compliance of the smelters
under discussion. The evaluations cover two fabric filters,
three wet scrubbers, three dry electrostatic precipitators,
and one wet electrostatic precipitator for each smelter.
The evaluations present the design parameters, capital
costs, and annual operating costs for each system. The
fabric filter costs include a gas cooling system, fabric
filter, necessary ductwork, and fan; the scrubber system
costs include a gas cooling system, scrubber, wet particulate
waste treatment equipment necessary duckwork, and fan; and
the dry and wet electrostatic precipitator costs include a
gas cooling system, precipitator, necessary ductwork, and
fan but do not include dry waste treatment (or disposal)
equipment.
Appendix A is a table for converting English into
metric units. Appendix B and Appendix C contain the add-on
control system specifications for Magma Copper Company and
Phelps Dodge Corporation, respectively. Appendix D contains
the New Source Performance Standards for Primary Copper
Smelters, the EPA Process Weight Regulation for existing
copper smelters in the Phoenix - Tucson Air Quality Control
Region, the EPA Test Methods 1-8 and the ASME "Test Code For
Determining The Dust Concentration in a Gas Stream." Appen-
dix E contains memorandums on the PEDCo's trips to the Magma
Copper company and Phelps Dodge Corporation.
1-4
-------
2.0 PLANT AND PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS
2.1 MAGMA COPPER SMELTER - SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA*
2.1.1 Plant Description
The Magma Copper Company operates an underground mine,
concentrator, smelter, electrolytic refinery, and continuous
casting rod plant in the vicinity of San Manuel, Arizona.
Products include electrolytically refined copper, copper
rod, sulfuric acid, and molybdenum. Average anode copper
production averages 613 to 635 metric tons (675 to 700 tons)
per day.
Figure 2-1 is a simplified process flow diagram of the
Magma smelter. Table 2-1 lists the major smelter process
equipment and operating data, and Table 2-2 describes and
provides operating data on the electrostatic precipitator
(ESP's) used for air pollution control.
Concentrate is conveyed by belt from the concentrator
to storage bins above the three reverberatory furnaces at
the smelter. Limerock is added to the concentrate in the
storage bins, and silica rock is stored in adjacent bins.
The concentrate and flux (limerock or silica rock) are moved
by belt conveyor from the storage bins to hoppers above and
adjacent to the side walls of the three reverberatory fur-
naces. Charging doors are opened and the material is fed to
the reverberatory furnaces by gravity flow.
*
This discussion is based mainly on information from Emis-
sion Testing at the Magma Company Shelter, San Manuel,
Arizona, by the National Enforcement Investigations Center,
EPA-330/2-76-029. May 2-22, 1976. Figure 2-1 and Tables
2-1 and 2-2 have been adopted from the EPA report with
minor changes.
2-1
-------
EXHAUST
r~T"
WASTE HEATM H
BOILERS M M
EXHAUST
t
i CASTING WHEELS
^^V EXHAUST
10 ANODES TO ANODE *
y!S^ FURNACES
" (4) "
R
iVERBERATO
FURNACES
(3)
-{ ESP M }-*(£
REVERBERATORY
STACK
RY
CONVERTERS
(6)
1 \
HUMIDIFYING
TOWER
HEAT
EXCHANGERS
CATALYST ^ABSORBING
CHAMBERS^iflTOWERS
r~*T\
DRYINGr
TOWERS •--
Ow
MIST
ESP
(6)
EXHAUST
ACID
PLANT
•Ur ^JT^sfACKS
.Annu
-------
Table 2-1. SMELTER PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING DATA FOR
MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Parameter
Feed rate:
Concentrates
Flux
Converter slag
Matte
Flue dust
Total
Size of unit:
Width
Length
Height
Diameter
Gas volume gen-
erated at Std.
conditionsf :
Exit gas
temperature:
Reverberatory furnaces
metric
tons/day
2004
202
1089
-
NA
3295
meters
c
31
3.4
m /min
8200
260°C
tons/day
2208
222
1200
-
NA
3630
feet
c
102
11
cfm
289,500
500°F
Converters
metric
tons/day
251
1504
meters
10.7
d
m /min
3 at 690
3 at 1070
704°C
tons/day
276
1656
feet
35
d
cfm
3 at 24,500
3 at 37,700
1300°Fg
Three units operating 720 to 744 hours per month.
Six units operating an estimated 432 hours (60% of 720) per
month per converter.
° The respective widths of each of the three reverberatory
furnaces are 9.8 m (32 ft), 10.4 m (34 ft), and 11.0 m (36 ft).
Three of the six converters are 4m (13 ft) each in diameter,
and the remaining are 4.6 m (15 ft) each.
e Undiluted maximum gas flow per converter. Units do not
usually operate simultaneously under peak flow conditions.
f Standard conditions are 760 mm Hg (14.7 psia) and 21°C (70°F).
" Maximum temperature reached during final copper blow.
2-3
-------
Table 2-2. REVERBERATORY FURNACE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING
DATA, MAGMA COPPER COMPANY - SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Control
device
ESP
Manufacturer
Research-Cottrell
Date of
installation/
modification
1975
No. of
units
and stages
c
1-4 stages
<3
1-6 stages
Gas flow
rate, a
m /min
2730
5470
scfm
96,500
193,000
Operating
temp.
°C
260
to
354
op
500
to
670
Pressure
drop
cmb
0.9
inb
0.35
Collection
area
m
6780
13,540
ft*
72,900
145,800
Velocity
m/sec
1.1
ft/sec
3.57
Reten-
tion
time
sec
7.56
Estimated gas flow through individual units (Basis for estimate unknown).
Water column.
0 West unit.
East unit.
-------
On the inside, the three reverberatory furnaces are 31
m (102 ft) long and 3.5 m (11 ft) high. The widths are 10,
10.5, and 11 m (32, 34, and 36 ft) for Furnaces 1, 2, and 3,
respectively. Although normally fired with natural gas,
fuel oil is used when gas delivery is interrupted. Work is
currently underway to convert to coal firing.
The reverberatory furnace walls are made of basic
brick. At the slag line, 76 copper water jackets 0.6 m (2
ft) high by 1.5 m (5 ft) long nearly surround three sides of
the furnaces. The suspended-arch roof also is constructed
of basic brick. The walls and arch are maintained by re-
placing brick; no hot patching is used.
Although the depth of molten material actually varies
among the three furnaces, normal slag depth is approximately
102 cm (40 in.) and normal matte depth is approximately 38
cm (15 in.). Slag is tapped near one end of each furnace
and flows through a launder into slag pots, which are hauled
by rail to the slag dump. Matte is tapped nearer the center
of the furnaces, depending on converter or reverberatory
furnace conditions, and carried in a launder one floor below
the furnaces. The matte drops by gravity off the launder
into ladles resting on a pallet, which is moved into the
converter aisle by an electric winch and cable unit.
The matte ladles are picked up by an overhead crane and
charged to one of six Peirce-Smith converters. Converters
1, 2, and 3 are 4 by 11 m (13 by 35 ft), and Converters 4,
5, and 6 are 4.5 by 11 m (15 by 35 ft). An initial charge
to a converter normally consists of two to four ladles of
matte. Air is blown through tuyeres into the charge, flux
is added, and the slag produced is skimmed into a ladle.
The slag is then returned by overhead crane to one of the
2-5
-------
reverberatory furnaces. Additional matte is added to the
converter until a total of approximately 65 metric tons (70
tons) of blister copper is produced.
The blister copper is poured into ladles, then carried
by overhead crane to one of four anode furnaces, two of
which are 4 by 9 m (13 by 30 ft), and the other two, 4 by 11
m (13 by 35 ft). Additional air is blown through tuyeres
into the charge to assure complete oxidation. Reformed
natural gas or propane is then introduced through the tuyeres
for final copper reduction. The refined copper is cast into
anodes of approximately 360 kg (800 Ib) on either of two
casting wheels. The anodes are cooled, inspected, and
transferred to the electrolytic refinery.
2.1.2 Emissions Sources and Reverberatory Furnace Control
Equipment
The primary particulate sources at the smelter are the
reverberatory furnaces and the converters, the majority of
whose exhaust gases are treated by control systems. Fugitive
emissions from feeding concentrates, skimming converter
slag, or returning converter slag, however, are neither
collected nor treated; they are exhausted directly to the
atmosphere. The reverberatory furnace matte and slag tap
areas are hooded, and collected gases containing particulate
matter are exhausted untreated directly to individual
stacks above the building. Converter "smoke" not collected
by the primary hood system is likewise released directly to
the atmosphere. The anode furnaces also emit some untreated
particulate matter directly to the atmosphere above the
converter aisle.
The principal reverberatory furnace exhaust gases pass
through a pair of waste-heat boilers following each furnace.
The partially cooled gases are then combined into a common
2-6
-------
duct before entering the plenum chamber of two parallel
ESP units. The unit called the "east ESP" is designed to
handle about two-thirds of the gas volume, and the other
called the "west ESP" is designed to handle one-third.
Shortly after installation, however, the perforation plates
between the plenum and the ESP units were removed because of
excessive plugging. Assuming that gas flow distribution is
actually as designed, the east ESP handles 5470 m /min
(193,000 scfm), and the west ESP handles 2730 m3/min (96,500
scfm), as shown in Table 2-2. The east ESP consists of six
2
stages with a total collection area of 13,540 m (145,800
2
ft ), whereas the west ESP consists of four stages with a
2 2
total collection area of 6780 m (72,900 ft ). Average gas
velocity is 1.1 m (3.6 ft)/sec and retention time is less
than 8 sec. The pressure drop across each ESP is 0.8 cm
(0.35 in.) H_0 maximum. The exit gas stream is exhausted to
a 157-m (515-ft) stack for discharge to the atmosphere.
2.1.3 Chronology of Enforcement Actions for Magma Copper
Company at San Manuel, Arizona
Table 2-3 presents a chronology of enforcement actions
by the EPA.
2.2 PHELPS DODGE COPPER SMELTER - AJO, ARIZONA*
2.2.1 Plant Description
The New Cornelia Branch of the Phelps Dodge Corporation
operates a mine, concentrator, and smelter at Ajo, Arizona,
for the production of anode copper from a chalcopyrite
(copper-iron sulfide) concentrate. During 1975, production
averaged 165 metric tons (185 tons)/day.
*
This discussion is based mainly on information from State
Implementation Plan Inspection of Phelps Dodge Corporation,
New Cornelia Branch Smelter, Ajo, Arizona, by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, May 1976. Figure 2-2 and Tables
2-3 and 2-4 have been adapted from the EPA report with
minor changes.
2-7
-------
Table 2-3. CHRONOLOGY OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS -
MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA3
Date
Action
May 14, 1973
July 13, 1973
September -
November, 1973
April 3, 1974
December 12, 1974
January 6, 1975
March 5, 1975
June 11, 1975
October, 1975
November 26, 1975
December 31, 1975
January 30, 1976
May 12-22, 1976
EPA promulgated process weight regula-
tion 40 CFR 52-126(b).
EPA notified company by letter of
process weight regulation requirements.
Company submitted proposed compliance
schedules.
EPA held public hearing in Phoenix on
proposed compliance schedule.
EPA approved compliance schedules for
converters and reverberatory furnaces.
Magma notified EPA of violations
of both compliance schedules.
EPA issued consent order to company.
Company submitted test results of
converter-side acid plant. Compliance
demonstrated.
Company conducted tests in reverberatory
furnace stack, which showed emissions to
exceed allowable by a factor of 20 to
30.
Company filed Petition for Reconsidera-
tion and Revision of process weight
regulation (EPA).
Letter from P. DeFalco, Administrator of
Region IX, EPA, to H.A. Twitty, Attorney
for Magma Copper Company, stated that
Region IX would review the process weight
regulation.
National Enforcement Investigations Center
(NEIC), Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS), and Region IX
EPA personnel visited the smelter.
Smelter was tested by EPA and NEIC team.
Provided by Larry Bowerman of EPA Region IX.
(Continued)
2-8
-------
Table 2-3. (continued) CHRONOLOGY OF ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS - MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Date
Action
March 28, 1977
May 18, 1977
R.L. O'Connell, Director of Enforcement
Division, EPA, sent letter pursuant to
Section 114 to Magma Copper Company, re-
questing further information about particu-
late removal systems installed for reverbera-
tory furnace gases.
Magma Copper Company responded to EPA letter
of March 28, 1977.
2-9
-------
Figure 2-2 is a simplified process flow diagram for
this smelter. Table 2-4 lists the major smelter process
equipment and operating data, and Table 2-5 lists the air
pollution control equipment and operating data. Concentrate
is delivered by a belt conveyor, 61-cm (24-in.) wide, from
the New Cornelia concentrator to the smelter, where it is
dried in a rotary dryer fired either by natural gas (when
available) or by diesel fuel.
As it enters the smelter building, the belt-delivered
concentrate is mixed with limestone flux in predetermined
proportions, then bedded. When available, dust from the
collectors is also added to the concentrate and crushed
limestone. Concentrates from other copper concentrators
(notably Tyrone, Bagdad, and Bruce) and copper precipitates
from the Phelps Dodge Tyrone operation are also bedded as
available.
The various materials to be smelted are put into 9-
metric-ton (10-ton) "cans," which are large cylindrical con-
tainers used to charge the reverberatory furnace. The
filled can is moved by an overhead crane either to storage
or to one of six furnace-charging stations for a single
reverberatory furnace.
The reverberatory furnace, which is 30 m (100 ft) long
and 9m (30 ft) wide on the inside, is mounted on a heavily
reinforced concrete foundation. Although the furnace nor-
mally fires natural gas, it can run on fuel oil if gas
delivery is interrupted.
Reverberatory furnace walls are made of silica brick,
with an interior protective surface of basic brick and, in
the area of the crucible, a mixture of tamped periclase and
firebrick. The walls also include copper water jackets, 51
cm (20 in.) high, immediately above the crucible. The
2-10
-------
SLAG
ANODES TO
REFINERY
CASTING
WHEEL
ANODE
FURNACE
REFORMED
GAS
CONCENTRATES
PRECIPITATES
LIMEROCK
OXIDIZING
FURNACE
REVERBERATORY
FURNACE
MATTE
SLAG
CONVERTERS (3)
SILICA
FLUX
AIR
Figure 2-2. Process flow diagram for Phelps Dodge Corporation plant, Ajo, Arizona.
-------
Table 2-4. SMELTER PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND OPERATING DATA -
PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION, AJO, ARIZONA
Parameter
Reverberatory furnace
Converters
Number of units
Feed rate:
Concentrates /
Precipitates(
Limestone (
Reverts j
Converter slag
Matte 1
Flux (siliceous))
Reverts j
Size of unit:
Width
Height
Length
Diameter
Hours of operation/month
Gas volume generated
Exit gas temperature
613 metric tons/day
(676 tons/day)
431 metric tons/day
(475 tons/day)
9.2 m (30 ft)
3.4 m (11 ft)
30.5 m (100 ft)
624
220 m3/min
(77,900 scfm)
309°C (588°F)a
725 metric tons/day
(799 tons/day)
9 m (30 ft)
4 m (13 ft)
522
1100 m /min
(39,500 scfm)
340°C (6500F)1
Per recorder following
Per estimate following
waste-heat boilers.
waste-heat boilers.
-------
Table 2-5. REVERSERATORY FURNACE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND
OPERATING DATA, PHELPS DODGE CORPATION - AJO, ARIZONA
Control
devicea
ESP
Scrub-
bersb-c
Liquid
S02 „
plant
Manufacturer
Western
Precipitator
(Type R)
Date of
installation/
modification
8/73
1/75
7/74
NO. Of
units
and stages
2
(with 2
stages
each)
1
1
Gas flow
rate,
m /min
2200
each
unit
700
to
1200
1100
scfra
77,900
25,000
to
43,000
38,500
Operating
temp. ,
°C
309
In
230
°F
588
let
450
Outlet
200
to
290
400
to
550
Inlet
52
to
66
125
to
150
Outlet
32
90
Pressure
drop, H2O
cm
1.3
3.8
Un)
in.
0.5
1.5
cnown
Collection
area,
m^
1927
1
1
ft'
20,738
,Ad
•1A
Velocity,
m/sec
0.9
N
N
ft/sec
3.0
i
V
Reten-
tion
time,
sec
6.6
NA
NA
I
\~>
Ul
Scrubbers and liquid S02 plant are noL operating at present.
Only includes humidifying tower, not the cooling tower, preceding liquid SO,, plant.
Design and construction by Stearns-Roger in collaboration with Monsanto; no special type or model number designated.
NA - Not applicable.
DMA process developed by ASARCO; engineering and construction by Stearns-Roger.
-------
reverberatory furnace roof is a sprung arch constructed of
silica brick. The furnace walls and arch are maintained by
hot patching with silica slurry.
The following procedure is followed in charging the
reverberatory furnace. A container of concentrate is posi-
tioned at one of the six charging stations. Then the bottom
gates of the container are opened, and the charge falls into
a small feed hopper of the charging machine (referred to as
a "slinger") immediately below. (The slinger is a short,
high-speed, portable belt conveyor pivoted on a vertical
shaft to permit lateral swinging.) The concentrate falls
from the feed hopper onto the rapidly moving belt and is
discharged into the furnace as it moves over the belt pul-
ley. The usual charge is 1.8 to 3.6 metric tons (2 to 4
tons), fed at an average rate of approximately 0.9 metric
ton (1 ton)/min.
Normal depth of the molten material in the furnace is
approximately 120 cm (46 in.), of which 66 to 76 cm (26 to
30 in.) is matte. Slag is tapped through the side wall and
flows through a launder into slag pots, which are hauled by
rail to the slag dump. Matte is tapped, as required by
converter or reverberatory furnace conditions, into ladles
resting on electric-powered trucks which can be moved into
the converter aisle.
The matte ladles are picked up by overhead crane and
charged to one of three Peirce-Smith converters measuring 4
by 9 m (13 by 30 ft). The initial charge to a converter
normally consists of four ladles of matte weighing 14 metric
tons (16 tons) each. Air is blown through tuyeres into the
charge, flux is added, and the slag produced is skimmed into
a ladle. The converter slag is then returned to the rever-
beratory furnace by the overhead crane. Additional matte is
2-14
-------
added to the converter to produce a total of approximately
50 metric tons (55 tons) of light blister copper.
The light blister copper is poured into ladles and
carried by overhead crane to a Great Falls converter, 4 m
(12 ft) in diameter, that has been modified to serve as a
holding furnace for final oxidation. The charge in the
oxidizing furnace is air-blown through tuyeres to complete
sulfur removal. Final oxidation in a holding furnace is
considered necessary to prolong brick life in the converters
and anode furnaces.
Following completion of oxidation in the modified Great
Falls converter, the copper is transferred to the anode
furnace, which is 9m (30 ft) long and 4 m (13 ft) in diam-
eter. Reformed natural gas (cracked methane) is introduced
through tuyeres for final copper reduction. The anode-grade
molten copper is cast into 330-kg (720-lb) anodes on a 22-
mold casting wheel. Anodes are cooled, inspected, and
loaded on flat rail cars for shipment to the Phelps Dodge
refinery in El Paso, Texas.
2.2.2 Emission Sources and Reverberatory Furnace Control
Equipment
The primary particulate sources at the Ajo smelter are
the reverberatory furnace and the converters. Although most
of the exhaust gas produced by these sources is treated
before exhausting to the atmosphere, fugitive emissions escape
from feeding concentrates, skimming converter slag, or
returning converter slag. Though the reverberatory furnace
matte and slag tap areas are hooded, the collected particu-
late-laden gases are simply exhausted to the smelter main
stack. Similarly, converter "smoke" not captured by the
primary hood system is taken by a secondary hood system
directly to the smelter main stack. The oxidizing and anode
2-15
-------
furnaces also exhaust particulate-laden emissions directly
to the atmosphere above the converter aisle.
The principal reverberatory furnace exhaust gases pass
through a pair of waste-heat boilers before entering a
common plenum chamber for the two independent and parallel
ESP units. The two units were designed to handle 4200
m3/min (150,000 acfm) total volume at 315°C (600°F) and 95
kPa (13.8 psia), but typical gas flow is 4640 m /min (164,000
acfm) at about 309°C (588°F). Each ESP unit consists of two
2 2
stages with a total collection area of 1930 m (20,700 ft ).
Average gas velocity is 0.9 ra/sec (3 ft/sec), and treatment
retention time is less than 7 sec. The maximum pressure
drop across a unit is 1.3 cm (0.5 in.) H20.
Originally, gas cleaning equipment was installed to
direct about 50 percent [1100 m /min (38,500 scfm)] of the
ESP exit gas stream through a DMA (dimethylaniline) sulfur
dioxide (S02) absorption plant, and the other half was ex-
hausted to the 110-m (360-ft) main stack of the smelter.
The duct work for directing ESP exit gas to the the DMA
absorption plant is now blanked off, and the entire gas
stream from the ESP outlet is discharged through the main
stack to the atmosphere.
In the DMA plant, which is now inoperative, the gas
stream first enters a humidifying tower for evaporative
cooling by a weak acid solution and removal of some of the
residual particulate matter. The gases then enter a cooling
tower, where a weak acid solution percolates down through
packing, which cools the ascending gases and removes more of
the remaining particulate matter. After passage of the
exhaust gases through a mist precipitator for removal of
acid mist and remaining dust particles, the cleaned gas
stream enters the DMA absorption tower for SO- removal. The
acid scrubbing section of the DMA absorption tower removes
2-16
-------
any acid mist that is formed before the gas stream is
discharged to the atmosphere through a 15-m (50-ft) stack
atop the tower.
2.2.3 Chronology of Enforcement Actions for Phelps Dodge
Copper Smelter at Ajo, Arizona
Table 2-6 presents a chronology of enforcement actions
by the EPA.
2-17
-------
Table 2-6. CHRONOLOGY OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS -
PHELPS DODGE COPPER COMPANY, AJO, ARIZONA3
Date
Action
May 14, 1973
July 13, 1973
January 23, 1974
March 24, 1975
May 5 and 6, 1975
June 30, 1975
August 28, 1975
September, 1975
October 1, 1975
October 6, 1975
EPA promulgated process weight regula-
tion 40 CFR 52-126(b).
EPA notified company by letter of process
weight regulation requirement.
Company notified EPA that it considers
itself to be in compliance with process
weight regulation. No stack test re-
sults submitted.
EPA sent company a Section 114 letter
requiring stack test results be sub-
mitted to demonstrate compliance.
Company submitted test results. The
results showed emissions that were
about three times allowable emissions.
EPA issued a Notice of Violation.
A conference was held between EPA,
Phelps Dodge, and Arizona State Agency.
Company conducted new emission tests,
which showed the emissions were 3.3
times the allowable emissions.
Company filed Petition for Review of
process weight regulation (Ninth Circuit) ,
Company filed application for stay
pending EPA review.
Provided by Larry Bowerman of EPA Region IX.
(Continued)
2-18
-------
Table 2-6 (continued).
Date
Action
October 17, 1975
November 5, 1975
November 28, 1975
January 15, 1976
April 7, 1976
July 5-16, 1976
July 15-30, 1976
March 28, 1977
May 9, 1977
Company submitted Petition for Reconsidera-
tion and Revision to EPA.
Letter from Russell E. Train (Administrator,
EPA) to Senator Goldwater stated that EPA
had agreed to review any new information
submitted by Phelps Dodge involving the pro-
cess weight regulation.
Letter from P. Defalco, Administrator of EPA
Region IX to John F. Boland, Jr., advised
that Region IX would review the process
weight regulation and that enforcement action
was stayed.
National Enforcement Investigations Center
(NEIC), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS), and Region IX EPA per-
sonnel visited the smelter.
Letter from R.L. O'Connell, Director of En-
forcement Division, EPA, to D.H. Orr, Manager,
New Cornelia Branch, Phelps Dodge Corporation,
indicated installation of sampling facilities
was required pursuant to Section 114.
Extensive testing was conducted by EPA con-
tractors (Southern Research Institute and
Radian) at the reverberatory furnace electro-
static precipitator.
Extensive testing was conducted by EPA con-
tractor (Acurex Corporation/Aerotherm
Division) at the reverberatory furnace ESP
Outlet, and acid plant outlet, and main
stack.
Letter pursuant to Section 114 from O'Connell,
Director of Enforcement Division, EPA, to
Phelps Dodge requested further information
about installation of particulate-removal
systems reverberatory furnace gases.
Phelps Dodge responded to EPA letter of
March 28, 1977.
2-19
-------
3.0 EMISSION TEST DATA
3.1 ANALYSIS OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PERFORMANCE
DATA ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE AT MAGMA COPPER
COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
At the request of EPA Region IX, the National Enforce-
ment Investigations Center (NEIC) in Denver conducted emis-
sion tests from May 14 to 18, 1976, on the reverberatory
furnace stack of the Magma Copper Company in San Manuel,
Arizona, to determine compliance with the process weight
regulations, and again from May 19 to 21, 1976, to evaluate
the effect of temperature on the formation of particulate.
Before these tests, Magma Copper had also conducted com-
pliance tests on the furnace stack (July 30 and 31, 1975).
Design parameters of reverberatory furnace ESP's,
actual performance data, and compliance test data (by both
NEIC and Magma Copper) are presented in Table 3-1.
At the San Manuel smelter, reverberatory furnace ex-
haust gases pass through a pair of waste-heat boilers fol-
lowing each furnace. The partially cooled gases are then
combined in a common duct before entering the plenum cham-
bers of the two separately housed units of the ESP.
The two-unit ESP was manufactured by Research Cottrell
and installed in 1975. It is designed for 98 percent
particulate removal, based on the ASME test methods. Com-
pliance testing and results on the ESP are discussed in the
following paragraphs.
NEIC Compliance Test Conducted May 14-18
Using EPA Method 5, NEIC conducted sampling tests on
the reverberatory furnace stack as a part of compliance
3-1
-------
Table 3-1. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE-MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Item
ESP manufacturer
ESP inlet conditions
Volume flow at continuous
rating, actual: m3/min
(acfm)
standard:
Temperature : °C
m3/min
(scfm)
U>
I
M
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
by instack/ontstack filter,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
by EPA Test Method 5,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
ESP outlet conditions
Volume flow at continuous
rating, actual: m3/min
(acfm)
standard:
Temperature
(Continued)
m3/min
(scfm)
Design
Research Cottrell
15,800 (calc.)
(560,000)
8040
(284,000)
260-354
(500-670)
1.91
(0.836)
922 (calc.)
(2035, calc.)
Actual
(1)
15,800 (calc.)
(560,000)
8040
(284,000)
260-354
(500-670)
1.91
(0.836)
922 (calc.)
2035, calc.)
Compliance tests
conducted by company,
Oct. 30-31, 1975 (2)
18,280 (calc.)
(645,500, calc.)
9378t>
(331,200)t>
300
(573)
EPA compliance
tests by NEIC
May 14 to 18, 1976
(3)
18,160 (calc.)
(641, 200, calc.)
9316=
(329,000)=
300
(573)
-------
Table 3-1 (continued).
I
UJ
Item
by instack filter,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
by EPA Test Method 5,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
ESP control efficiency, %
Allowable emissions.
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
At ESP outlet
SO2 emissions, ppm
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
303 emissions, ppm
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
Moisture content, volume percent
CO2 volume percent
02 volume percent
Metal analysis, kg/hr, (Ib/hr) ^
Tin (Sn)
Arsenic (As)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Copper (Cu)
Lead (Po)
Mercury (Hg)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni)
Selenium (Se)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
Design
0.02869
(0.01254)
14.04 (calc.)
(30.53, calc;)
98. Og
Actual
(1)
Compliance tests
conducted by company,
Oct. 30-31, 1975 (2)
0.275 to 0.898d
(0.1201 to 0.3924)
158 to 486
(349 to 1071)
EPA compliance
tests by NEIC
May 14 to 18, 1976 (3)
1.76e
(0.77)
99Qf
(2180)
0.032 (calc.)
(0.014)
18
(39.7)
5400h
8100
(17,820)
15. 9i
30
(66.2)
8.7
4.03
(14.17)
0.072 (0.16)
2.34 (5.2)
0.11 (0.25)
0.045 (0.10)
4.32 (9.8)
1.55 (3.4)
0.027 (0.06)
0. 37 (0. 81)
0.014 (0.03)
0.59 (1.3)
2.34 (5.2)k
(Continued)
-------
Table 3-1 (continued) .
Footnotes
Numbers in parenthesis represent corresponding reference listed.
Average of four compliance test runs conducted by Magma on October 30 and 31, 1975. Included in Appendix
A, Magma Petition for Revision Table 1, page 4. NEIC report.
0 Average of three compliance tests conducted by NEIC from May 14-22, 1976. The actual flow rates were 9770,
8864, and 9298 m3/min (345,000, 313,000, and 328,300 scfm) respectively.
Actual emissions during four compliance tests conducted by Magma on October 30 and 31, 1975 were 0.75, 0.50,
0.28, and 0.90 g/m3 (0.3268, 0.2202, 0.1201, and 0.3924 gr/scf respectively. Isokinetic conditions were not
., met during all the tests.
I e Average of three test runs [1.63, 1.95, and 1.63 g/m3 (0.71, 0.85, and 0.71 gr/scf)] conducted.
£ Actual emissions during the three tests were 948, 1111, and 907 kg/hr (2090, 2450, and 2000 Ib/hr) .
' Based on instack filter tests.
Average of three test runs. Actual measurements were 4500, 6670, and 5030 ppm respectively.
1 Average of three test runs. Acutal measurements were 12.8, 16.2, and 18.7 ppm respectively.
3 Metals identified in particulates collected by EPA Method 5 in ESP outlet during the second compliance test
run.
i,
Filter zinc results are questionable.
Reference
1) State Implementation Plan Inspection of San Manuel Division Smelter, Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona. June 1976. In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter, San Manuel, Arizona,
by National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA-330/2-76-029. May 2-22, 1976.
2) Appendix A, Magma Petition for Revision In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter,
San Manuel, Arizona, by National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA-330/2-76-029. May 2-22, 1976.
3) Test Results. In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter, San Manuel, Arizona, bv
National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA 330/2-76-029. May 12-22, 1976.
-------
testing at the San Manuel smelter. During the test program,
NEIC also collected process input data for calculating the
allowable emissions from the reverberatory furnace.
Three valid sampling runs were reported, using the four
available sampling ports at the 80-m (262-ft) level of the
157-m (515-ft) stack. These test runs were performed within
the isokinetic range of 90 to 110 percent. The sample
volumes collected during these test runs were 1.692, 1.698,
and 1.632 m3 (59.76, 59.97, and 57.63 ft3) with process
inputs of 159, 157, and 169 metric tons/hr (176, 173, and
186 tons/hr) respectively- The sample from Run 2 was also
analyzed for its metallic content.
Table 3-2 presents particulate emissions computed from
the test data, and allowable emissions calculated from
process weight input data.
Table 3-2. PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA
Run
1
2
3
Average
Actual particulate
emissions
kg/sec
.263
.309
.252
.275
Ib/hr
2090
2450
2000
2180
Allowable particulate
emissions
kg/sec
.005
-005
.005
.005
Ib/hr
39.6
39.5
39.5
39.5
Table 3-3 lists quantities of metallic elements detected
in the filter catch and acetone wash of Run 2, the principal
ones being copper, lead, arsenic, and zinc. The amount of
arsenic caught in the impinger of the sample train was
insignificant compared with that caught in the filter.
During the three tests, the gas moisture contents measured
8.9, 8.3, and 8.9 volume percent respectively- Sulfur
3-5
-------
Table 3-3. ANALYSIS OF METALLIC ELEMENTS IN GAS
SAMPLE RUN 2
Element
Tin (Sn)
Arsenic (As)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Copper (Cu)
Lead (Pb)
Mercury (Hg)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Nickel (Ni)
Selenium (Se)
Vanadium (V)b
Zinc (Zn)c
Amount detected,
228
7,200
340
144
13,500
4,700
76
1,110
36
1,790
7,200
Emission rate.
g/hr
74.4
2,375
112
47.3
4,453
1,550
25.0
367
11.7
590
2,375
Ib/hr
O.L6
5.2
0.25
0.10
9.8
3.4
0.06
0.81
0.03
1.3
5.2
Includes both filter and acetone wash.
Vanadium results below background levels observed in the
blank filters.
Zinc results include only acetone catch. The filter zinc
results are questionable because of the high zinc levels
found in the blank filters.
3-6
-------
dioxide emissions were about eight times greater than
particulate emissions. Table 3-4 gives the amounts of S02
and SO^ in the sample tests as calculated by NEIC.
Table 3-4. SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS
Run
1
2
3
Average
S02 cone.
^ppm
4500
6670
5030
5400
SO? emission
Ib/hr
15,680
21,100
16,700
17,820
kg/sec
1.97
2.66
2.10
2.25
SO^t cone.
ppm
12.8
16.2
18.7
15.9
SO^ emission
Ib/hr
56.1
64.5
78.0
66.2
kg/sec
0.007
0.008
0.010
0.008
The NEIC believes the reported values of sulfur dioxide
emissions are conservative, because the sulfur dioxide gas
dissolved in the first impinger (water) of the sample train
would not be detected by the sulfate analytical method
(i.e., SO- caught in Impinger 1 is not included in the SO-
emission results). No sulfate was found in the filter or
acetone wash catches during the testing.
Based on the test results, NEIC concluded that the high
particulate concentration in the reverberatory furnace flue
gas indicates the ESP is not providing effective control.
According to the Magma Copper data, an average of 114 metric
tons (125 tons) of fines per day is recycled from the rever-
beratory and converter ESP's to the reverberatory furnace.
This amount is substantially less than the 218 metric tons
(240 tons) per day that would be collected by the rever-
beratory furnace ESP if it were operating at least at a 90
percent efficiency level. Recycle weights were not avail-
able to NEIC for the specific times during which tests were
conducted.
The average stack gas flow rate during the tests mea-
sured approximately 9313 m /min (328,900 scfm) and the stack
temperature averaged 300°C (573°F).
3-7
-------
NEIC Ancillary Test Data
NEIC conducted additional testing on the reverberatory
furnace stack on May 19 and 21, 1976, to evaluate the effect
of temperature on particulate formation. Five tests were
conducted using two sampling trains simultaneously in two
ports, one equipped with an instack filter in combination
with an outstack filter and the other with a standard Method
5 outstack filter. The sampling probes were about 5 ft
apart. Particulate was measured using the instackroutstack
filter train in the south port for the first three readings
and in the north port for the other two readings, while the
outstack filter train was kept in the west port throughout
the five runs. Based on these ancillary tests, NEIC reached
the following conclusions: a) particulate is apparently
formed as the reverberatory gases are cooled during sampling
from an average stack temperature of 274°C (526°F) to a
filter temperature of 120°C (250°F); (b) particulate sulfate
appears to be formed as the reverberatory gases pass through
the instack filter; and (c) simultaneous samples should be
obtained from sampling points as close to each other as
possible without causing aerodynamic disturbances, in order
to define the effect of temperature on particulate collec-
tion.
Sample times for the five runs varied from 10 to 58
minutes and sample volumes from 0.169 to 1.028 m3 (6 to 36
scf). The stack gas temperature measured during sampling
averaged 274°C (526QF) and ranged from 223° to 306°C (434°
to 583°F), and the average gas moisture content was 8.8
volume percent with a 3.1 to 13.1 percent variation. All
measurements were made under isokinetic conditions.
Consistently less particulate was collected on the
outstack filter train during the first four runs than on the
outstack filter of the instack/outstack filter train.
3-8
-------
During the five runs, the particulate collected by the
outstack filter train was 17.44, 61.57, 51.8, 52.34, and
139.29 percent of that collected on the instack/outstack
filter train. The particulate collected on the instack
filter of the instack/outstack train ranged from 1.4 to 49
percent. [In all cases, the particulate collected on the
instack filter at approximately 282°C (540°F) ranged from 2
to 44 percent of that collected by the outstack filter of
the other train.]
After further study of the tests for sulfate formation,
NEIC made the following observations: analyses performed on
the outstack filter of the instack/outstack train indicate
that from 19 to 57 percent of the particulate collected was
a sulfate material. No sulfates were found in the instack
filter nor on the filters for Runs 3, 4, and 5 of the
outstack train. The data do not explain why sulfates were
present in the front half of Runs 1 and 2 of the outstack
train, but not in Runs 3, 4, and 5. Analyses of Impingers
1, 2, and 3 indicated SO., concentrations of 31 to 93 ppm and
SO_ concentrations of 2600 to 5000 ppm by volume. These
amounts show higher SO., concentrations and lower S0~
concentrations than those observed during the compliance
testing. The arsenic content of Impinger 4 was insignifi-
cant (i.e., <0.01 wt. %) when compared to the arsenic con-
tent of the filter. (NEIC did not give the arsenic content
of the filter.)
Company-Conducted Compliance Tests on October 30 and 31, 1975
Since isokinetic conditions were not met during the
four company-conducted sampling tests, the results cannot be
considered valid. Even these test results, however, show
that actual particulate emissions far exceed the allowable
limits.
3-9
-------
3.2 ANALYSIS OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PERFORMANCE
DATA ON REVERBERATQRY FURNACE AT PHELPS DODGE CORPO-
RATION, AJO, ARIZONA
Since 1975, many tests have been conducted to determine
emission characteristics and control system performance of
the reverberatory furnace at the Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter at Ajo, Arizona. Basic design parameters of the
ESP, actual data reported by Phelps Dodge, and data from
numerous field tests by Radian Corporation, Southern Research
Institute, and Aerotherm Corporation are summarized in Table
3-5.
After reverberatory furnace gases pass through the
waste-heat boilers, they are treated in an ESP at a tempera-
ture of approximately 315°C (600°F) and vented to the atmo-
sphere through the stack.
The ESP, manufactured by the Western Precipitation
Division of Joy Manufacturing Company, was installed in
August 1973. Design performance of the system was based on
measuring particulate at a system temperature of 315°C
(600°F) by the ASME test method. The system design does not
comply with EPA process weight regulations, which call for
ESP outlet particulates to be measured by EPA Method 5.
This method measures the particulate collected from the
stream at approximately 120°C (250°F).
Detailed analyses of various tests and their data are
presented in the following sections.
Radian Corporation Test Results - Radian Corporation
tested particulate emissions from the reverberatory furnace
ESP at the Phelps Dodge Ajo facility from June 7 to 16,
1976, to evaluate the performance of the ESP. Table 3-6
summarizes Radian's sampling program.
Radian reached the following conclusions as the result
of these tests:
3-10
-------
Table 3-5. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR IN REVERBERATORY FURNACE - PHELPS DODGE COPPER SMELTER,
AJO, ARIZONA
Item
ESP manufacturer
ESP inlet conditions
Velocity, m/sec
(fps)
Volume flow at continuous
rating, actual: m3/min
(acfra)
standard: mVmin
(scfm)
Temperature, °C
(°F)
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter.
g/m3
(gr/scf )
kg/hr
(Ibs/hr)
by instack/outstark
filter, g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ibs/hr)
by EPA Test Method 5,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ibs/hr)
standard m-Vmin
(scfm)
ESP outlet conditions
Velocity, m/sec
(fps)
Design
(l)a
Joy Western
4248C
(150,000)
(2124 calc.)
(75,000 calc.)
315 (max.)
(600)
5.15 (max.)e
(2.25)
655 (calc.
max. )
(1446.43)
Actual
(1)
4644
(164,000)
(2560 avg. calc. )
(90,500 avg. calc.)
232 to 288
(450 to 550)
1.35 (calc.)
(0.592)
191e
(421)
Radian
test results
July 6-16, 1976
(2)
16.76 to 17. 37b
(55 to 57)
4531d
(160,000)
2197 (calc.)
(77,580 calc.)
334
(633)
avg. 1.37
(0.39 to 3.5)
(avg. fl.6, range
from 0.17 to 1.55)
avg. 184 (calc.)9
(avg. 402 calc. )
i_
3.57 to 5.65n
(1.56 to 2.47)
468 to 756 (calc.)
(1041 to 1648)
2630 (calc.)
92,840
34.7
(114)
SRI test
results
July 9-10, 1976
(3)
Aerotherm
test results
July 15-30, 1976
(4)
23.5
(77.17)
(Continued)
-------
Table 3-5 (continued).
CO
I
H
N)
Item
Volume flow at continuous
rating, actual: m^/min
(acfm)
standard: m3/min
(scfm)
Temperature °C
(°F)
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter.
g/n.3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
by instack/outstack
filter, g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
by EPA Test Method 5,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
ESP control efficiency, %
Allowable emissions,
g/m3
(gr/scf)
kg/hr
(Ib/hr)
Dust size analysis
'at ESP inlet
at ESP outlet
Gas composition volume, %
H,O
°2
C02
S02
so3
Design
(1)
0.144
(0.063)
18.1 (guaranteed)
(40)
96.83q
Actual
(1)
0.153
(0.067)
21.3^
(47)
Radian
test results
July 6/16, 1976
(2)
5248
(185,330)
2629
(92840)
314
(598)
v,.w,u
.(0.02)
6.10 (calc.)
(13.44)
1.92 to 3.14™
(0.84 to 1.37)
254 to 414 (calc.)
(560 to 914)
ESP t ESP t
inlet outlet
13.2 12.3
10.7 9.5
6.0 6.5
0.33 0.56
0.006 0.012
SRI test
results
July 9-10, 1976
(3)
9*.7r
S
< 10 urn
< 1 urn
Aerotherm
test results
July 15-30, 1976
(4)
32901
(116,200)
1685 calc.
(59500)
288 to 316
550 to 600
0.96 (calc.)
(0.42)
96. 51
(212.8)
1.89 (calc.)
(0.83)
192n
(423.5)
1.28 (calc.)
(0.56)
129. 4P
(285.4)
14,15
(31.2)
ESP*
outlet
12.2
13.6
4.1
8.1
0.0034
-------
Table 3-5 (continued).
Footnotes
a Numbers in parentheses represent corresponding references listed.
Actual measurements in each of the two inlet ducts to the ESP were 16.76 and 17.37 n/sec (55 and
57 fps) respectively.
0 At 0°C and 101.33 kPa (32°F and 14.7 psia).
Average of six tests conducted July 7 through July 10, 1976. During the test runs, the volume rate
varied from 4190 to 4730 m3/min (148,000 to 167,000 acfm).
e 1975 tests by Engineering Testing Laboratories, using WP Method 50, hard particulates only.
Result of five test runs conducted July 8 through July 10, 1976. Actual emissions varied from 0.39 to
3.6 g/m3 (0.17 to 1.55 gr/scf) .
^ According to Radian, the outlet sampling location was much more favorable than the inlet and for this
reason the gas flow rate obtained at the outlet, 2220 mVmin (78,400 scfm) , was used to calculate the
flow rates of gas through the ESP. Based on this gas flow rate and average loading of 1.37 g/m3 (0.6
gr/scf), Radian calculated a mass flow rate of 154 kg/hr (340 Ib/hr).
Results of two test runs performed at a single point in the one duct (two ducts lead into ESP). Test
Run 1 collected 1.33 g/n\3 (0.58 gr/scf) on instack filter and 4.33 g/m3 (1.89 gr/scf) on outstack filter,
and Test Run 2 collected 0.71 g/m3 (0.31 gr/scf) on instack filter and 2.86 g/m3 (1.25 gr/scf).on outstack
filter.
UJ 1 Average of 11 tests conducted July 20 to 30, 1976, during which the volume flow was between 1320 and 1982
I m3/min (46,700 and 70,000 scfm).
,. i Average of five test runs conducted on July 0 to 10, 1976. The minimum and maximum dust loadings obtained during
the test were 0.039 and 0.057 g/m3 (0.017 and 0.025 gr/scf) respectively.
1975 tests by Engineering Testing Laboratories, using EPA Method 5 with sulfates deducted.
Average particulates collected on instack filter during two tests conducted by using instack/outstack
filters on July 29 and 30, 1976. The actual readings were 98.5 and 94.5 kg/hr (217.2 and 208.4 Ib/hr) .
m Results of three test runs. The actual readings were 2.22, 1.92, and 3.14 g/m3 (0.97, 0.84, and 1.37 gr/scf).
Amounts collected on instack filters in these three test runs were 0.06, 0.17, and 0.044 g/m3 (0.027, 0.072,
and 0.019 gr/scf respectively.
n Average of two test runs conducted on July 29 and 30, 1976. Actual readings were 191.9 and 192.3 kg/hr (423.0
and 423.9 Ib/hr).
P Average of seven test runs during July 21-28, 1976. The minimum and maximum readings were 98.1 and 150.3 kg/hr
(216.2 and 331.3 Ib/hr) respectively.
^ Guaranteed efficiency based on instack filter tests.
r Using instack filter method.
Overall mass median diameter.
Average of many measurements.
References
1) Appendix B. State Implementation Plan Inspection of Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona. May 1976.
2) Radian Corporation. Stack Test Results at Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona. Technical Note
200-045-57-03. January 5, 1977.
3) Southern Research Institute. Performance Evaluation of an Electrostatic Precipitator Installed on a
Copper Reverberatory Furnace. Order No. CA-6-99-2980-J. January 14, 1977.
4) Acurex Corporation/Aerotherm Division. Stack Test Results at Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Ajo, Arizona,
Volume I. Aerotherm Project 7211. March 1977.
-------
Table 3-6. SUMMARY OF THE SAMPLING EFFORT (JULY 7 THROUGH JULY 16, 1976) BY RADIAN
U)
I
Date
Location/stream sampled
To evaluate reverb. ESP performance:
July 8 to 10
July 8
July 8 to 10
July 10
July 10
ESP outlet
ESP outlet
ESP inlet
ESP inlet
ESP control room
Parameter
Grain loading
Particle size distribution
Grain loading
Particle size distribution
Electrical performance
To form a material balance around reverb. ESP:
July 11
July 11
July 11 to 13
ESP outlet
ESP inlet
ESP dust
Trace element flow rates
Trace element flow rates
Trace element flow rates
Technique
Instack filter
Andersen cascade impactor (SRI)
Instack filter
Brinks cascade impactor (SRI)
Monitor operating parameters (SRI)
Integral WEP
Integral WEP
Periodic grab sample
To form an approximate material balance around the reverb, furnace:
July 13
July 12 to 14
July 11 to 13
July 12 to 14
July 12 to 14
ESP outlet
Reverb feed
ESP dust
Reberb slag
Matte
Trace element flow rates
Trace element flow rates
Trace element flow rates
Trace element flow' rates
Trace element flow rates
Integral WEP
Compositing slinger bin catches at
the end of each shift
Periodic grab sample
Periodic grab sample (PD)
Periodic grab sample (PD)
To collect particulate by particle size for trace element analysis:
July 16
ESP outlet
To collect vapor phase emissions:
July 16
ESP outlet
To determine amount of condensible material and SO emitted:
July 15
July 15
To determine
July 13 to 14
July 13 to 14
July 7
July 7
ESP inlet
ESP outlet
arsenic emission rates:
ESP outlet
ESP inlet
ESP outlet
ESP inlet
Particulate by size frac-
Trace element flow rates
as vapor
Condensed particulate
(between 600-250°F) and
SOj-SOj concentrations
Condensed particulate
(between 600-250°F) and
S02-SO3 concentrations
Arsenic emission rate
Arsenic emission rate
Velocity and temperature
traverse
Velocity and temperature
traverse
Three outstack cyclones in series
plus filter
Outstack filter followed by
impingers
EPA Method 5 train with instack filters
EPA Method 5 train with instack filters
Modified EPA Method 5 train
Modified EPA Method 5 train
S-type pilot tube and thermocouples
S-type pilot tube and thermocouples
-------
1. The known major components charged to the rever-
beratory furnace are copper, iron, silicon, calci-
um, and aluminum. Titanium, potassium, magnesium,
and sodium also are important.
2. Minor elements of environmental concern are arse-
nic, cadmium, molybdenum, lead, antimony, seleni-
um, zinc, and fluorine. Nearly all of the arse-
nic, 50 percent of the selenium, and 30 percent of
the fluorine, are discharged as off-gases from the
reverberatory furnace. Nearly all the fluorine
escapes as gas.
3. Arsenic and selenium pass through the ESP partly
as vapor.
4. The waste-heat boiler seems to act as a collection
chamber for arsenic and selenium compounds, which
means that chemical species in the vapor phase
condense on the heat exchange surfaces because of
changes in gas temperature.
5. Actual gas flow rate of 4530 m /min (160,000 acfm)
and temperature of 316°C (600°F) correspond to
design parameters for the device.
6. Electrostatic precipitator inlet and outlet grain
loadings determined at a duct temperature of 315°C
(600°F) are 1.37 g/m3 (0.6 gr/scf), and 0.046 g/m3
(0.02 gr/scf) respectively.
7. When the temperature is decreased from 315 to
121°C (600 to 250°F) (as recommended by EPA),
condensible materials increase to 3.66 g/m3 (1.60
gr/scf) at the inlet and to 1.37 g/m3 (0.60 gr/scf)
at the outlet.
8. Converter off-gases and gas stream particulates
not collected in the hot reverberatory furnace ESP
can be almost completely removed in the gas
conditioning sections of the DMA plant and the
contact sulfuric acid plant. The elements removed
from the gas streams will ultimately be found in
the humidifier blowdown streams. (The DMA plant,
which was originally installed to treat 50 percent
of gases from the existing ESP, is not operated.
The duct connection for these gases to the DMA
plant is completely cut-off, and all treated gas
is passed through the stack.)
3-15
-------
During the testing program, Radian observed that dust
loading changes from light to very heavy black and back to
light, all within a few minutes, apparently as a function of
furnace charging.
The gas flow rates to and from the ESP were determined
from velocity measurements. Reported average velocities
were 17.4 m/sec (57 ft/sec) in the east duct, 16.2 m/sec (53
ft/sec) in the west duct, and 34.7 m/sec (114 ft/sec) in the
outlet duct. The respective inlet and outlet gas temperatures
were 334 and 314°C (633 and 598°F). Radian reported the
average gas flow rate to be 2220 m /min (78,400 scfm), based
on a measurement at the ESP outlet (the outlet sampling
location was more accessible than the inlet). Test data
show that the average volume flow rate of six measurements
was 2340 m /min (82,700 acfm) in the east inlet duct, 2190
m /min (77,300 acfm) in the west inlet duct, and 5247 m 'min
(185,300 acfm) in the outlet duct. These values would
correspond to 2185 m /min (77,160 scfm) at the ESP inlet and
2629 m /min (92,825 scfm) at the outlet. During all measure-
ments, except the first, outlet flow was higher than inlet,
even though the outlet temperature was lower. The design
flow through the ESP is 1994 standard m3/min or 4248 m3/min
at 315°C and 92.06 kPa (70,400 scfm or 150,000 acfm at 600°F
and 13.8 psia). The flow measurements, therefore, show
that the actual gas treated in the ESP is about 6.7 percent
higher than design, based on inlet volume flow, and about
24 percent higher based on outlet flow. This could indicate
leakage of outside air into the ESP-
During PEDCo's visit to the plant on May 21, 1977,
Phelps Dodge personnel indicated that one hanging damper is
installed in each of the two equally sized inlet ducts to
the ESP. These dampers may differ slightly in size and thus
3-16
-------
be causing differences in velocity and gas dust loadings in
the two ducts. The flip-flop damper (installed in the duct
system for guiding gases through the balloon flue or the
duct work), the manholes on the ESP, and the access doors on
the hoppers are all possible sources of air infiltration.
Average grain loading measurements using instack
filters are based on five simultaneous test runs conducted
July 8, 9, and 10, 1976, at the two inlet ducts and the
outlet duct of the ESP. Problems were encountered during
the test program because of the sticky or tacky nature of
particulates, which cause them to plug the filtering media
at the ESP inlet (and to a lesser extent at the ESP outlet).
The average inlet and outlet particulate concentrations are
1.37 and 0.046 g/m (0.6 and 0.02 gr/scf) respectively.
These averages are calculated without regard for ESP inlet
grain loading changes in the operating cycle of the reverberatory
furnace. At the 95 percent confidence level, therefore, the
3
inlet particulate loading is 1.38 + 0.586 g/m (0.603 +
0.256 gr/scf) and the outlet loading is 0.046 + 0.0075 g/m~
(0.0202 + 0.0033 gr/scf). During all five of the simultaneous
test readings at the inlet ducts, loading measurements
varied significantly. If it were possible to take inlet
concentration measurements in the mixing chamber, the
results might be more accurate.
Conclusions concerning the amount of condensables
between 315° and 120°C (600 and 250°F), are based on tests
using instack and outstack filter tests. This determination
was, in essence, a comparison between instack filter and
outstack filter sampling methods. The results presented in
Table 3-7 are based on two measurements performed at a
single point in the west inlet duct and three measurements
with a six-point traverse at the outlet duct.
3-17
-------
Table 3-7. INSTACK VS. OUTSTACK PARTICULATE LOADING
PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION, AJO, ARIZONA
Run
1
2
3
ESP Inlet
Instack
1.33 g/m3
(0.58 gr/scf)
0.71 g/m3
(0.31 gr/scf)
Outstack
4.32 g/m3
(1.89 gr/scf)
2.86 g/m3
(1.25 gr/scf)
Combined
5.65 g/m3
(2.47 gr/scf)
3.57 g/m3
(1.56 gr/scf)
ESP Outlet
Instack
0.062 g/m3
(0.027 gr/scf)
0.16 g/m3
(0.072 gr/scf)
0.044 g/m3
(0.019 gr/scf)
Outstack
2.15 g/m3
(0.94 gr/scf)
1.78 g/m3
(0.78 gr/scf)
3.09 g/m3
(1.35 gr/scf)
Combined
2.22 g/m3
(0.97 gr/scf)
1.92 g/m3
(0.84 gr/scf)
3.14 g/m3
(1.37 gr/scf)
U)
I
M
00
-------
As indicated by test results using only an instack
filter, the loading varies significantly in the two ducts at
any given time. The instack and outstack filter tests at
the ESP inlet also should have been conducted at more than
one sampling point in both ducts. Results do not indicate
whether the test runs were taken continuously, or at dif-
ferent times to allow for the effect of the furnace opera-
tion on the loadings. Tests using an instack filter train
and an instack/outstack filter train might be more valuable
if they were conducted at the same time and if measurements
were taken repeatedly at different intervals to allow for
variations in particulate loading that result from operating
changes. Tabular data in Table 3-7 (two measurements) show
that 77 to 80 percent of the total particulate entering the
ESP's is in a vapor form. The overall removal efficiency of
the ESP is 46 to 61 percent. The particulate measurements
were obtained by using instack/outstack filter trains at the
inlet and outlet of the ESP. The instack filter was at
316°C (600°F) and the outstack filter at 120°C (250°F).
These measurements also indicate that the ESP's are removing
from 77 to 98 percent of the particulate in a solid state at
316°C (600°F) and 38 to 50 percent of particulates in the
supposedly gaseous state at 316°C (600°F). This poses a
question as to how 38 to 50 percent of gaseous particulate
is removed in the ESP.
Radian also conducted sampling tests on July 11, 1976,
at the inlet and outlet of the ESP to capture all particu-
late trace elements in the gas streams. They used a train
containing a wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP), followed
by a series of impingers to collect vapors escaping the ESP.
They also analyzed the dust collected in the ESP by periodic
sampling. These ESP inlet and outlet samples were collected
3-19
-------
isokinetically from a single point assumed to be a point of
average velocity and particulate loading. The sample col-
lected was analyzed for trace elements by the atomic absorp-
tion method and fluorometry. The results indicate that
nearly all the trace elements were collected in the WESP,
whereas only negligible amounts were collected by the
impingers.
On July 13, 1976, Radian also measured the trace ele-
ments content of the flue gas at the ESP outlet, using a
WESP sampler followed by impingers; that was part of a
sampling program for material balance around the reverberatory
furnace. They conducted a separate test on July 16, 1976,
for trace elements present as vapor in the flue gas at the
ESP outlet. The collection of vapor phase trace elements
was accomplished using a series of impingers, preceded first
by a cyclone then by a filter to remove particulates. Table
3-8 presents the results of these tests/analyses of the
total particulate (in the flue gas at ESP inlet and outlet)
and vapor phase particulate (in the flue gas at 'ESP outlet).
Because the values for solid phase trace elements collected
on the cyclone and filter were not measured during the test
for vapor phase trace elements, it is impossible to estimate
accurately the relative proportions of these phases in the
flue gas at the ESP outlet. The WESP samples indicate that
the ESP now used removes about 26 percent of the arsenic in
the gas (results of particulate measured on July 11, 1976,
from Table 3-8). Results also show that some copper and
small amounts of cadmium, lead, and zinc present in the
inlet gas were also removed in the following proportions:
98.2, 94.2, 91.6, and 98.1 percent respectively.
Results of the quantitative analysis of samples col-
lected around the reverberatory furnace are given in Table
3-9. As shown in Table 3-6, integral WESP samples at the
3-20
-------
Table 3-8. ANALYSES OF TOTAL PARTICULATE AND VAPOR PHASE PARTICULATE
IN FLUE GAS AT ESP INLET OR OUTLET (BY RADIAN CORPORATION)
U)
I
NJ
Element
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Fluorine
Iron
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Lead
Sulfur as SO2e
as SO3e
Ant imony
Selenium
Silica
Vanadium
Zinc
ESP inlet
Total particulate
measured on 7/ll/76a'b
kg/hr
86.2
Not de-
0.0059
0.13
0.012
25.4
3.36
0 .00049
3.95
0.042
0.42
598.7
13.61
0.367
0.413
0.018
1.95
Ib/hr
190
.ected
0.013
0.29
0.027
56
7.4
0.0011
8.7
0.092
0.92
1320
30
0.81
0.91
0.041
4.3
Total particulate
measured on 7/ll/76a'c
kg/hr
63.5
Not de
0.0049
0.0073
0.0049
0.454
3.4
0.00039
0.073
0.039
0.034
1002.4
22.67
0.149
0.439
0.002
0.033
Ib/hr
140
:ected
0.011
0.016
0.011
1.0
7.5
0.00087
0.16
0.085
0.075
2210
50
0.33
0.97
0.0047
0.072
ESP outlet
Total particulate
measured" on 7/13/77d
kg/hr
34.5
0.29
0.0015
3.45
0.019
8.16
4.26
0.249
0.015
0.077
0.0049
0.17
.014
0.295
0.77
0.099
Ib/hr
76
0.64
0.0034
7.6
0.044
18
9.4
0.55
0.033
0.17
0.011
0.38
0.03
0.65
1.7
0.027
0.22
Vapor phase content
measured on 7/16/77
kg/hr
6.8
0.12
0.0018
0.00004
0.016
1.33
4.99
0.089
0.028
0.0073
0.014
0.0039
0.0014
0.095
0.009
0.016
Ib/hr
' 15
.27
0.004
0.0001
0.036
2.94
11.0
0.196
0.062
0.016
0.031
0.0087
0.003
0.21
0.02
0.036
a Particulate collected using wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP). In addition to this, an insignificant
amount of trace elements is collected on impingers.
b Trace elements constituted 0.32 percent of total sample analyzed.
c Trace elements constituted 0.12 percent of total sample analyzed.
Trace elements constituted 0.1 percent of total analyzed
e Sample was not analyzed for sulfur, but its values are based on SOj-SC^ concentrations in flue gas and the
sulfur content of the flue dust, determined independently of the WESP sampler.
-------
Table 3-9. ELEMENT FLOW RATES IN THE FEED AND DISCHARGE
STREAMS OF REVERBERATORY FURNACE
Element
Al
As
Ba
Be
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
F
Fe
Hg
Mo
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
Si
V
Zn
Incoming streams
Reverb.
feed
kg/hr
181
86.4
14.4
0.032
349
26.7
0.034
7260
1.5
4536
0.0082
35.8
0.32
22.2
2.72
4.54
499
0.42
19.0
Ib/hr
400
190
31
0.072
770
59
0.076
16000
3.4
10000
0.018
79
0.70
49
6.0
10
1100
0.92
42
slag
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Converter
dust
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total
kg/hr
181
86.0
14.1
0.032
349
26.7
0.034
7260
1.54
4536
0.008
35.8
0.32
22.2
2.72
4.54
499
0.42
19.0
Ib/hr
400
190
31
0.072
770
59
0.076
16000
3.4
10000
0.018
79
0.70
49
6.0
10
1100
0.92
42
Outgoing streams
Matte
kg/hr
<7.7
0.72
14.97
0.0019
5.4
16.8
29
8165
0.005
4970
0.0091
3.85
0.91
38.1
2.09
0.077
<19
0.15
14.1
Ib/hr
<17
1.59
33
0.0041
12
37
0.64
18000
0.012
11000
0.020
8.5
2.0
84
4.6
0.17
<42
0.33
31
SlaE
kg/hr
318
0.86
19.5
0.015
862
0.15
1.72
998
1.0
5443
0.004
40.3
0.34
5.89
1.54
2.49
21.7
0.39
13.6
Ib/hr
700
1.9
43
0.032
1900
0.33
3.8
2200
2.2
12000
0.0091
89
0.76
13
3.4
5.5
48
0.86
30
Flue gas
kg/hr
0.045
34.5
0.29
0.0015
0.005
3.44
0.019
8.16
4.26
0.25
0.015
0.077
0.0050
0.17
0.014
0.29
0.77
0.12
0.10
Ib/hr
0.10
76
0.64
0.0034
0.011
7.6
0.044
18
9.4
0.55
0.033
0.17
0.011
0.38
0.030
0.65
1.7
0.027
0.22
ESP3 dust
kg/hr
0.49
13.6
0.010
0.0002
0.95
0.33
0.0082
28
0.015
19.3
0.00007
2.99
0.026
2.4
0.58
0.073
0.77
0.005
2.09
Ib/hr
1.1
30
0.023
0.0004
2.1
0.74
0.018
62
0.032
42.6
0.00015
6 *
0.059
5.3
1.3
0.16
1.7
0.011
4.6
Waste heata
boiler dust
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Total
kg/hr
318
49.4
34.6
0.014
907
20.9
2.04
8165
5.4
10400
0.028
45.4
13.2
45.4
4.26
2.95
2177
0.54
29.9
Ib/hr
700
109
76.2
0.039
2000
46
4.5
18000
12
23000
0.062
100
29
100
9.4
6.5
4800
1..2
66
I
NJ
fO
a These s
NA - Not
Creams were not recycled during
available.
the time of ESP sampling
-------
ESP outlet were collected on July 13, 1976, and precipitator
dust was collected July 11 to 13, 1976. The matte and slag
were obtained during sampling from July 12 through July 14,
1976. The samples of concentrate were taken at the end of
each shift from January 12 to 14, 1976. The data in Table
3-8 and Table 3-9 show that of a total of 86.2 kg/hr (190
Ib/hr) of arsenic entering the system only 34.5 to 63.5
kg/hr (76 to 140 Ib/hr) is found in the ESP exit stream and
13.6 kg/hr (30 Ib/hr) is trapped in the ESP dust. According
to Radian, the remaining 7.3 to 36.3 kg/hr (16 to 80 Ib/hr)
of arsenic, which is unaccounted for, may have settled out
in the surface area of the waste-heat boilers serving the
reverberatory furnace. As indicated in the table, some of
the other elements may also be settling out in the waste-
heat boilers.
On July 13 and 14, 1976, Radian conducted a separate
test for arsenic at the ESP inlet and outlet, using EPA
Method 5 with a filter at 120°C (250°F) followed by a
series of impingers. During these tests, Radian measured
arsenic emission rates averaging 31.39 kg/hr* (69.2 Ib/hr)
at the ESP inlet [measurements of 26.9 kg/hr (59.3 Ib/hr),
33.1 kg/hr (72.9 Ib/hr), and 34.2 kg/hr (75.4 Ib/hr) during
three runs] and 22.6 kg/hr (49.9 Ib/hr) at the ESP outlet
[measurements of 24.4 kg/hr (53.7 Ib/hr), 20.3 kg/hr (44.8
Ib/hr), and 23.3 kg/hr (51.3 Ib/hr) during three runs].
These data do not clearly indicate whether the arsenic
emission rates are based on the amount collected on the
filter at 120°C (250°F) only, or on the total amount col-
lected on the filter and impingers.
Based on these sampling tests, Radian assumes that the
efficiency of the WESP used for sample collection in this
*
The emission rates are based on flow rate determined by
Radian and analyzed data obtained by Battelle, Columbus
Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio.
3-23
-------
study can be compared with the expected efficiency of the
WESP for particulate control. They further assume that
virtually all elements covered in their study can be col-
lected in the spray tower,- packed tower, and WESP arrange-
ment. The blowdown stream of the cooling-humidifying unit,
however, will have to be treated, because it will contain
all the impurities presently escaping the existing dry ESP
that treats the off-gases of the reverberatory furnace.
Additional tests produced the following results: the
reverberatory feed concentrate consists primarily of two
crystalline phases: chalcopyrite (CuFeS2) and two-quartz
(Si02). Arsenolite (As203) was positively identified in the
hopper dust, in the material captured by the instack filter,
in the deposit on the outstack filter as well as in the
impingers. Hydrates of copper sulfate and arsenolite were
the predominant materials collected on the instack filter.
This material was a bright blue, and the crystalline portion
was almost pure arsenic oxide. The crystalline portion of
the material collected on the outstack filters at 120°C
(250°F) was almost all arsenolite.
Aerotherm Corporation Test Results
At the request of EPA Region IX, Aerotherm conducted
particulate emission tests from July 20 to July 30, 1976, on
the ESP outlet of the reverberatory furnace, the acid
plant, and the main stack. This was done to determine the
compliance status of the copper smelter with the process
weight particulate emission regulation. During the testing
period, particulate emissions and concentrations of SO-,/H_SO
*j ^
and S02 were measured, and the instack sampling method was
compared with EPA Method 5. Table 3-10 summarizes the
actual time during which test samples were taken at the
reverberatory furnace ESP. Two trains were used during the
3-24
-------
Table 3-10. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING TIMES -
REVERBERATORY ESP
Run No .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Date
7-20-76
7-21-76
7-22-76
7-23-76
7-26-76
7-26-76
7-27-76
7-28-76
7-28-76
7-29-76
7-29-76
7-30-76
Sampling time
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
A-Port
B-Port
4:15 pm
4:58 pm
5:25 pm
6:00 pm
9:56 am
10:29 am
9:18 am
9:53 am
8:50 am
9:25 am
2:56 pm
3:27 pm
8:35 am
9:08 am
11:13 am
11:44 am
7:16 pm
7:49 pm
10:12 am
10:50 am
4:00 pm
4:34 pm
11:20 am
11:55 am
4:45 pm
5:28 pm
5:55 pm
6:30 pm
10:26 am
10:59 am
9:48 am
10:23 am
9:20 am
9:55 am
3:26 pm
3:57 pm
9:05 am
9:38 am
11:43 am
12:14 pm
7:46 pm
8:19 pm
10:42 am
11:20 am
4:30 pm
5:04 pm
11:50 am
12:25 pm
3-25
-------
testing: one sampling train for a combination of EPA
Methods 3 and 4, to measure gas composition moisture con-
tent; and one sampling train for a combination of EPA
Methods 5 and 8, to measure particulate and sulfur oxide
emissions. The two trains were used simultaneously, one in
each sample port.
Aerotherm based the following conclusions and observa-
tions on the test results: a) particulate emissions from
the ESP are much greater than the allowable particulate
emission rate; b) the amount of particulate measured when
using a train with both instack and outstack filters is
consistently higher than the amount measured when using a
sampling train with only an outstack filter (according to
the EPA Method 5 test procedure, required for process weight
emissions regulation); c) particulates captured on both the
instack and outstack filters are hygroscopic in nature, with
a difference between extrapolated and equilibrium weights of
20 to 40 percent on the instack filter and 30 to 50 percent
on the outstack filter; d) a large portion of the particu-
late collected may be sulfuric acid; and e) a chemical
analysis of the particulate should be undertaken to deter-
mine its characteristics.
To calculate allowable emissions, reverberatory furnace
process weight data were collected for an 8-hr shift on July
26, 1976. These data are summarized in Table 3-11.
3-26
-------
Table 3-11. TOTAL SOLID INPUT TO THE REVERBERATORY
FURNACE DURING SHIFT "A" (8-HR PERIOD) ON JULY 26, 1976
(ESTIMATED BY THE PHELPS DODGE STAFF)
Input
Concentrate
Converter slag
Precipitate
Lime
Dust
Total
Quantity
metric tons
159
105
5.4
13.6
7.3
290.3
tons
175
116
6
15
8
320
The corresponding allowable emission rate based on the
process weight regulation would be 14.15 kg/hr (31.2 Ib/hr).
It was observed during the sampling program that 2
hours of the total time cycle for normal converter operation
are generally required for a copper-blow. Table 3-12 records
the test results of a sample train using EPA Methods 3 and
4. Table 3-13 records the test results of a sample train
using EPA Methods 5 and 8. Because of the hygroscopic
nature of the particulate matter collected, the filter
gained weight very rapidly during the weighing process by
adsorbing water vapor from the air. Consequently, no attempt
was made to determine the exact weight of the filter on
completion of sampling. It was weighed later to calculate
equilibrium weight, from which extrapolated emission weights
were calculated. Of the 12 measurements taken, Runs 2
through 9 were made by an EPA Method 5 sample train, and the
remaining runs were made by a sample train containing an
instack filter and an outstack filter. Because of subisokinetic
sampling rates, Runs 1 and 11 on Table 3-13 were rejected.
3-27
-------
00
I
N)
00
Table 3-12. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING DATA USING EPA METHODS 3 AND 4 -
PhELPS JJODGE REVERBERATORY FURNACE ESP
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Date
(1976)
July 20
July 21
July 22
July 23
July 26
July 27
July 28
July 28
July 28
July 29
July 29
July 30
Moisture
%
16.8
12.3
12.3
12.3
12.8
10.1
12.3
9.0
11.1
12.1
11.5
13.8
Vm-dry volume
measured by meter
mJ
1.03
1.27
1.17
1.25
1.13
1.26
1.13
1.41
1.28
1.28
1.28
scf
36.5
44.8
41.3
44.2
39.9
44.7
39.9
49.9
45.2
45.3
45.2
C02
7.
1.0
1.0
3.7
0.9
4.2
4.2
4.2
5.9
6.2
6.3
5.8
5.8
°2
%
18.1
18.1
11.3
18.1
14.0
14.0
14.0
11.3
10.9
10.5
11.5
11.5
Md3
kg/kg mole
or
Ib/lb mole
29.16
28.88
29.05
28.86
29.23
29.23
29.39
29.43
29.43
29.39
29.39
Ms1
kg/kg mole
or
Ib/lb mole
27.29
27.54
28.03
27.53
27.80
28.10
28.36
28.16
28.05
28.08
27.83
VS-gas
velocity
m/sec
23.2
24.8
21.3
25.7
18.8
23.6
27.5
25.4
23.6
23.5
21.9
ft/sec
76.0
81.4
69.9
84.3
61.8
77.4
90.1
83.3
77.5
77.1
72.1
Qs-gas
flow rate
m^/hr scfh
x 10A
8.78
10.2
8.49
10.76
7.93
10.2
11.89
109.8
11.04
11.04
10.2
x 10b
3.1
3.6
3.0
3.8
2.8
3.6
4.2
38.8
3.9
3.9
3.6
Md - dry molecular weight.
Ms - wet molecular weight.
-------
Table 3-13. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE, S03/H2S04 AND SO2 EMISSION
DATA FOR REVERBERATORY FURNACE ESP
Run
No.*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
11
Date
(19761
July 20
July 21
July 22
July 23
July 26
July 26
July 27
July 28
July 28
July 29
July 29
July )0
Extrapolated
weight
1.67 q/m3
(0.731 gr/scf)
1.41 q/m3
(0.617 qr/scf)
1.46 g/m3
10.639 qr/sdf)
0.92 q/m3
(0.400 qr/scf)
1.02 q/m3
(0.444 gr/scf)
1.49 g/m3
(0.651 gr/scf)
i.27 g/m3
(0.555 gr/scfl
1.14 g/m3
(0.500 qr/Bcf)
1.7] q/m3
(0.758 gr/scf)
1.78 q/m3
(0.780 gr/scf)
1.86 g/m3
(0.816 gr/scf)
First
measured
weight
1.68 q/m3
(0.732 qr/scfl
1.41 g/m3
(0.617 qr/scf)
1.46 q/m3
(0.640 qr/scf)
0.92 g/m3
(0.400 gr/scf)
'1.02 g/m3
(0.444 gr/scf)
1.49 q/m3
(0.651 qr/icfl
1.27 q/m3
(0.555 qr/scf)
1.23 q/m3
(0.538 gr/scf)
1.74 q/m3
(0.760 gr/scf)
1.78 g/m3
(0.777 gr/scf)
1.89 g/m3
(0.829 qr/scf)
Equilibr ium
weight
2.14 g/m3
(0.934 gr/scf)
1.72 q/m3
(0.752 gr/scf)
1.83 g/»3
(0.801 gr/acf)
i.40 g/m3
(0.612 gr/scfl
1.55 g/m3
(0.679 gr/scfl
1.95 g/m3
(0.851 qr/scfl
1.49 g/m3
(0.652 qr/scf)
1.64 q/m3
(0.716 qr/scf)
2.24 q/m3
10.980 qr/scf)
2.17 g/m3
10.951 qr/scf)
2.30 g/m3
(1.004 gr/scf)
Extrapolated
we igh t
149 kg/hr
(328.3 Ib/hr)
144 kg/hr
(318.2 Ib/hr)
124 kg/hr
(272.9 Ib/hr)
97.9 kg/hr
(216.2 Ib/hr)
75.2 kq/hr
(175.3 Ib/hrl
150 kq/hr
(330 Ib/hr)
150 kq/hr
(331.3 Ib/hrl
125 kq/hr
(273.3 Ib/hr)
192 kq/hr
(423.0 Ib/hr)
197 kq/hr
(431. 1 Ib/hrl
192.2 kq/hr
(423.9 Ib/hrl
First
measured
weiqht
149 kg/hr
(328.6 Ib/hrl
144 )ta/hr
(318.4 Ib/hr)
124 kq/hr
(273.2 Ib/hrl
97.9 kq/hr
(216.5 Ib/hr)
79.6 kg/hr
(175.6 Ib/hr)
150 kg/hr
(331.1 Ib/hr)
150 kg/hr
(331. 1 Ib/hr)
133 kg/hr
(293.9 Ib/hr)
192 kg/hr
(423.8 Ib/hr)
197 kg/hr
(413.6 Ib/hr)
195 kq/hr
(430.4 Ib/hr)
weight
190 kg/hr
(419.5 Ib/hr)
176 kg/hr
(388.1 Ib/hr)
155 kg/hr
(341.9 Ib/hr)
98.3 kq/hr
(216.5 Ib/hr)
122 kg/hr
(268.4 Ib/hr)
196 kg/hr
(432.8 Ib/hr)
177 kg/hr
(389.9 Ib/hrl
178 kq/hr
(390.9 Ib/hr)
310 kg/hr
(683.8 Ib/hr)
240 kq/hr
(528.2 Ib/hr)
237 kq/hr
(521.6 Ib/hr)
87. 0«
91.41
109.21
92. 0\
107.71
98.81
96.31
104. Ot
92.81
89.71
98.1%
Allowable
14.2 kq/hr
(31.3 Ib/hrl
14.2 kq/hr
(31.4 Ib/hrl
14.3 kg/hr
(31.6 Ib/hr)
14.5 kg/hr
(31.9 Ib/hr)
14.1 kg/hr
(31.2 Ib/hr)
13.8 kg/hr
(30.5 Ib/hr)
14.0 kg/hr
(30.8 Ib/hr)
13.9 kq/hr
(30.7 Ib/hr)
14.4 kq/hr
(31.7 Ib/hr)
14. 3 kg/hr
(31.5 Ib/hr)
14.1 kq/hr
(31.01 Ib/hr)
14.3 kg/hr
(31.6 Ib/hr)
S02
9660 ppm
15,820 ppa
6760 ppra
6340 ppm
4830 ppm
16,190 ppm
5440 ppm
1810 ppm
743Q ppm
3810 ppm
8340 ppm
S°2
emission
2270 kg/hr
(5000 Ib/hr)
4320 kg/hr
(9500 Ib/hr)
1500 kg/hr
(3300 Ib/hr)
1810 kg/hr
(4000 Ib/hr)
997 kg/hr
(2200 Ib/hrl
4320 kg/hr
(9500 Ib/hrl
1720 kq/hr
(3800 Ib/hr)
500 kg/hr
11100 Ib/hr)
21§0 kq/hr
(4800 Ib/hr)
1090 kq/hr
(2400 Ib/hrl
2270 kq/hr
(5000 Ib/hr)
S03/H2SO«
16.4 ppm
49.7 ppm
27.0 ppm
2 . 9 ppm
0 . 0 ppm
32.8 ppm
0 . 0 ppm
42.5 ppm
41.1 ppm
40.6 ppm
44.9 ppm
SOj/H2S04
emiss ion
4.72 kg/hr
(10.5 Ib/hrl
16.9 kq/hr
(31.2 Ib/hr)
7.6 kq/hr
116.8 Ib/hr)
1.04 kq/hr
(2.1 Ib/hr)
0.0 kq 'hr
(0.0 Ib/hr)
10.8 kq/hr
(24.0 Ib.'hrl
0.0 kq/hr
(0.0 Ib/hr)
15.2 kq/hr
(33.7 lb''hr)
15.0 kg'hr
13). 0 Ib/hrl
14.8 Vq/hr
(32.7 Ib/hrl
15.4 kq/hr
1)3, <> Ib/hrl
Ul
I
NJ
Runs 1 and 11 are re]ected because of subkinetlc conditions. Runs 10, 11, and 12 were done by using instack/
outstack filter trains. Durinq test runs 10 and 12, the particulate emission rate uslnq the inatack filter was
99.52 1217.2) and 9<>.52 kq/hr (212.8 Ibs/hr) respectively.
-------
The measurements of Run 7 were not considered, because of
errors in velocity measurements and isokinetic sampling
rates. The velocity measurement on one of the trains was
low in Run 5, and the measured emission rate reading was
replaced with a corrected emission rate, which is an average
of all particulate emissions collected on the outstack
filters.
During the test program, Aerotherm observed that, for
P
some undetermined reason, the Teflon coating on the out-
stack filter holder broke down and flaked at 120°C (250°F)
in each test. Since any particulates that may have been
R
deposited on these Teflon flakes would not be included in
the actual particulate measurements, Aerotherm believes the
measured emission rate to be erroneously low. The magnitude
of this error could not be measured.
Aerotherm calculated a mean particulate emission rate
of 143.4 kg/hr (316.1 Ib/hr) and a standard deviation of
32.4 (71.4), using all the valid measurements, including
seven EPA test methods, five runs, and two simultaneous
instack and outstack test runs.
The data indicated a mean particulate emission rate of
129.5 kg/hr (285.44 Ib/hr) with a standard deviation of 21.8
(48.13) using EPA Method 5. Using a 95 percent confidence
level, the limits become 129.5 + 14.4 kg/hr (285.44 + 31.67
Ib/hr). A comparison of the average particulate emission
rate of 129.5 kg/hr (285.44 Ib/hr) by EPA Method 5 with the
average particulate emission rate of 192.1 kg/hr (423.45
Ib/hr) (average of two measurements) by a combination of
instack and outstack filters indicates that about 50 percent
more particulate is collected by the latter than by the
former. Aerotherm could not explain the weight difference
of the residues from the two sampling trains.
3-30
-------
During instack/outstack testing, emissions collected on
the instack filter and residue from the nozzle and probe
were included with the instack filter weight. The average
particulate weight collected on the nozzle, instack filter,
and probe during two instack/outstack test runs was 96.5
kg/hr (212.8 Ib/hr), which is about 50 percent of the total
collected on the nozzle, instack filter, probe and outstack
filter. Comparison of the average particulate emission of
96.5 kg/hr (212.8 Ib/hr) measured on the nozzle, instack
filter, and probe with the average particulate emissions of
129.5 kg/hr (285.44 Ib/hr) measured by EPA Method 5, shows
that the amount collected by EPA Method 5 is about 134
percent of the amount collected by the former method.
Calculated mean emission rates of SO-/H SO. and SO2
from the test data were 11.2 kg/hr (24.9 Ib/hr) with a 5.62
kg/hr (12.4 Ib/hr) standard deviation, and 2313.4 kg/hr
(5100 Ib/hr) with a 1134 kg/hr (2500 Ib/hr) standard devia-
tion respectively.
SRI Test Results
Southern Research Institute performed tests July 9, and
10, 1976, to measure the fractional collection efficiency
and the voltage-current characteristics of the ESP system.
A computer simulation of ESP performance was made simultaneously,
using a computer system model developed by SRI, and the
inlet particle size distribution was measured. The Institute
concluded the following on the basis of the test results:
a) Measured efficiency and design efficiency are identical
within the limits of experimental error. (An overall col-
lection efficiency of 96.7 percent was measured by instack
filters, 96.6 percent was calculated from cascade impactor
data, 96.8 is predicted by the SRI-EPA computer model, and
96.8 percent is the design efficiency.) b) Power supply
versus electrical current characteristics indicates the ESP
3-31
-------
is in good mechanical alignment and electrical condition.
c) Particulate resistivity is not limiting the operating
characteristics of the collector, d) Particle sizes appar-
ently differ in chemical composition. The mass median
diameter of the inlet particle size distribution was greater
than 10 ym. The inlet particle distribution was bimodal
with one component having a mass median diameter less than 1
ym. e) A significant variation in sulfur dioxide concentra-
tion occurs with time. f) A potential problem with the
application of an ESP to a source of very fine particulate
is presented in suppression of the corona current by a
particulate space charge. Some reduction in current was
observed at the ESP inlet during the testing, but the degree
of suppression was not large. This results from the particles
being larger than expected. Furthermore, the concentration
was rather low, and it was observed that some of the impactor
catches appeared to be hygroscopic. The difference in the
color of particles noted from stage to stage within the
impactor indicates that their chemical composition was
nonhomogeneous with respect to size.
Six measurements were made of the particle size distri-
bution during the test, three each at the inlet and outlet,
using a modified Brink cascade impactor. Southern Research
Institute noted that the validity of the first outlet run
data was questionable because the filter and filtrates for
this run were discovered to be wet when the impactor was
disassembled. This was probably caused by condensed water
within the probe as it accidentally ran back into the
impactor after being removed from the duct.
Figure 3-1 presents a plot of the average inlet and
outlet size distributions on a cumulative percentage basis
versus particle size basis for the Phelps Dodge smelter.
Figure 3-2 shows measured and calculated fractional efficiency
3-32
-------
Ul
o
QC
LLJ
£X.
UJ
»— l
«C
_l
o
35. 73
99.95
99.9
99.8
99.5
99
98
95
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
5
2
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.05
0.01
n
1 1
—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
TlT OUTLET SIZE
rill 1 DISTRIBUTION
Till11
T 1
I1
I
, i X INLET SIZE
T i 1 1 I * l DISTRIBUTION
Ijl
i
_ r
i
X
-
-
_
-
-
» -
1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10'1 10° 101 10'
PARTICLE DIAMETER, ym
Figure 3-1. Average inlet and outlet particle size
distributions, particle size vs. cumulative percent, for
the ESP at the Phelps Dodge smelter.
3-33
-------
99.99
0.01
1QU A ^^.^^^^ 1Q,
PARTICLE DIAMETER, ym
10'
Figure 3-2. Measured and theoretical fractional efficiency
curves prepared by SRI for the ESP on the reverberatory
furnace at Phelps Dodge Corporation.
3-34
-------
curves for the reverberatory furnace ESP. The theoretical
curve generated with the SRI-EPA computer model simulation
is predicted for ideal conditions, with no corrections for
rapping losses, poor velocity distribution, or any of the
gas bypassing the active areas.
The inlet particulate size distribution is bimodal,
with a fine mode having a mass median diameter of 0.8 ym.
Approximately 22 percent of the mass is contained in parti-
cles with diameters smaller than 10 ym (Figure 3-1) . The
overall mass median diameter of the inlet particle size
distribution is greater than 10 ym. It is also evident from
Figure 3-1 that less than 3 percent of the total mass is
0.26-ym in size. Approximately 80 percent of the total mass
collected at the ESP outlet was under 10 ym in size. About
26 percent was below 0.26 ym.
On July 9 and 10, 1976, ESP efficiency measurements of
96.4 and 96.7 percent were made using an impactor train and
96.6 and 96.8 percent using a mass train. Mass emission
data were provided to SRI by the Radian Corporation from
simultaneously conducted tests.
Southern Research Institute indicated that the impactor
data may not be reliable, especially regarding particle size
at the ESP outlet, because of their inability to do isokinetic
traverses and the low quantities collected on impactor
stages. During each sampling, anywhere from one-tenth to a
few tenths milligram weight was collected on each stage.
Figure 3-2, which presents the confidence limits, shows the
unreliability of the data.
On July 9 and 10, 1976, S0~ sample measurements were
made at the ESP outlet using a sampling system consisting of
a heated, glass-lined sampling probe with a quartz wool
filter, a water-jacketed condenser, and fritted bubbler
3-35
-------
containing a 3 percent hydrogen peroxide solution. The
measurements were made before and after the reverberatory
furnace was charged, because the sulfur oxide concentration
is expected to vary with the furnace operation cycle. Based
on the test results presented in Table 3-14, SRI speculates
that S02 concentrations in the stack gas are highly vari-
able.
Table 3-14. TEST RESULTS - SULFUR OXIDE CONCENTRATION
(by volume percent)
Date
7/9/76
7/10/76
Furnace charge cycle
After charging
Before charging
After charging
Before charging
After charging
S02
1.0
0.42
0.73
0.63
1.7
S03
0.024
0.019
0.018
0.025
0.067
Southern Research Institute concedes that the reliability
of the S03 data cannot be verified because the applicability
of this method of measurement to the nonferrous metal industry
is questionable and the efficiency of the condenser has not
been previously evaluated in this kind of environment;
however, they do not believe this makes the accuracy of the
S02 measurements suspect. They do suggest, however, that
accurate measurement of S03 concentrations with respect to
the furnace operation requires further investigation.
3-36
-------
4.0 ADD-ON CONTROL SYSTEM FOR PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
As explained in Section 2.0, the principal reverbera-
tory furnace exhaust gases at the Magma Copper Company and
Phelps Dodge Corporation smelters pass through waste-heat
boilers, after which the partially cooled gases are treated
in ESP's before being vented through a stack. The ESP's
were designed to treat the flue gases at a temperature of
316°C (600°F). The efficiency was to be determined by using
the ASTM test method. This method specifies that partic-
ulate loading of the flue gas be measured at a process gas
temperature, which is about 316°C (600°F) at these two
smelters. The copper reverberatory furnaces at these
smelters are presently subject to compliance with EPA
Process Weight Regulation 40 CFR 52.126(b), which requires
the flue gas particulate content to be measured at about
120°C (250°F) in accordance with EPA Method 5. Most of the
flue gas particulate matter at these two smelters, as
measured by Method 5, is composed of material that has
condensed from the vapor phase to the solid or liquid phase
when the gas temperature is reduced from 316°C (600°F) to
120°C (250°F) in the sampling apparatus. Numerous sampling
tests conducted for EPA by different organizations have
shown that the reverberatory furnaces at the Magma Copper
and Phelps Dodge smelters are emitting more particulate
matter than allowed by the EPA Process Weight Regulation.
The EPA decided to evaluate the feasibility of upgrading
control systems of these smelters as a means of meeting
emission standards, and also (with the assistance of IGCI)
4-1
-------
to evaluate new control alternatives if upgrading proves
impractical. The EPA provided various sampling test data
obtained at the two smelters for examination by IGCI and
PEDCo. Based on the limited information provided and their
best judgment, IGCI members believe each of the smelters can
comply with EPA regulations by installing an additional
control system in series with the ESP already in operation.
Effective particulate control can be achieved by first
cooling the gas from the existing ESP outlet, then applying
available control techniques such as electrostatic pre-
cipitation, filtration, or scrubbing. IGCI suggested one of
the following add-on control systems be installed in series
with the existing ESP's:
a) Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a fabric filter to
reduce the flue gas dust loading to an allowable
level.
b) Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a wet scrubber system to
reduce the flue gas dust loading to an allowable
level.
c) Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a dry ESP to reduce the
flue gas dust loading to an allowable level.
d) Gas cooling equipment to reduce flue gas tempera-
ture to 120°C (250°F) and a wet ESP to reduce the
flue gas dust loading to an allowable level.
PEDCo also analyzed the sampling test data provided by
EPA and developed technical specifications for the add-on
control systems.
The specifications, which included data on flue gas
exiting from the existing ESP such as volume flow rate,
inlet gas loadings, allowable emissions, moisture content,
and gas composition, were issued to selected IGCI members.
They were asked to furnish capital and annual operating cost
4-2
-------
data for the add-on control systems specified. All provided
costs for both gas cleaning equipment and auxiliary equipment,
and some also provided direct and indirect cost items as
well as annual operating cost data.
More definitive information on the nature of the flue
gas would help in the development of precise technical and
economical add-on particulate control systems for the smel-
ters. Pilot plant studies of add-on control systems could
determine their feasibility, optimum sizing, system pressure
drop, and efficiency. Gas composition varies with raw
materials, operating conditions, furnace production cycle,
and also between smelters. Separate tests at the individual
smelters, relating the emissions rate and composition with
the smelter operating cycle, might provide better information
on which to base control evaluations. The test program
could also be extended to estimate condensation points of
individual trace elements present in the gas and the dew
point of the gas stream.
As mentioned previously, available data on the existing
control systems at the Magma and Phelps Dodge smelters
suggest that most of the particulate matter measured by EPA
Method 5 was present as vapor at 316°C (600°F), but was
condensed to a solid or liquid at 120°C (250°F). The process
weight regulation requires flue gas particulates to be
measured at 120°C (250°F) for compliance. If compliance is
to be achieved, the gas must be cooled and the volatile
compounds condensed before the gas passes through the add-on
control equipment. This can be accomplished by evaporative
cooling, dilution, or convection/radiation heat exchange.
Because control by scrubbing is a wet operation, the gases
are cooled by water as they pass through a quencher or
scrubber.
Evaporative cooling with water (also known as spray
cooling) has two principal advantages. First, this type of
4-3
-------
cooling does not greatly increase the gas volume, and
second, it requires relatively little space. Consideration
must be given to water availability and corrosion protection,
however, when analyzing an evaporative cooling system.
Gas cooling with dilution air is the simplest method,
but it is not economical because it greatly increases the
gas volume flow rate to the add-on control system. This
increased flow rate greatly increases the size and cost of
the control device, and it could necessitate modifications
to or replacement of the existing stack. Increased gas
volumes would also decrease particulate concentrations in
the gas at the inlet of the control system, thereby making
it more difficult to achieve high particulate removal effi-
ciencies.
Air-to-air heat exchangers have economic limitations
and are disadvantageous for cooling larger gas volumes.
They require a great deal of space, and the installed cost
of this type of heat exchangers is also higher than any
other cooling method.
Gas cooling by natural convection and radiation, causes
the duct to become hot (because of the hot gas flowing
through it), and it heats the surrounding air. Natural
drafts are formed as the temperature of the air increases,
carrying the heat away from the ducts. Heat is also discharged
by radiant heat to the area surrounding the hot duct. Both
temperature decreases in the hot gas flowing through a short
duct length and temperature increases in the surrounding air
are limited.
Those IGCI members who recommended dilution air cooling
expressed the belief that this is the only technically
feasible cooling method, despite obvious disadvantages.
They rejected spray cooling because it would require the
control device to be operated at a temperature lower than
4-4
-------
the acid dew point. They rejected the air-to-air heat
exchanger because the skin temperature of the heat transfer
surface would be below the acid dew point of the gas.
Data are not available on gas dew points for the smelters.
However, calculations based on gas composition data indicate
that the flue gas dew point is above 120°C (250°F). This
could create corrosion problems in gas handling and treatment
equipment. Some copper smelters that cool gases to temperatures
as low as 93°C (200°F) before treatment use brick-lined
flues and a brick and mortar stack with acid-proof lining.
At one copper smelter, gas from the fluid bed reactor,
electric furnace, and converters is treated in a fabric
filter control system; at three other smelters the gases are
treated in a cold ESP. No wet scrubbers are used to control
emissions from copper reverberatory furnaces in the United
States. According to some IGCI members, fabric filters have
been successfully used to clean reverberatory furnace gases
at smelters in Canada.
An add-on control system must be equipped with a fan to
handle the additional pressure drop across the system (a few
inches W.C. when ESP's or fabric filters are used, and up to
100 inches W.C. if scrubbers are used). When the fan is
located upstream of the control system, the volume of gas
flow is large (because the gas is at high temperature).
When the fan is located downstream of the control system, it
does not have to handle such a large gas flow (because the
gas is at low temperature); however, the control device must
be of a heavier construction and reinforced because it must
withstand high negative pressures. In either case, the fan
must be insulated for protection against corrosion or constructed
of corrosion-resistant materials. The duct work must also
be well insulated.
4-5
-------
The following section presents evaluations of different
add-on control systems for application at the Magma Copper
Company and Phelps Dodge Corporation smelters in question.
4.1 ADD-ON CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN
MANUEL, ARIZONA
The reverberatory furnace flue gas is now treated in a
hot ESP, which operates at 300°C (573°F) and has a design
removal efficiency of 98 percent (measured by the ASTM in-
stack methods). (This efficiency has never been verified by
actual ASTM testing.) In EPA Method 5 sampling tests, the
flue gas volume flow rate measured 18,264 m /min (645,000
acfm) at 300°C (573°F), and particulates averaged 1.76 g/m
(0.77 gr/scf) at 120°C (250°F), with a maximum of 2.9 g/m
(1.25 gr/scf) at the outlet of the ESP. The allowable
particulate emission rate for the furnace is 18 kg/hr (39.7
Ib/hr) or 0.032 g/m (0.014 gr/scf). Thus, additional
particulate matter control with an average efficiency of
98.18 percent (maximum 98.88 percent) is required for com-
pliance. The three units of the hot ESP are situated in
parallel (west to east), and the stack is located to the
north. These units operate under negative pressure without
a fan.
Enough space is available for add-on control equipment
south of the existing SCRA* pilot plant. Evaluations of
different add-on control for the Magma smelter reverberatory
furnace are discussed in this section. Magma Copper Company
is planning to convert the reverberatory furnaces from gas
and oil firing to coal firing. The evaluations of add-on
control systems in this section do not apply to conditions
that will prevail after the reverberatory furnaces have been
converted to coal.
*
Smelter €ee^d-iaa%iftg- Research Association.
4-6
-------
Add-on Fabric Filter Control System
Appendix B presents an add-on fabric filter control
system specification for Magma Copper Company- Based on
their best judgment, two IGCI members evaluated a system
according to this specification. Table 4-1 presents the
design parameters for these evaluations.
Evaluation A on this table involves a system designed
to cool gases from the hot ESP to 120°C (250°F) in a spray
cooling chamber, then to treat the gases in a fabric filter.
Design and instrumentation of the spray chamber must be
precise to keep the exit gas in dry condition. The chamber
is a cocurrent spray tower made of carbon steel with a
brick-lined bottom. The top of the chamber requires no
lining. The gas transportation portion downstream of the
chamber is properly lined to resist corrosion. Bag material
is fiberglass to insure that no damage occurs if the cooling
system fails. The baghouse external wall is constructed of
insulated carbon steel.
Evaluation B involves a system designed to cool the hot
ESP exit gas to 120°C (250°F) by the addition of dilution
air and to treat the gas in a fabric filter system equipped
with dacron bags. The dilution air cooling increases the
volume of gas to be treated to about four times that of the
original volume exiting the hot ESP. The bidder expressed
his belief that although dilution air cooling greatly in-
creases the size and cost of the collection equipment, it is
technically superior to the spray chamber or the air-to-air
heat exchanger. The inlet and outlet plenums and the plate
compartment walls of the baghouse system are made of 3/16-
in. A36 material. A mineral wool insulation 3 in. thick and
aluminized steel logging are used in the baghouse.
The best solution for temperature control appears to be
4-7
-------
Table 4-1. DESIGN PARAMETERS OF ADD-ON CONTROL
FABRIC FILTER SYSTEM FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER.
Parameter
Evaluation A
Evaluation B
System description
Gas volume flow rate from the
existing ESP to cooling
system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Particulate loading :
Concentration
Weight rate
Type of cooling
Number of units
Dimensions of each unit
Water consumption
Dilution air
Fabric Filter System
Total volume flow from cooling
system to add-on fabric filter
system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Filter type
Air-to-cloth ratio (net)
Air-to-cloth ratio (gross)
No. of compartments (net)
No. of compartments (gross)
Cleaning mechanism
Fan: Location
Number
Pressure drop
Power required (total)
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F). fabric filter
followed by a fan
18,264 m3/min (645,000 acfm)
9,316 m3/min (329,000 scfra)
300°C (573°F)
8.7%
1.762 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
979 kg/hr (2158 Ib/hr)
Concurrent water spray cooling
2
6.1 m x 21.3 m (20 ft x 70 ft)
61.32 m3/hr (270 gpm)
13,400 m /rain (474,640 acfm)
10,039 m3/min (354,310 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
21.1%
Fiber glass
2:1
34
Reverse air
Downstream of the system
3
2.985 kPa (12 in. W.C.)
1100 kw (1475 HP)
Air dilution of gas to 120°C
(250°F), fabric filter followed
by a fan
18,264 nT/min (645,000 acfm)
9,316 m3/min (329,000 scfra)
300°C (573°F)
8.7%
1.762 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
979 kg/hr (2158 Ib/hr)
Dilution air
2652 m /min (936,500 scfm)
49,554 nr/min (1,750,000 acfm)
36,990 m3/min (1,306,000 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
2.2%
Combination dacron
1.49:1
1.37:1
38
41
Shaker type
Downstream of the system
8
2.737 kPa (11 in. W.C.)
4705.4 kW (6310 HP)
4-8
-------
a combination of spray cooling and dilution cooling. Cal-
culations show that cooling the gas to 204°C (400°F) by
water evaporation, then to 120°C (250°F) by air dilution,
would increase the gas volume to 23,530 m3/min (831,000
acfm), which is only about 50 percent of that which would be
produced by complete reliance upon air dilution cooling.
Add-on Fabric Filter Control System Costs
Tables 4-2 and 4-3 present a capital and annual operat-
ing cost breakdown for Evaluations A and B. These evaluations
represent the cost of equipment as of the last quarter of
1977. Only basic equipment is included; no spares are
represented in these costs. Duct costs are estimated on the
basis of 110 m (360 ft) of duct from the existing ESP outlet
to the inlet flange of the system, an appropriate length
within the system, and a return duct of 107 m (350 ft) from
the system outlet to the existing stack. Capital charges in
the annual operating costs were calculated as 17.5 percent
of total turnkey costs. This rate is based on a 10 percent
interest rate, 15 years equipment life, and 4.3 percent for
taxes and insurance.
The data show that an add-on fabric filter system to
enable Magma Copper Company to comply with the applicable
emission regulations will entail capital costs of $337.73 to
$854.52 per m3/min ($9.56 to $24.20 per acfm) of ESP exhaust
gas, depending on the type of cooling system included and
based on a gas flow rate of 18,264 m /min (645,000 acfm).
System A, which contains a spray chamber for gas cooling and
a fabric filter for particulate control, costs $337.73 per
m /min ($9.56 per acfm) of gas introduced into the system.
System B, which uses dilution air cooling for gas temperature
reduction and a fabric filter for particulate control, costs
$854.52 per m /min ($24.20 per acfm) of gas introduced into
4-9
-------
Table 4-2. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL
FABRIC FILTER SYSTEM FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER.
Parameter
Evaluation A
Evaluation B
System description
Inlet gas flow :
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Contaminant loading :
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, flow rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, flow rate
Cleaning efficiency, %
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F). fabric filter
followed by a fan
13,440 mj/min (474,640 'acfm)
10,000 m3/min (354,310 acfm)
120°C (250°F)
21.1%
1.6 g/m3 (0.716 gr/scf)
989 kg/hr (2180 Ib/hr)
0.028 g/m3 (0.012 gr/scf)
18.0 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2
Air dilution of gas to 120°C
(250°F), fabric filter followed
by a fan
49,550 mj/min (1,750,000 acfm)
36,980 m3/min (1,306,000 acfm)
120"C (250°F)
2.2%
0.71 g/m3 (0.310 gr/scf
1599 kg/hr (3524 Ib/hr)
0.0092 g/m3 (0.004 gr/scf)
18.0 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.8
Gas cleaning equipment cost
Cost of auxiliaries:
Fan w/drive
Screw conveyor/air lock
Cooling tower/accessories
Total equipment cost
Installation costs, direct:
Foundation and supports
Duct workc
Stack
Piping
Insulationd
Painting
Electrical
Other
Total direct costs
Installation costs, indirect
Engineering
Construction & field expenses
'Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkey cost
$1,447,500
143,400
58,800
263,100
$1,912,800
? 114,800
1,412,000
0
19,100
378,800
47,800
210,400
475,000
$2,657,900
$ 187,500
994,600
296,500
25,500
17,000
76,500
$1,597,600
$6,168,300
$6,200,000
1,000,000
a
$7,200,000
2,387,000
0
b
2,053,000
b
b
3,483,000
$ 7,923,000
d
d
d
$ 22,000
30,000
432,000
$ 484,000
$15,607,000
|* Included in gas cleaning equipment.
Included in others.
f Includes material and labor, necessary
For gas cleaning equipment only.
6 Included with direct cost.
insulation, and lining of duct.
4-10
-------
Table 4-3. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON
FABRIC FILTER FOR MAGMA COPPER SHELTER.
Parameter
Evaluation A
Evaluation B
System description
Inlet gas flow :
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Contaminant loading :
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, flow rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, flow rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), fabric filter
followed by a fan
13,440 nr/min (474,640 acfm)
10,000 m3/min (354,310 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
21.1%
1.6 g/m3 (0.716 gr/scf)
989 kg/hr (2180 Ib/hr)
0.028 g/m3 (0.012 gr/scf)
18.0 kg/hr (3y./ ic/nr)
8760
Air dilution of gas to 120°C
(250°F), fabric filter followed
by a fan
49,500 m /min (1,750,000 acfm)
36,980 m3/min (1,306,000 scfm)
120°C (250°F
2.2%
0.71 g/m3 (0.310 gr/scf)
1599 kg/hr (3524 Ib/hr)
0.0092 g/m3 (0.004 gr/scf)
18.0 kg/hr (39.7 lo/nr)
8760
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, SlO/man-hour
Supervisor, 512/man-hour
Total
Maintenance:
Labor, SlO/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities
Electricity, S0.03/kWh
Water, SO.25/1000 gal.
Compressed air, 50.02/1000 ft3
Total
Total direct costs :
Capital charges
Total annual cost
1,
SI.
543,800
8,800
52,600
43,800
1,900
45,700
59,500
473,700
36,400
510,100
667.900
079,300
747,200
S41,600
41,600
315,500
4, 200
319,700
a
1,375,000
a
500
1,375,500
$1,716,900
2,731,200
S4,468,000
a Included in maintenance labor.
4-11
-------
the system. The respective gas cleaning equipment (including
auxiliaries) costs are 31 percent of the total turnkey
capital costs for Evaluation A and 46 percent for Evaluation
B. Annual operating costs of particulate removal are $0.21/kg
($0.09/lb), or $4787/day, for Evaluation A, and $0.32/kg
($0.15/lb), or $12,241/day, for Evalulation B. Utility
costs and capital charges represent about 91 percent of the
total annual operating costs for Evaluation A and 92 percent
for Evaluation B.
Add-on Wet Scrubber Control System
Appendix B contains a specification for an add-on wet
scrubber system at the Magma Copper smelter. Based on this
specification, three bidders used their best judgment to
evaluate the scrubber system.
Although all three evaluations are based on the same
specification, they are not comparable because the individual
systems are designed for different pressure drops (AP)
across the system. Pressure drop is a principal design
parameter of a system, usually determined by particle size
distribution and chemical analysis of the particulate
matter. Because of a lack of sufficient data on these
parameters, the bidders used their experience and judgment
to determine pressure drop. Table 4.4 presents design
parameters of these evaluations (C, D, and E).
In Evaluation C, ESP exhaust exit gas is treated in two
identical scrubber units, each containing a quencher, an
adjustable venturi, a flooded elbow, and a mist eliminator
followed by two fans. Each unit treats half of the total
volume flow, which is 9132 m /min (322,500 acfm). Estimated
pressure drop for this system is 24.9 kPa (100 in. W.C.).
The quencher is fabricated of carbon steel at least 1/2 in.
thick. The inlet flow passage to the quencher, the outlet
4-12
-------
Table 4-4. ADD-ON CONTROL SCRUBBER SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETER FOR
MAGI1A COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
.to.
I
System description
Gas volume flow rate from the
existing ESP to the system:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Particulate loading:3
Concentration
Weight rate
Number of units
Gas volume flow rate to
quencher/prequencher in each
unit:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Quencher dimensions
Evaporative water addition to
Evaluation c
A prequencher, an adjustable
venturi, a flooded elbow, and
a mist eliminator separator
followed by two fans
18,264 m /rain (645,000 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
9260 m3/min (327,000 scfm)
8.7%
1.762 g/mj (0.77 gr/scf)
979 kg/hr (2158 Ib/hr)
2
9075 m /rain (320,500 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
4630 m3/min (163,500 scfm)
3.2 m x 1.07 m (10.5 ft x
3.5 ft)
34.1 m3/hr (150 gpm)
Evaluation D
A fan, a separate quencher, and
a venturi scrubber
18,264 m /min (645,000 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
9260 m3/min (327,000 scfm)
8.7%
1.762 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
979 kg/hr (2158 Ib/hr)
2
9075 m3/min (320,500 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
4630 m3/min (163,500 scfra)
4.6 m x 11.6 m (15 ft x 38 ft)
51.1 m3/hr (225 gpm)
Evaluation E
A prequenpher, a venturi, and
a separator followed by a fan
18,264 nT/min (645,000 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
9260 m3/min (327,000 scfm)
8.7%
1.762 g/mj (0.77 gr/scf)
979 kg/hr (2158 Ib/hr)
1
9075 m /min (320,500 acfm)
300°C (573°F)
4630 m3/min (163,500 scfm)
5.03 m x 12.2 m (16.5 ft x
40 ft)
-------
Table 4-4 (continued).
Parameter
Evaluation C
Evaluation D
Evaluation E
Gas volume flow rate at scrub-
ber exit in each unit:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Particulate loading
Scrubber system clean effi-
ciency
Scrubbing water quantity
(recycled)
Venturi scrubber rate
Makeup water addition rate
Total scrubber pressure drop
Scrubber dimensions
Demister dimensions
Fan location
Number of fans per unit
Estimated power required
9872 iri /min (349,160 acfm)
52°C (125°F)
10,800 m3/min (382,220 scfm)
12.94%
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/acf)
98.2%
35.77 m3/min (9450 gpm)
35.7 m3/min (9430 gpm)
1.19 m3/min (314 gpm)b
24.9 kPa (100 in. W.C.)
7.6 m x 10.7 m n 16m (25 ft x
35 ft x 53 ft)
3.4 m x 5.2 m x 0.6 m (11 ft x
17 ft x 2 ft)
Downstream of the scrubber
2
2790 kW (3750 HP)
6625 m3/rnin (233,970 acfm)
64°C (148°F)
4660 m3/min (164,500 scfm)
25.4%
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/acf)
99.0%
6.18 m3/min (1635 gpm)
6.2 m3/min (1640 gpm)
1.92 m3/min (503 gpm)c
14.92 kPa (60 in. W.C.)
5.9 m x 11.6 m (19 ft 6 in. x
38 ft 5 in.)
5.9 m x 0.025 m (19 ft 6 in. x
1 in. high)
Upstream of the scrubber
1
3251 kW (4360 HP)
11,950 m /min (421,900 acfm)
60°C (140°F)
11,150 m3/min (393,740 scfm)
0.032 g/rrT (0.014 gr/scf)
Minimum 98.2
11.34 m /min (3000 gpm)
1.02 m3/min (280 gpm)
6.47 kPa (26 in. W.C.)
9.1 m x 18.2 m (30 ft x 60 ft)
9.14 m dia. (30 ft dia.)
18.2 overall length (60 ft
overall length
Downstream of the system
1
2050 kW (2750 HP)
a Maximum particulate loading during furnace charging is 2.86 g/m or 1584 kg/hr (1.25 gr/scf or 3504 Ib/hr)
68.4 m /hr (303 gpm) water for evaporation into the gas in quencher and 2.3 m /hr (10.1 gpm) water to make up for
that removed from the system for treatment.
c 101 m3/hr (450 gpm) water for evaporation into the gas in quencher and 14.4 m3/hr (63 gpm) water to make up for
that removed from the system for treatment.
-------
flow passage from the venturi to the flooded elbow, and
the flooded elbow itself are all fabricated of carbon steel
at least 1/2 in. thick, lined with Ceilcote. The venturi
scrubber is fabricated of 1/2-in. thick Grade B or Grade C
steel plate. The converging throat and diverging sections
are lined with silicon carbide brick. The wetted parts of
the fan are made of 316 L SS.
The system in Evaluation D contains two scrubber units,
each with a fan and separate quencher followed by a venturi
scrubber. This system operates at a pressure drop of 14.94
kPa (60 in. W.C.). The bidder believes this pressure drop
and associated power requirements could be significantly
lower, and that a pilot test should be conducted to determine
actual pressure drop. The preconditioner is constructed of
mild steel with a Gunite or Savereisin acid-resistant
cement lining. Flow velocities are low to reduce abrasive
wear. The scrubber would be constructed of 316 L stainless
steel unless the scrubbing water is high in chlorides.
The one-unit scrubber system in Evaluation E consists
of a prequench section, a venturi, and a separator section
followed by a fan. The pressure drop of this system is 6.47
kPa (26 in. W.C.). The bidder indicated that some study has
been made regarding the scrubbing of reverberatory furnace
gases in copper smelters; and, based on limited scrubbing
pilot plant data, he believes that a pressure drop of 6.47
kPa (26 in. W.C.) is a reasonable choice to produce 96 to 98
percent efficiency by weight. The general material of
construction is acid-brick-lined steel; the hot gas zones
and high-velocity sections of the scrubbers are constructed
of FRP-lined steel. All alloy parts in the venturi are of
Inconel 625. The fan wheel and shaft will be supplied in
Incoloy-825 or 904L material. Inlet ducting is a 1/4-in.
and 3/8-in. carbon steel with exterior weatherproof insula-
tion. The material of construction for the prequencher and
4-15
-------
venturi is 1/4-in. and 3/8-in. carbon steel with 60- to 80-
mil flaked-glass lining plus 3-in. acid brick and foam glass
interior lining. Alloy parts are of Inconel 625. The
separator is 1/4-in., 3/8-in. and 1/2-in. carbon steel with
60- to 80-mil flaked glass lining. The base of the separator
mill is lined with 3-in. acid brick up to 2 ft. above gas
inlet. The exit ducting to the fan and stack is of 5/8-in.-
thick FRP-Hetron 197 with flame retardant.
Carbon steel is the material of construction for the
water treatment systems in all evaluations.
Based on these evaluations, it is apparent that pilot
plant tests are necessary to produce a wet scrubber with the
desired efficiency.
Add-on Wet Scrubber Control System Costs
Tables 4.5 and 4.6 present capital and annual operating
costs for the three systems. These evaluations represent
the cost of equipment during the last quarter of 1977. They
include only basic equipment (no spare equipment). The
following parameters were used in the duct cost estimate:
a duct length of 110 m (360 ft) from the existing ESP exit
to the add-on control system inlet, an appropriate duct
length within the system, and a return duct of 107 m (350
ft) from the add-on system outlet to the existing stack.
Capital charges in the annual operating costs were calculated
by using 20.5 percent of the total turnkey cost. This rate
is based on an interest rate of 10 percent, an equipment
life of 10 years, and a tax and insurance rate of 4.22
percent.
Data show that the turnkey capital cost of an add-on
scrubber system ranges from $218 to 279 per actual cubic
meter/min ($6.18 to 7.89 per acfm) of gas entering the
system. The individual turnkey capital cost estimates are
$264.13, $218.24, and $278.69 per actual cubic meter/min
4-16
-------
Table 4-5. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL SCRUBBER SYSTEM FOR
MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
£>.
I
System description
Gas flow at scrubber outlet;
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Contaminant loading:
Inlet
Inlet
Outlet
Outlet
Cleaning efficiency
Gas cleaning equipment cost
Cost of auxiliaries:
Fan with drive
Pumps
Tanks
d
Water treatment
Others
Evaluation C
A prequencher, an adjustable
venturi, a flooded elbow, and
a mist eliminator separator
followed by two fans
19,744 m /min (698,330 acfm)
51.6°C (125°F)
10,800 m3/min (382,220 scfm)
12.44%
1.76 g/m (.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 qr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
$506,000
$1,183,000
20,000
c
126,000
89,000€
Evaluation D
A fan, a separate quencher, and
a venturi scrubber
13,250 m /min (467,941 acfm)
64°C (148°F)
9320 m3/min (329,000 scfm)
Saturated
1.76 g/m (.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m (0.014 gr'/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
$273,600
$661,400
29,000
118,000
121,300
75,700
Evaluation E
A prequencher, a venturi, and
a separator followed by a fan
11,950 m3/min (421,900 acfm)
54.4°C (130°F)
10,050 m3/min (354, 780 scfm)
1.76 g/m (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
$1,000,000
$340,000
50,000
20,000
150,000
-------
Table 4-5 (continued).
I
M
CO
Parameter
Total equipment cost
Installation costs, direct:
Foundation and supports
Duct work
Stack
Piping
Insulation^
Painting
Electrical
Other
Total direct costs
Installation cost, indirect:
Engineering
Construe. & fields expenses
Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkey cost
Evaluation C
51,924,000
S 106,300
2,000,000
0
75,000
12,100
7,600
172,900
$2,373,900
$ 35,400
374,400
5,100
25,300
35,400
50,600
526,200
$4,824,100
Evaluation D
$1,279,000
$ 90,000
2,402,000
0
65,000
25,000
12,800
36,200
$2,631,000
$ 22,000
20,000
5,000
7,000
12,000
10,000
76,000
$3,986,000
Evaluation E
$1,560,000
1,737,000
$l,793,000h
$5,090, 000
a Particulate content of the gas at the inlet and outlet is based on the gas flow rate of 9260 m /min
(327,000 scfm) to the system.
Includes preconditioning equipment (quencher), scrubber, and associated tanks.
Included in the gas cleaning equipment cost.
Materials and labor.
e Piping and instrumentation.
Includes material and labor, and necessary insulation and lining of duct.
g For gas cleaning equipment.
^ Includes total of direct costs and indirect costs, excluding foundation and duct costs.
-------
Table 4-6. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL SCRUBBER FOR
MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
Evaluation
Evaluation D
Evaluation E
System description
Gas flow at scrubber outlet:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Contaminant loading : a
Inlet
Inlet3
Outlet
Outlet3
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
A prequencher, and adjustable
venturi, a flooded elbow, and
a mist eliminator separator
followed by two fans
19,744 m /min (698,330 acfm)
51.6°C (125T)
10,800 m3/min (382,220 scfm)
12.44%
1.76 g/m (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.016 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98 .2%
8760
A fan, a separate quencher, and
a venturi scrubber
13.250 m /min (467,941 acfm)
64°C (148°F)
9320 m3/min (329,000 scfm)
Saturated
1.76 g/m (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.018 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
8760
A prequencher, a venturi, and
a separator followed by a fan
11,950 m /min (421,900 acfm)
54.4°C (130°F)
10,050 m3/min (354,780 scfm)
1.76 g/m 0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
8760
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, ?10/man-hour
Supervisor, $12/man-hour
Total
$122,200
37,000
159,200
587,600
24,000
111,600
$27,100
9,700
36,800
-------
Table 4-6 (continued).
i
NJ
O
Parameter
Maintenance:
Labor, SlO/raan-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities :
Electricity, SO.Ol/kWh
Water
Chemical water treatment
Total direct cost
Capital charges
Total annual cost
Evaluation c
59,200
41,000
100,200
26,000
3,136,000
31,500
24,200
$3,477,100
989,000
54,466,100
Evaluation D
3,600
3,000
6,600
20,000
1,744,100
53,900
9,500
51,945,700
817,100
52,762,800
Evaluation E
27,100
18,500
45,600
18,500
479,800
29,400
31,800
5641,940
1,043,600
| 51,685,500
Particulate content of the gas at the scrubber inlet and outlet is based on the gas flow rate
9260 m3/min (327,000 scfra) to the system.
-------
($7.48, $6.18, and $7.89 per acfm) of gas entering the
system for Evaluations C, D, and E respectively. Gas flow
rate to each system is 18,264 m3/min (645,000 acfm). Cost
of gas cleaning equipment, including auxiliaries, varies
from 30 to 40 percent of the total turnkey cost. The respec-
tive annual operating costs for the three systems are $0.53,
and $0.33, and $0.20/kg ($0.24, $0.15, and $0.09/lb) of
particulate removed, or $12,236, $7,569, and $4,618 per day.
Utilities and capital charges represent 71 percent and 22
percent in Evaluation C, 65 percent and 29 percent in
Evaluation D, and 32 percent and 62 percent in Evaluation E.
Add-on Dry ESP Control System
Appendix B contains specifications for an add-on dry
ESP for the Magma Copper Smelter. Using their best judgment,
three members of IGCI evaluated the requirements based on
information given to them. Table 4-7 presents design para-
meters of the add-on dry ESP system.
Evaluations F, G, and H all involve two parrallel
systems, each containing a fan, a cooling system, and an
ESP. The fan is placed on the hot side of the cooling
system to avoid a potential corrosion and imbalance problem.
Design and instrumentation of the cooling system must be
precise to keep the exit gas dry. A pilot study of the ESP
is recommended to assess the corrosive and sticky nature of
the dust.
Add-on Dry ESP Control System Costs
Tables 4-8 and 4-9 present capital and annual operating
cost breakdowns for Evaluations F, G, and H. The evaluations
represent the cost of equipment during the last quarter of
1977. They include only basic equipment (no spare equipment).
Duct costs in the three estimates are based on 110 m (360
ft) of duct from the existing ESP outlet to the inlet of the
add-on control system, an appropriate length within the
4-21
-------
Table 4-7. DESIGN PARAMETERS OF ADD-ON DRY ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR SYSTEM
FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
System description
Gas volume flow rate fro* the
cipitator to cooling systemi
Under actual condition*
Under standard condition*
Temperature
Type of cooling
Number of unit*
Dimensions of each unit
Hater consumption
cooling systems to add-on
electrostatic precipitator;
Under actual conditions
Under standard conditions
Number of ESP's
Dimension of each
Number of chambers per ESP
Number of fields
Number of passages per
chamber
Length of each field
Field height
number of energizing Means
Current
Voltage
Have form
Migration velocity
Specific collecting area,
net
Total power consumption (ESP)
ran: location
number
Pressure drop
t>ow*r rnquiz-ed
Evaluation T
A fan, evaporative cooling to
120'C <250»r), a dry electro-
IB, 264 »3/»in (645,000 acfn)
9316 B3/»in (329,000 scfrn)
300'C (575'F)
6 7%
Evaporative cooling
2
34.1 m3/hr (150 gpn)
14,470 n3/min (511,000 acini)
10,601 B3/min (381,450 ecfm)
1 20"C ( 250*F)
2
19.8 m x 15. e n -A 15.5 n
(65 ft x 52 ft x 51 ft)«
2
S»
31
2.74 m (9.0 ft)
9.1 B (30 ft)
10
1500 BA
70 kv
Pull
3.96 cm/» <0.13 ft/«)
103.2 B2 p«r •'/• (52< ft2/
1000 acfnic
1400 kH (1170 HP)
Hot fit* of cooling «y«t««
2
O.995 fcPa 14 in. M.C.)
448 kH (fiOO HP)
Evaluation G
A fan, an avaporativa cooling
tower, followed by dry elec-
18,264 n'/nin (645,000 act*)
9316 n'/min (329,000 icfm)
300'C (573T)
8 7%
Evaporative cooling
2
1.99 n dia x 25.5 n length
(29.5 ft dia x 83.6 ft length)
25 m3/hr (110 gpn)
14,040 B3/min (495.830 «cf»)
10,481 B3/min (370,137 acf«)
120*C (250*F)
2
26.5 B L x 14.63 n H
(87.1 ft L x 48.7 ft t»)
1
5b
46
3.61 ro (12.5 ft)
9.40 » (30.83 ft)
10
1250 BA
56 kV
Full
3.41 oo/l (0.112 ft/«)
111 •' per •'/• (597 ft2/
1000 acfii)d
1995 kW (2665 HP)
Hot side of cooling •yateai
3
429 let! (575 -HP)
Evaluation H
A fan, concurrent flow cooling
tower to iii'C (250*F), a dry
11,2(4 »3/»in (64.5,000 acfm)
*31( »3/»in (329,000 acfm)
JOO'C (573T)
1.7%
evaporative cooling
2
34.1 »3/hr (150 gpn)
13,567 m3/nin (479,106 acfm)
9401 •3/min (332,000 acfm)
120*C (250"F)
2
1
3
44
3.24 • (10.625 ft)
10.97 B (36 ft)
3327 BA
45 kV
mil
4.14 CB/l (0.158 ft/a)
12.* B2 per B3/« (421 ft2/1000
•CfB)
1100 kH {1475 HP)
•ot vide of cooling «yeteB
2
l.TH kcPa 17.3 in. N.C.)
44B KM (600 RP)
-------
I
to
u>
Table 4-8. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON DRY ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
SYSTEM FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
the aya ten.
b Includes screw conveyor.,
c Access and dust disposal.
Slide gates and dampers.
Parameter
Inlci gas (low:
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading •*
Inlet, wt . rate
Outlet, concentration
Out let , wt . rate
Others
Foundation and supports
(MiL)«
Duct work
Stack
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Other
Engineering
Construction fees
Start-up
Model study
Evaluation F
14,470 nVrain (511,000 acfm)
10,801 n3/min (381, 450 «cfm>
102'C <250'F)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 lb/hr(
98.2%
223,000
3B4,OOOb
52.978,000
S 29), 000
1.504,000
0
Not quoted
0
Not quoted
1 , 570, 5009
S3, 367, 500
3
3
3
S 2S.OOO
1
15,000
210,000
S 120,000
'».. bbS.SOO
Evaluation G
14,040 n3/min 1495,810 acf»!
10,481 m3/Bin (370,137 scfnl
120'C (250'F)
i .76 g/mj (0.77 gr/scf )
0.032 q/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
99.21
11,960,000
300,000
661,000
300,000C
53,423,000
S 216,000
1,513,800
0
Not quotvd
0
Not quoted
417,400
l,829,000h
53,996,200
S 308,000
235,000
84,000
25,000
15,000
50,000
305,000
SI, 022. 000
Si, 441, 100
evaluation H
tator
j
120'C (250T)
1.76 g/«3 (0-77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr 12170 Ib/hr)
98 .21
271,400
683,000
211 ,600d
$3,219,000
S 11.200
1,497,000
0
Not quote J
0
336,000
Not quoted
1,792,000'
53,706,200
k
S 132,000
11,800
51, iOO
358, 300
1 453,700
S ' . 17t . $00
f
la
' Irutallatlon labor tor 4** cl*aninq *quip»«nt and •uiiliarl"*
About 92.5 p«rcant for inctallation oC total gas cleaning «qu
and r««aininq for Iralqht on *quip^nt
Included in others.
Included in vquipSMnt coat.
Included In co«t of start-up.
-------
Table 4-9. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL
DRY ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
Inlet gas Mow
Temperature
Contaminant loading3
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor
Operator, $10/man-hour
Supervisor, 521/man-hour
Total
Maintenance
Labor, SlO/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts'
Utilities
Electricity, $0.03/kWh
Hater, SO. 25/1000 gal
Total
Total direct costs
Capital charges
Total annual cost
Evaluation P
120°C (250-n, a dry electro-
static precipitator
14,470 m3/min (511,000 acfm)
10,801 m3/min (381,450 scfml
120°C (250°F)
1.76 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98. 2»
8760
521,500
4,400
25,900
11,000
7,800
18,800
5,200
367,900
19,700
387,600
437,500
51,166,500
51,604,000
Evaluation G
tower, followed by dry electro-
1«,040 m3/min (495, B30 acfm]
10,481 mj/min (370,137 scfml
120°C (250°F)
1.76 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hrl
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scfl
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
8760
532,000
4,500
36,500
12,600
7,800
20,400
b
524,300
14.500
538,800
595,700
51,477, 200
52,072 . 900
Evaluation H
A fan, concurrent flow cool-
ing tower to 120°C (250°F)
tator
13,567 m3/min (479,106 acfm)
9401 m3/min (332,000 scfm)
120*C (250°F)
1.76 g/m3 (0.77 gr/acf)
984.31 kg/h (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.24
8760
$11,000
4,500
15,500
8,000
4,500
12,500
4,500
290,000
19,700
309,700
142,200
51,291,300
51,633, 500
, 000 S(.-fmJ to
the system.
Included in maintenance.
-------
system, and a return duct of 107 m (350 ft) from the system
outlet to the existing stack. Capital charges in the annual
operating costs were calculated by using 17.5 percent of the
total turnkey costs. This rate is based on a 10 percent
interest rate, 15 years of equipment life, and a rate of
4.35 percent for taxes and insurance.
The data show the use of an add-on dry ESP system to
enable Magma Copper Company to comply with the applicable
emission regulation will entail capital costs of $365 to
$462 per m /min ($10.00 to $13.00 per acfm) based on exist-
ing ESP exhaust gas flow rate of 18,264 m /min (645,000
acfm). The respective turnkey capital costs are $365 per
3 3
m /min ($10.33 per acfm) for Evaluation F, $462 per m /min
($13.00 per acfm) for Evaluation G, and $404 per m /min
($11.44 per acfm) for Evaluation H. The respective gas
cleaning equipment costs are 45 percent of the total turnkey
capital costs for Evaluation F, 41 percent for Evaluation G,
and 44 percent for Evaluation H. Annual operating costs of
particulate removal are $0.19/kg ($0.09/lb), or $4480/day,
for Evaluation F and Evaluation H, and $0.25/kg ($0.11/lb),
or $5679/day, for Evaluation G. Utility costs and capital
charges represent about 97 percent of the total annual
operating costs for Evaluation F and Evaluation G, and 98
percent for Evaluation H.
Add-on Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WEP) Control System
Appendix B contains specifications for an add-on wet
ESP at the Magma Copper smelter. Table 4-10 presents the
design parameters of one WEP system (Evaluation I). The
system involves a WEP designed to cool gases from the exist-
ing ESP in an evaporative cooling tower to 120°C (250°F) ,
then to treat the gases in a WEP. The evaluation involves
two parallel systems consisting of a fan, an evaporative
4-25
-------
Table 4-10. ADD-ON CONTROL WET ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
Evaluation I
System description
Gas volume flow rate from the existing
electrostatic precipitator to system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Cooling system: type
Number of units
Dimensions of each unit
Liquid- to-gas ratio, L/G
Electrostatic precipitator system
Total volume flow rate at add-on pre-
cipitator system inlet or at gas cool-
ing system outlet:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Number of ESP's
Number of chambers per ESP
Number of fields per ESP
Number of passages per chamber
Length of each field
Field height
Number of energizing means
Current
Voltage
Wave form
Migration velocity
Spray water
Flush water for inlet transition
Flush water for ESP plates3
Specific collecting area
Fan: Location
Number
Pressure drop
Power required
Two units each consists of a fan, an
evaporative cooling tower, and a wet
electrostatic precipitator
18,151 m /min (641,000 acfro)
9313 m3/min (328,877 scfm)
300°C (573°F)
8.7%
Evaporative cooling tower
2
8.99 m x 25.98 m (29.5 ft x 83.6 ft)
3 3
0.0974 m per m /min (355 gal/1000 acfm)
14,040 m /min (495,830 acfm)
10,480 m3/min (370,137 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
2
1
4a
31
3.33 m (10.92 ft)
9.40 m (30.83 ft)
4
200 mA
55 kV
Full
0.079 m/s (0.262 ft/s)
5686 m /min (1502 gpm)
1567 m3/min (414 gpm)
15,490 m3/min (4092 g.pm)
49.6 m2 per m3/s (253 ft2/1000 acfm)
Hot-side cooling tower
2
1.99 kPa (8 in. W.C.)
429 kW (575 HP)
One field is redundant.
4-26
-------
cooling tower, and a WEP. The fan is located upstream of
the cooling system to prevent a potential corrosion problem.
The WEP is generally chosen when the particulate tends to be
sticky and does not drop when the plates of a dry ESP are
rapped. The WEP is a continuously sprayed, horizontal flow,
parallel plate, and rigid frame discharge electrodes type.
Water from a precisely designed water nozzle arrangement is
sprayed at the WEP entrance to maintain a low resistivity of
the particles entering into the system. Water sprays located
above the electrostatic field sections introduce evenly
distributed water droplets to the gas stream for washing all
internal surfaces. The particulates and water droplets in
the electrostatic fields pick up charges and migrate to the
collecting plates. The plates are continuously flushed to
remove the collected material into the troughs below which
are sloped to a drain. The WEP parts not sprayed or flushed
with water are constructed of corrosion-resistant materials.
(The portion close to outlet of WEP is not sprayed or
flushed with water in order to remove the carryover liquid
drops and mists before the outlet of the equipment). The
condensible material collected in the drain liquor can be
separated by means of any sludge removal methods.
Cost of Add-on Wet Electrostatic Precipitator System
Tables 4-11 and 4-12 present capital and annual operat-
ing cost breakdowns for evaluation I. The evaluation re-
presents the cost of equipment during the last quarter of
1977. It includes only basic equipment (no spares). Duct
costs in all three evaluations are based on 110 m (360 ft)
of duct from the existing ESP outlet to the inlet flange of
the gas cooler, an appropriate length within the system, and
a return duct of 107 m (350 ft) from the system flange to
4-27
-------
Table 4-11. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON WET ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR SYSTEM FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Gas cleaning equipment cost
Cost of auxiliaries:
Fan with drive
Evaporative cooling tower
• Water treatment
Others
Total equipment cost
Installation costs, direct:
Foundation and supports
Duct work
Stack
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Electrical0
Otherd
Total direct costs
Installation costs, indirect:
Engineering
Construction and field expenses
Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Model study
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkpy rost-
Evaluation I
Two units. Each consists of a fan, an
evaporative cooling tower, and a wet
precipitator
14,010 m /min (495,830 acfm)
10,481 m3/min (370,137 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.76 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
$1,284,000
300,000
863,000
83,000
$2,530,000
$ 103,500
1,455,900
0
650,000
206,000
1,162,000
$3,577,400
$ 327,000
160,000
60,000
25,000
15,000
50,000
246,000
$ 883,000
$6,990,400
Particulate content of the gas at the inlet and outlet is based on a gas flow rate
b of 9260 m3/min (327,000 scfm) to the system.
Includes only material and labor for precipitator supports.
j Includes material and labor and necessary insulation and lining.
Installation costs for gas cleaning equipment, auxiliaries, fan, and cooling tower.
4-28
-------
Table 4-12. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON WET
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR FOR MAGMA COPPER SMELTER
Parameter
Evaluation I
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading:
Inlet , concentration
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
Two units. Each consists of a fan, an
evaporative cooling tower, and a wet
electrostatic precipitator
14,040 m /min (495,830 acfm)
10,481 m3/min (370,137 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.76 g/m3 (0.77 gr/scf)
984.31 kg/hr (2170 Ib/hr)
0.032 g/m3 (0.014 gr/scf)
18.01 kg/hr (39.7 Ib/hr)
98.2%
8760
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, $10/man-hour
Supervisor, $12/man-hour
Total
Maintenance:
Labor, $10/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities:
Electricity, $0.03/kWh
Water, $0.25/1000 gal
Chemicals
Total
Total direct costs:
Capital charges
Total annual cost
$ 21,400
3,000
24,400
8,400
5,200
13,600
b
414,800
471,000
885,800
S 923,800
1,223,300
S2,147,100
Paniculate content of the gas at the inlet
of 9260 m3/min (327,000 scfm) to the system
Included in maintenance.
and outlet is based on a gas flow rate
4-29
-------
existing stack flange. Capital charges in the annual
operating costs were calculated by using 17.5 percent of the
total turnkey costs. This rate is based on 10 percent
interest, 15 years of equipment life, and 4.35 percent for
taxes and insurance.
The data show that the use of an add-on WEP system
(Evaluation I) by Magma Cooper Company to comply with the
applicable emission regulation entails a capital cost of
$382.74 per m3/ min ($10.84 per acfm) of ESP exhaust gas
(based on a gas flow rate of 18,264 m /min (645,000 acfm).
This system uses an evaporative cooling system to cool the
gas to 120°C (250°F) before it enters the WEP. Cost of gas
cleaning equipment (including auxiliaries) is 36 percent of
the total turnkey capital cost. Annual operating costs of
particulate removal are $0.25/kg ($0.12/lb) or $5883 per
day. The utility costs and capital charges are about 41
percent and 57 percent of the total annual operating costs,
respectively.
4.2 ADD-ON CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION,
AJO, ARIZONA
The reverberatory furnace flue gas is treated in a hot
ESP consisting of two independent, parallel units (north of
the furnace) followed by a fan and stack. The ESP operates
at about 316°C (600°F) with a design removal efficiency of
96.83 percent (measured by ASTM instack method). The
efficiency was tested and verified by Southern Research
Institute and Radian Corporation in July 1976. EPA Method 5
sampling tests at the existing ESP exit measured a flue gas
C
3
volume flow rate of 5270 m /min (186,000 acfm) at 314°C
(598°F), average dust particulate loadings of 1.28 g/m"
(0.56 gr/scf) at 120°C (250°F), and maximum particulate
loadings of 3.14 g/m (1.37 gr/scf). Mass emissions aver-
aged 203 kg/hr (447 Ib/hr) at 120°C (250°F); the maximum was
496 kg/hr (1094 Ib/hr). Compliance with particulate regu-
4-30
-------
lations require an additional control of 93.0 percent
efficiency during normal operation and 97.15 percent during
furnace charging.
Enough space is available for an add-on control system
north of the existing ESP. Water availability is supposedly
limited. Evaluations of different add-on control for the
Ajo smelter reverberatory furnace are discussed in this
section.
Add-on Fabric Filter Control System
Appendix C presents the specification for a fabric
filter add-on control system at the Phelps Dodge Corporation
smelter. Three IGCI members used their best judgment to
evaluate a system based on this specification. Table 4-13
presents design parameters of the systems evaluated.
Evaluation J is for a system consisting of a spray
tower to cool gases from the existing hot ESP to 120°C
(250°F), followed by a fabric filter for particulate con-
trol. The chamber is a cocurrent spray tower made of
carbon steel with a brick-lined bottom. The gas transporta-
tion system (i.e., ductwork, fans and control devices)
downstream of the chamber is properly lined to resist corro-
sion. Fabric filter bags are fiberglass to insure that no
damage occurs if the cooling system fails.
Evaluation K involves a system designed to cool the hot
ESP exit gas to 120°C (250°F) by adding dilution air, then
treating the gas in a fabric filter system containing dacron
bags. Dilution cooling increases the original gas volume of
5670 m3/min (186,000 acfm) to 14,000 m /min (495,000 acfm).
The bidder expressed his belief that although dilution air
cooling greatly increases the size and cost of the collec-
tion equipment, it is technically superior to the tower and
air-to-air heat exchanger. The inlet and outlet plenums and
4-31
-------
Table 4-13. DESIGN PARAMETERS OF AN ADD-ON FABRIC FILTER SYSTEM FOR
THE PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER IN AJO, ARIZONA
Parameter
1
U)
NJ
System description
Gas volume flow rate from the
existing electrostatic precip-
itator to cooling system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditionsa
Temperature
Moisture content
Particulate loading:
Concentration
Weight rate
Type of cooling
Number of units
Dimension of each
Water consumption
Dilution air
Evaluation J
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
5270 m /min (186,000 acfm)
2639 rnVmin (93,176 scfrn)
314"C (598°F)
12.3%
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
Concurrent waterspray cooler
1
7.01 m (23 ft) diameter
24.9 m (82 ft) overall height
0.31 m /min (82 gpm)
Control system
Evaluation K
Dilution air cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
5270 m /min (186,000 acfm)
2639 m3/min (93,176 scfm)
314°C (598°F)
12.3%
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
Dilution air
-------
Table 4-13 (continued).
Parameter
I
U)
OJ
Total volume flow rate from
cooling system exit to add-on
fabric filter system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions3
Temperature
Moisture content
Filter type
Air-to-cloth ratio (net)
Air-to-cloth ratio (gross)
No. of compartments (net)
No. of compartments (gross)
Pressure drop across the
system
Cleaning mechanism
Fan:
Location
Number
Pressure drop
Evaluation J
3700 m /min (130,690 acfm)
2763 m3/min (97,558 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
25.3%
Fiberglass
2:1
10
Reverse air
Downstream of the system
1
2.99 kPa (12 in W.C.)
298 kW (400 hp)
Control system
Evaluation K
14,000 m3/min (495,000 acfra)
10,460 m3/min (369,500 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
3.0%
Combination dacron
1.60:1
1.46:1
10
11
Shaker type
Downstream of the system
3
2.74 kPa (11 in. W.C.)
1175 kW (1575 hp)
Standard conditions are 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia) and 21°C (70°F)
-------
the plate compartment walls are of 3/16 in. A36 material.
A 3-in.-thick mineral wool insulation and aluminized steel
lagging are used for baghouse.
Add-on Fabric Filter Control System Cost
Tables 4-14 and 4-15 present the capital and annual
operating costs for the two systems evaluated (design evalua-
tions are in Table 4-13). The evaluations represent the
cost of equipment for the last quarter of 1977. They
include only basic equipment (no spare equipment). The duct
cost items in the three evaluations are based on a 24 m (80
ft) straight duct length from the existing ESP outlet to the
inlet flange of the system, an appropriate length within the
system, and a return duct of 34 m (110 ft) from the outlet
to the existing stack. Capital charges in the annual oper-
ating costs were calculated by using 17.5 percent of the
total turnkey costs. This rate is based on 10 percent
interest rate, 15 years of equipment life, and a 4.35 per-
cent rate for taxes and insurance.
The cost estimate data show that treating furnace gas
in an add-on control system (Evaluation J) consisting of a
fabric filter preceded by a water spray tower for cooling
the gas to 120°C (250°F) costs about half of what it costs
to treat the gas in a fabric filter preceded by air dilution
for cooling the gas (Evaluation K). The turnkey capital
cost of treating gas from the existing ESP outlet by the
system in Evaluation J is $380.11 per m /min ($10.77 per
acfm); by the method in Evaluation K this cost is $751.58
per m /min ($21.30 per acfm). The total cost of gas clean-
ing equipment (including auxiliaries) is about 37 percent of
the total turnkey cost in Evaluation J and about 57 percent
in Evaluation K. Annual operating cost for particulate
removal is about $0.14/kg ($0.06/lb), or $1607/day, for the
4-34
-------
Table 4-14. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL FABRIC FILTER SYSTEM
FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
I
U)
ui
System description
Inlet gas flow:3
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, weight rate
Outlet, concentration
Cleaning efficiency
Gas cleaning equipment cost
Cost of auxiliaries:
Fan w/drive
Screw conveyor w/air lock
Cooling tower w/accessories
Total equipment cost
Evaluation J
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
3700 m /min (130,690 acfm)
120°C (250°F)
2760 m3/min (97,558 scfm)
25.3%
3.07 g/mJ (1.34 gr/scf)
508 kg/hr (1120 Ib/hr)
0.082 g/m3 (0.036 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
97.3%
3498,000
47,800
17,300
168,200
5731,300
Control system
Evaluation K
Dilution air cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
14,020 m /min (495,000 acfm)
120°C (250°F)
10,460 m3/min (369,500 scfm)
3.0%
0.792 g/m (0.346 gr/scf)
497 kg/hr (1095 Ib/hr)
0.023 g/m3 (0.01 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
97.3%
51,960,000
310,000
c
c
S2,270,000
(continued)
-------
Table 4-14 (continued).
i
U)
Parameter
Installation costs, direct:
Foundation and supports
Duct work
Stack
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Electrical
Other
Total direct costs
Installation costs, indirect:
Engineering
Constr. and field expenses
Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkey cost
Evaluation J
$ 45,000
188,300
0
7,500
162,200
18,800
82,500
135,000
$ 639,300
73,500
390,000
116,400
12,700
10,000
30,000
$ 632,600
$ 2,003,200
Control system
Evaluation K
$ 241,000
0
394,800
1,034,000
$1,669,800
c
c
c
11,000
10,000
d
$ 21,000
$3,960,800
To fabric filter from cooling system.
Based on gas conditions at fabric filter inlet.
Included in others.
By others.
-------
Table 4-15. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL FABRIC FILTER FOR
PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
I
U)
-J
Parameter
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, weight rate
Outlet, concentration
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, $10/man-hour
Supervisor, $12/man-hour
Total
Evaluation J
Spray water cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
3700 m /min (130,690 acfm)
120°C (250°F)
2760 m3/min (97,558 scfm)
25.3%
3.07 g/m (1.34 gr/scf)
508 kg/hr (1120 Ib/hr)
0.082 g/m3 (0.036 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr
97.3%
8760
(30.0 Ib/hr)
$29,200
7,200
36,400
Control system
Evaluation K
Dilution air cooling of gas to
120°C (250°F), a fabric filter,
followed by a fan
14,020 m /min (495,000 acfm)
120°C (250°F)
3
10,460 m /min
3.0%
[369,500 scfm)
0.792 g/m (0.346 gr/scf)
497 kg/hr (1095 Ib/hr)
0.023 g/m3 (0.024 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.0%
8760
$20,800
20,800
(continued)
-------
Table 4-15 (continued).
i
OJ
CO
Parameter
Maintenance :
Labor, $10/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities:
Electricity, $0.03/kWh
Water, $0.025/1000 gal
Total
Total direct costs:
Capital charges
Total annual cost
Evaluation J
30,200
700
30,900
17,500
140,400
10,800
151,200
$ 236,000
350,600
$ 586,600
Control system
Evaluation K
4,200
84,600
88,800
260,000
0
260,000
$ 369,600
693,100
$1,062,700
To fabric filter from cooling system.
Based on gas conditions at fabric filter inlet.
-------
system in Evaluation J and $0.25/kg ($0.11/lb), or $2912/day,
for the system in Evaluation K. Utilities costs represent
about 25 percent of total annual operating costs for both
systems.
Add-on Wet Scrubber Control System
Appendix C contains a specification for an add-on wet
scrubber system at the Phelps Dodge smelter.
Three bidders used their best judgment to evaluate the
scrubber system on the basis of this specification. Their
evaluations are not comparable, however, because the in-
dividual systems are designed for different pressure drops
(AP) across the system. System pressure drop, a principal
design parameter, is usually determined by particulate size
distributions and chemical analysis. Because of lack of
sufficient data on these parameters, the bidders used their
experience and judgment to determine pressure drop. Table
4-16 presents the design parameters of these evaluations
(Evaluations L, M, and N).
In Evaluation L, ESP exhaust gas is treated at a rate
of 5270 m /min (186,000 acfm) in a scrubber system consist-
ing of an adjustable throat venturi, a flooded elbow, and an
entrainment separator followed by a fan. Estimated pressure
drop for this system is 17.43 kPa (70 in. W.C.). The
venturi scrubber is made of 1/4-in. 316L SS. The flooded
elbow, inlet and outlet transition pieces leading to and
from the flooded elbow, the mist eliminator, and all connec-
tions are of 1/4-in. carbon steel with Ceilcote lining.
The scrubber system in Evaluation M consists of a fan
and a quencher, followed by a venturi scrubber. This
system operates at a pressure drop of 14.94 kPa (60 in.
W.C.). The bidder believes this pressure drop and asso-
ciated power requirements could be significantly lower, and
4-39
-------
Table 4-16. DESIGN PARAMETERS OF ADD-ON SCRUBBER SYSTEM FOR
PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
I
*>
o
system3
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
' P
P rt te lo d ng.
Weight rate
Quencher dimensions
to gas in the quencher
Number of units
Gas volume flow rate at
scrubber exit:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Pressure drop across scrub*
her
Weight rate
Scrubbing system cleaning
efficiency
(recycled)
Venturi scrubber, water rate
Makeup water addition rate
Total scrubber pressure drop
Demister dimensions
Fan location
Number of fans per unit
Total power required
followed by a fan
5270 m3/mm (186,000 acfm)
314°C (598"F]
2639 m3/mm (93,176 scfm)
12.5
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
2.44 in IE 0.20 m x 5.56 in
(8 ft :c 0.67 ft x 18.25 ft)
0.37 m3/min (97.2 gpml
I
4431 m3/min (156,455 acfml
66.1°C (151'F)
3132 mVmin (110,587 scfm)
21. Oft
16.17 kPa [65 in W.C.)
0.074 g/m3 (0. 32 gr/scfl
13.93 kg/h (30.7 Ib/hr)
93ft minimum
13.14 m3/min (3450 gpm)
17.55 mVmin (4636 gpm)
0.41 m3/min (107 gpm)
17.43 kPa (70 in. W.C.I
0.28 m x 0.2 m x 5. 50 m
(8 ft x 0.67 ft x 18.25 ft)
0.24 m x 0.24 m x 0.6 m
(8.5 ft i; 8.5 ft 11 2 ft)
Downstream of scrubber
1
1731 kW (2320 hp)
Control system
Evaluation M
and vuntun scrubber
5270 mj/min (186,000 acfm)
314°C (59B°F)
2639 m3/min (93,176 scfm)
12.5
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf]
199.04 kg/h (438.8 Ib/hr)
4.57 m x 11.6 m
(15 ft x 38 ft)
0.36 m3/min (94 gpml
1
3643 m3/min (128,661 acfml
65.6°C (150°FI
3166 m3/min 111,787 scfm)
12. 3»
i 13.44 kPa 154 in H.C.)
0.085 g/m3 (0.037 gr/scf)
15.65 kg/h 134.5 Ib/hr
. 93l minimum
2 . 3 m /mm (607 gpm)
2.44 m3/min (643 gpm)
0.49 m /mm (130 gpml
12.45 kPa (50 in. W.C. )
2.2 m x 11.6 m
(7.2 ft x 38 ft]
Upstream of scrubber
2080 kW 12788 .hp)
i n N
A preijuencher, venturi scrubber.
5270 m3/min (186,000 acfm)
314"C (598°F)
2639 m3/mm 193,176 scfm)
12.5
1.28 g/03 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
5.03 m X 12.2 m
(16.5 ft x 40 ft)
1
3462 m3/mm (122,250 acfm)
66*F (150'F)
-------
that a pilot test should be made to determine actual pres-
sure drop. The preconditioner is constructed of mild steel
with a gunite or Savereisin acid-resistant cement lining.
The scrubber would be 316L stainless steel to protect against
scrubbing water, which is high in chlorides.
The scrubber system in Evaluation N consists of a pre-
quencher, an adjustable-throat venturi scrubber, and a
separator section, followed by a fan. The pressure drop of
this system is 5.23 kPa (21 in. W.C.). The bidder indicated
that some study has been made regarding scrubbing reverbera-
tory furnace gases in copper smelters, and based on the
limited scrubbing pilot plant data, he believes that a
pressure drop of 5.23 kPa (21 in W.C.) is a reasonable
selection for producing 96 to 98 percent efficiency by
weight. The materials of construction are steel lined with
acid brick, with FRP-lined steel in the hot gas zones and
high velocity sections of the scrubber. All alloy parts are
in Inconel 625 in the venturi. The fan wheel and shaft
would be of Incoloy-825 or 904L material. The inlet ducting
is of 1/4-in. and 3/8-in. carbon steel with exterior weather-
proof insulation. The material of construction for the
prequencher and venturi is 1/4-in. and 3/8-in. carbon steel
with 60- to 80-mil flaked-glass lining plus 3-in. acid brick
and foam glass interior lining. Alloy parts are of Inconel
625. The separator is 1/4-in. 3/8-in., and 1/2-in. carbon
steel with 60- to 80-mil flaked-glass lining. The base, up
to 2 ft above the gas inlet, is lined with 3-in. acid brick.
The exit ducting to the fan and stack is of 5/8-in. thick
FRP-Hetron 197 with flame retardant.
These evaluations point up the necessity of running
pilot plant tests to evaluate a wet scrubber that will
produce the desired efficiency.
4-41
-------
Carbon steel is the material of construction for the
water treatment systems in all three evaluations.
Add-on Wet Scrubber Control System Costs
Tables 4-17 and 4-18 present capital and annual operat-
ing costs of the three systems. The evaluations represent
the cost of equipment for the last quarter of 1977. They
include only basic equipment (no spare equipment). The
following parameters were used in the duct cost estimate: a
duct length of 24 m (80 ft) from the existing ESP exit to
the add-on control system inlet, an appropriate duct length
within the system, and a return duct of 34 m (110 ft) from
the add-on system outlet to existing stack. Capital charges
in the annual operating costs were calculated by using 20.5
percent of the total turnkey cost. This rate is based on an
interest rate of 10 percent, an equipment life of 10 years,
and a tax and insurance rate of 4.22 percent.
Data show that the turnkey capital cost estimates for
an add-on scrubber system in the Evaluations L, M, and N are
$137, $160, and $390 per actual m /min ($3.90, $4.53 and
$11.05 per acfm), respectively, of gas entering the system.
Gas flow rate to each system is 5270 m /min (186,000 acfm).
Cost of gas cleaning equipment, including auxiliaries,
varies from 40 to 60 percent of the total turnkey cost. The
respective annual operating cost for the three systems are
$0.53, $0.55 and $0.45/kg ($0.24, $0.25 and $0.20/lb) of
particulate removed, or $2407, $2504, and $2042 per day.
Utilities and capital charges represent 54 percent and 17
percent of the total annual cost in Evaluation L, 67 percent
and 19 percent in Evaluation M, and 30 percent and 57 per-
cent in Evaluation N.
4-42
-------
Table 4-17. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR AN ADD-ON SCRUBBER SYSTEM
FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
*>.
I
U)
Parameter
Gas flow at scrubber outlet i
Actual conditions
Tsmparature
Standard conditions
Moisture content
Contaminant load ing i*
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, weight rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, weight rate
Cleaning efficiency
Gas Cleaning equipment cost
Pan w/drive
Pumps
Tanks
Others
Total equipment cost
Foundation and supports
Duct work
Stack
Piping
Insulation
Painting
Electrical
Other
Total direct costs
Installation costs, indirect
Engineering
Construction fc field eupt 11
Construction fees
Start-up
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkey cost
Evaluation L
elbow and mist eliainator
follow by a fan
4411 B3/Bln (156,455 ac(»)
66.1*F (151'F)
3132 B3/Bin 1110,587 acfB)
26.111
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
240.8 kg/hr (530.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/B3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3%
$102,500
92,000
11,500
116,800
16,500
$339,300
i 26,000
146,000
0
12,500
18,700
5,000
3,000
50,000
$261,200
$ 8,700
is 92,000
1.300
2,000
4 800
15,000
$121,800
$724.300
Evaluation H
A fan, a separator quencher
and a venturi scrubber
3643 m3/nin (128,661 acfB)
65.6'C (150'F)
3166 B3/Bin (111,787 scfa)
Saturated
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/a3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3%
$120,100
90.000
20,000
60,000
118,500
87,100
$.495,700
$ 59,400
127,000
0
42,900
18.500
4,000
27,200
$279,000
$ 16,000
18,000
5,000
7,000
12 000
10.000
$ 68,000
$142,700
Evaluation N
A prequencher, a venturi scrub-
ber, separator, followed by a fan
3462 B3/Bin (122,250 acfB)
66'C (150'F)
2821 B3/Bin (99,850 scfB)
1.28 g/B3 (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/B3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3%
$535,000
140,000
33,000
12,000
105,000
$ 125,000
$ 123,500
0
$1,108,300°
S2.0<.f.,800
* &*»•<) on .lyatMi inlet, (i.e. furticulAta content in the gam Mow rate) of 2639 » /»in l9J,.7b •ct.ij to th« «y«t««.
b
Materials and labor.
Total of direct and Indirect
r.,ma. a«cluding duct cost.
-------
Table 4-18. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON
SCRUBBER FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
*>.
I
System description
Gas flow at scrubber outlet:
Actual conditions
Temperature
Standard conditions
Moisture
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, weight rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, weight rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, ?10/man-hour
Supervisor, S12/man-hour
Total
Maintenance
Labor, $10/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities
Electricity, $0.03/kWh
Water, $0.25/1000 gallon's
Chemicals
Total
Total direct costs
Capital charges
Total annual cost
Evaluation L
A venturi scrubber, a flooded
elbow, and a mist eliminator,
followed by a fan
4431 m /min (156,455 acfm)
66.1°C (151°F)
3132 m3/min (110,587 scfm)
26.13%
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
202.R5 kg/hr (4/17.2 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/h (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3%
8760
$122,200
37,000
159,200
59,200
25,600
84,800
16,200
450,700
14,100
5100
469,900
$730,100
148,500
$878,600
Evaluation M
A fan, a separator quencher,
and a venturi scrubber
3643 mj/min (128,661 acfm)
65°C (150°F)
3166 m3/min (111,787 scfm)
Saturated
1.28 g/m (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3% (minimum)
8760
$ 87,600
24,000
111,600
3,600
3,000
6,600
10,000
576,800
12,400
23,800
613,000
$741,200
172,800
5914,000
Evaluation N
A prequencher, a venturi
scrubber, and a separator,
followed by a fan
3462 m /min (122,250 acfm)
66°C (150°F)
2828 m3/min (99,850 scfm)
1.28 g/nT (0.56 gr/scf)
202.85 kg/hr (447.2 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.3%
8760
$27,100
9,700
36,800
27,100
18,500
45,600
18,500
196,000
7,500
19,400
222,900
?323,800
421,600
$745,400
Based on system Inlet (I.e. particulate content in the gas flow rate) of 2639 ro /min "(93,176 scfm} to the system.
-------
Add-on Dry Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP), System
Appendix C presents the specification for an add-on dry
ESP for the Phelps Dodge smelter in Ajo. Three IGCI members
used their best judgment to evaluate a dry ESP system based
on this specification. Table 4-19 presents design para-
meters of the systems evaluated.
The system in Evaluation P consists of an evaporative
cooling tower to cool gases from the existing hot ESP to
120°C (250°F), followed by a dry ESP for particulate con-
trol. The fan, necessary to overcome 0.96 kPa (4 in. W.C.),
is located on the hot side of the evaporative cooling tower
to avoid possible corrosion and imbalance problems. Design
and instrumentation of the cooling tower spray chambers must
be precise to keep the exit gas dry because wet gas in the
ESP can cause a corrosion problem and lead to premature
system failure. An ESP pilot study would be required to
assess the corrosive and "sticky" nature of the flue gas and
particulate load.
The particulate control add-on system in Evaluation Q
consists of a combination heat exchanger and dilution air to
cool the gas to 120°C (250°F) and two dry ESP's in parallel.
The fan is located upstream of the cooling system to take
advantage of the smaller gas stream which requires less
power, and to prevent corrosion and imbalance problems. The
combination heat exchanger and dilution air cooling is
believed to be the most economic from the viewpoint of cost
per Btu transferred and prevention of an increase in the
sticky and corrosive nature of the gas stream that is caused
by water spray cooling.
The add-on system in Evaluation R consists of a water-
spray cooling tower, which cools the gas to 120°C (250°F) ,
and a dry ESP for particulate control. The fan is located
4-45
-------
Table 4-19. DESIGN PARAMETERS FOR ADD-ON DRY ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
I
£»
(TV
Parameter
Gas volume flow rate from
system:
Actual conditions
Type of cooling
Number of units
Hater consumption
Total volume flow rate to
outlet:
Temperature
Number of ESP's
Dimension of each
Number of chambers per ESP
Number of fields
Number of pai««g« par chimb
Field height
Voltage
Have form
Specific collecting area
Total power consumption
Pan:
Number
Location
Pressure drop
Power required
Evaluation P
314"C IS98T)
12.251
1
i.02 m3/h 1270 gpm)
120°C I250°F)
1
14.3 m x 12.8 m x 14. 3 m
2
•Ul
2.7 m (9.0 It)
7.3m (24 ft]
B
1000 mA
70 kV
Full
0.04 m/s (0. 13 ft/s)
74.4 m2 per m3/s H
(37B ftVlOOO acfm)
94 5 kW
1
Hot side of cooling tower
0.99ft kPa <4 in. H.C.)
280 kW (175 hpl
Evaluation 0
5267 re3 /nun (186,000 acfm)
314"C (598°F)
12.25*
air-
2b
629 3/ 22 192 f )
120°C (250'F)
1
1
4C
JO
J. 33 m (10.94 ft)
9.40 m (30.83 ft)
4
1250 mA
55 kV
Full
0.41 m/s (0.133 ft/s)
77.4 rn2 per m3/9 .
1393 ft /1000 acfm)
680 kW
1
Hot side of cooling system
1.992 kPa (8 in. H.C. 1
294 kH (335 hp]
2633 at3 /nun (93,000 scfm)
314*C (598'F)
12.25%
1
3535 mVmin (12.4,820 acfm)
120'C (250'F)
2
(49 ft x 42. S ft x 59.1 ft)
1
3
20
2.7B m (9.125 ft)
3
1300 mA
45 kV
Full
0.0322 m/s (0.0098 ft/s)
58.7 m2 per m3/s
(298 ft /1000 acfm)
233 kH
I
Hot side of cooling tower
297 kH (400 hp)
" Heat exchanger cools qas to 177'C (350*F) and dilution ai
Pertains only to heat exchanger.
c One field is redundant.
* Net gro«« X03 a2 per m3/s (524 ft2/1000 acfm).
further cools gas to 120"C (250DF).
-------
on the hot side of the cooling tower to prevent corrosion
and imbalance problems that can occur with this type of gas.
Costs of an Add-on Dry Electrostatic Precipitator
Tables 4-20 presents the capital cost breakdown for the
evaluations P, Q, and R. Table 4-21 presents the annual
operating cost breakdown for Evaluations P, Q and R. The
evaluations represent the cost of equipment during the
quarter of 1977. They include only basic equipment (no
spare equipment). Duct cost estimates in the three evalua-
tions are based on 24 m (80 ft) of duct from the existing
ESP outlet to the inlet of the system, an appropriate length
within the system, and a return duct of 34 m (110 ft) from
the system flange to the existing stack. Capital charges in
the annual operating costs were calculated by using 17.5
percent of the total turnkey costs. This rate is based on
an interest rate of 10 percent, an equipment life of 15
years, and tax and insurance rate of 4.35 percent.
The data show that the use of an add-on dry ESP system
to enable Phelps Dodge Corporation to comply with the
.applicable emission regulation will entail capital costs of
$329 to $466 per m /min ($9 to $13 per acfm) of ESP exhaust
gas, depending on the type of cooling system involved. A
gas flow rate of 5267 m /min (186,000 acfm) is used as the
basis for all three evaluations. System P, which uses an
evaporative cooling tower for gas cooling and a dry ESP for
particulate control, costs $367.12 per m /min ($10.40 per
acfm) of gas introduced into the system. System Q, which
uses a heat exchanger and dilution air cooling system and
two dry ESP's in parallel for particulate control, costs
$465.62 per m /min ($13.19 per acfm). System R which uses
a water spray cooling tower for gas cooling followed by a
dry ESP for particulate control, costs $329.35 per m /min
4-47
-------
Table 4-20. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR ADD-ON DRY ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR SYSTEM
FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
I
£..
00
ParoiMter
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditi
Temperature
Contaminant loading4
Inlet, concentration
'
Cleaning efficiency
cost
Fan -/drive
Dry cooling chamber
Other
direct:
ports6
(material fc labor)
Duct -or ic1
Stack
Piping
Painting
Other
Total direct costs
Complete erection
Engineering
Construction t field e
Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Hodel study
Contingencies
Turnkt-y CUM
Evaluation P
I -j
"l20*C (250*FJ
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
93
93.2*
$ 645,000
87,000
168,000
123,600b
i.
112,000
175,100
0
Not quoted
Not quoted
505, bOO1*
5 792,700
:
xpenses 3
3
' 12,500
1
9,000
96,000
si ,-*n,Boo
Evaluation Q
dry ESP
1 3 , 5 «c a)
120*C <250'F)
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/acf)
"' 93 ' lt> ^^
g g /sc )
93.2%
$470,000
87,500
277,000
7B,000C
SO, 000
154,000
Q
Not quoted *
Not quoted
729,400h
51,008,400
261,000
63,000
36,000
12,000
7.SOO
31,000
101,000
$2,4,52,400
Evaluation ft
dry ESP
3535 m^/nin (124,820 acfm)
120'C I2SOT)
1.28 g/nra' (0.56 gr/scf)
93
g/nm . g
93.21
5555,900
65,000
168,000
»7,BOOd
7,500
168,100
Not quoted
93,000
36B.6001
$ 692,200
k
49,900
5,900
25,700
74,400
Sl.734,700
systt-m.
Includes screw conveyors, slid* gates and lower dampers.
Access and dust disposal.
Slide-gate conveyors, dampers.
Inc
Includes duct, insulation, lining, materials and labor.
costs connected with engineering and construction.
1 About 92.5 percent for installation of total gas cleaning equipment and remaining for freight on equipment.
1 Included in "other"
1 Included in cost of s.tart-up.
-------
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
I
•C*
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per
year
Evaluation P
A fan, an evaporative cooling
tower cooling gas to 120°C
(250°F), followed by a dry
electrostatic precipitator
407
8 m /min (149,000 acfm)
3044 m3/min (107,490 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr
93.2%
8760
DIRECT COSTS
Operating labor:
Operator, $10/man-hour
Supervisor, $12/man-hour
Total
Maintenance
Labor, $10/man-hour
Materials
Total
Replacement parts
Utilities
Electricity, $6.03 kWh
Water, $0.25/1000 gal
Total
Total direct costs
Capital charges
Total annual cost
$ 8,100
1,900
10,000
4,200
2,200
6,400
1,800
248,000
10,800
258,800
f277,000
344,000
$621,000
Control system
Evaluation Q
A fan, two heat exchangers,
a dilution air fan, to cool
gas to 120°C (250°F) , follow-
ed by a dry electrostatic
precipitator
4371 m /min (154,374 acfm)
3262 m3/min (115,192 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.2%
8760
$ 10,700
1,500
12,200
4,200
2,600
6,800
b
178,700
0
178,700
$197,700
429,200
5626,900
Evaluation R
A fan, water spray cooling to
120°C (250°F), followed by a
dry electrostatic precipitator
3535 m3/min (124,820 acfm)
2149 m3/min (75,900 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.04 gr/m (0.456 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.2%
8760
$ 5,500
2,300
7,800
4,000
2,200
6,200
1,400
99,600
10,800
110,400
$125,800
303,600
$429,400
a Particulate content ol the gas at the inlet and outlet is based on a gas flow rate of 2639 m /min (93,176 scfm) to the
system.
Included in maintenance.
-------
($9.33 per acfm). Cost of gas cleaning equipment including
auxiliaries for the Evaluations P, Q, and R, respectively,
is 53 percent, 37 percent, and 51 percent of the total
turnkey capital charges. Annual operating costs are $0.38/kg
($0.17/lb) or $1701/day, of particulate removed for Evalua-
tion P; $0.39/kg ($.18/lb), or $1718/day, for Evaluation Q;
and $0.26/kg ($0.12/lb), or $1176/day, for Evaluation R.
Utility costs and capital charges represent about 97 percent
of the total annual operating costs for all three evaluations,
Add-on Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WEP) Control System
Appendix C contains the specification for an add-on wet
ESP at the Phelps Dodge smelter. Based on the specifica-
tion, one IGCI member used his best judgment to evaluate a
system. Table 4-22 presents the design parameters of that
system (Evaluation S).
The system involves a WEP designed to receive gases
from an evaporative cooling tower at 120°C (250°F). The
system consisting of a fan, an evaporative cooling tower,
and a WEP- The fan is located upstream of the cooling
system to prevent a potential corrosion problem. The WEP is
generally chosen when the particulate tends to be sticky and
does not drop when the plates of a dry ESP are rapped. The
WEP is a continuously sprayed, horizontal flow, parallel
plate, and rigid frame discharge electrode type. Water from
a precisely designed water nozzle arrangement is sprayed at
the WEP entrance to maintain a low resistivity of the particles
entering into the system. Water sprays located above the
electrostatic field sections introduce evenly distributed
water droplets to the gas stream for washing all internal
surfaces. The particulates and water droplets in the
electrostatic field pick up charges and migrate to the
collecting plates. The plates are continuously flushed to
4-50
-------
I
Ul
Table 4-22. DESIGN PARAMETERS OF AN ADD-ON CONTROL WET ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR SYSTEM FOR THE PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
System description
Gas volume flow rate from the existing
ESP to the cooling system:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Moisture content
Type of cooling system
Number of units
Dimensions of each unit
Liquid-to-gas ratio, L/G
Electrostatic Precipitator System
Total volume flow rate to add-on precip-
itator system inlet or cooling system
outlet:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Number of ESP's
Dimension of each
Evaluation S
One evaporative cooling tower to cool gas
to 120°C (250°F), one fan, and one wet ESP
5267 mJ/min (186,000 acfm)
2633 m3/min (93,000 scfm)
314°C (598°F)
12.25%
Evaporative cooling tower
1
7.99 m x 18.8 m (26.24 ft x 61.7 ft)
0.097 m per m /rain (355 gal/1000 acfm)
4046 mj/min (142,892 acfm)
3021 m3/min (106,673 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1
(continued)
-------
Table 4-22 (continued).
Parameter
t
-------
remove the collected material into the troughs below which
are sloped to a drain. The WEP parts not sprayed or flushed
with water are constructed of corrosion-resistant materials.
(The portion close to outlet of WEP is not sprayed or
flushed with water in order to remove the carry over liquid
drops and mists before the outlet of the equipment). The
condensible material collected in the drain liquor can be
separated by means of any sludge removal methods.
Costs of Add-on WEP System
Tables 4-23 and 4-24 present capital and annual operat-
ing cost breakdowns for Evaluation S. The evaluation
represents the cost of equipment during the last quarter of
1977. It includes only basic equipment (no spares). Duct
cost estimates in the evaluation are based on 24 m (80 ft)
of duct from the existing ESP outlet to the inlet of the
system, an appropriate length within the system, and a
return duct of 34 m (110 ft) from the system to existing
stack. Capital charges in the annual operating costs were
calculated by using 17.5 percent of the total turnkey
costs. This rate is based on an interest rate of 10 per-
cent, an equipment life of 15 years, and a tax and insurance
rate of 4.35 percent.
The data show that the capital cost of an add-on wet
ESP system to enable Phelps Dodge Corporation to comply with
the applicable emission regulation is $384.17 per m /min
($10.88 per acfm) of ESP exhaust gas [based on a flow rate
of 5,267 m /min (186,000 acfm)]. The evaluated system uses
an evaporative cooling system to cool the gas to 120°C
(250°F) before it enters the WEP. Cost of gas cleaning
equipment including auxiliaries is 43 percent of the total
4-53
-------
turnkey capital charges. Annual operating costs for partic-
ulate removal are $0.35/kg ($0.16/lb), or $1547 per day.
Utility costs and capital charges represent about 98 percent
of the total annual operating costs.
4-54
-------
Table 4-23. CAPITAL COST DATA FOR AN ADD-ON WET ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR SYSTEM FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
I
ui
en
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Gas cleaning equipment cost
Cost of auxiliaries:
Fan with drive
Evaporative cooling tower
Total equipment cost
Installation costs, direct
Recipitator supports (M&L)
Duct work
Evaluation S
One evaporative cooling tower to cool the
gas to 120°C (250°F), one fan, and one wet ESP
4046 m /min (142,898 acfm)
3021 m3/min (106,673 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.2%
$ 435,100
$ 28,000
87,500
314,000
$ 864,600
$ 23,500
154,400*
(continued)
-------
Table 4-23 (continued).
I
Ul
Parameter
Stack
Piping
Insulation (material & labor)
Painting
Electrical (material & labor)
Other
Total direct costs
Installation costs, indirect
Engineering
Construction and field expenses
Construction fees
Start-up
Performance test
Contingencies
Total indirect costs
Turnkey cost
Evaluation S
0
87,500
340,900C
$ 606,300
$ 350,000d
52,000
36,000
12,000
7,500
95,000
$ 552,500
$2,023,400
3 Particulate content of the gas at the inlet and outlet based on a gas flow rate of
2639 m3/min (93,176 scfm) to the system.
Includes duct, insulation lining, materials and labor.
c Installation cost Of ESP, auxiliaries, and fan.
Includes $31,000 model study.
-------
Table 4-24. ANNUAL OPERATING COST DATA FOR ADD-ON CONTROL WET
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR FOR PHELPS DODGE CORPORATION SMELTER
Parameter
Evaluation S
System description
Inlet gas flow:
Actual conditions
Standard conditions
Temperature
Contaminant loading:
Inlet, concentration
Inlet, wt. rate
Outlet, concentration
Outlet, wt. rate
Cleaning efficiency
Operating hours per year
One evaporative cooling tower to cool gas
to 120°C (250°F) and one fan, followed by
one ESP
4046 m /min (142,898 acfm)
3021 m3/min (106,673 scfm)
120°C (250°F)
1.28 g/m3 (0.56 gr/scf)
199.04 kg/hr (438.8 Ib/hr)
0.087 g/m3 (0.038 gr/scf)
13.6 kg/hr (30.0 Ib/hr)
93.2%
8760
Direct costs
Operating labor
Operator, $10/man-hour
Supervisor, $12/man-hour
Total
Maintenance
Labor, $10/man-hour
Materials
Total
$ 7100
1500
8600
3500
2300
5800
(continued)
-------
Table 4-24 (continued)
Parameter
I
cn
oo
Replacement parts
Utilities
Electricity, $0.03/kWh
Water, $0.25/1000 gal
Chemicals
Total
Total direct costs
Capital charges
Total annual cost
Evaluation S
76,900
119,200
b
196,100
$210,500
354,000
$564,500
Included in maintenance cost.
Included in electricity cost.
-------
APPENDIX A
A-l
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
To convert
English units
Multiply
by
To obtain
SI units
British thermal unit (Btu)
Cubic foot (ft3)
Degrees fahrenheit
Foot
Gallon (U.S. liquid)
Gallon (U.S. liquid)
Horsepower (hp)
Inch
Inches of water
Pound
1056
0.0283
5/9 C°F-32)
0.3048
0.0038
3.7854
746.0
0.0254
248.8
0.4536
Joule (j)
Cubic meter (m )
Degrees Celsius (C)
Meter (m)
3
Cubic meter (m )
Liter (1)
Watt (w)
Meter (m)
Pascal (pa)
Kilogram (kg)
A-2
-------
APPENDIX B
B-l
-------
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL
CHESTER ROAD
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45346
(513) 782-47OO
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADD-ON
CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR REVERBERATORY
FURNACE AT MAGMA COPPER COMPANY,
SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Prepared by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
PEDCo Project Number: 3287-B
June 28, 1977
BRANCH OFFICES
CHESTER TOWERS
Crown Center
Kansas City. Mo.
Professional Village
Cnapel Hill. N.C
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SCOPE OF WORK 1
GENERAL INFORMATION 3
DESIGN CRITERIA AND GUARANTEE 3
SPECIFIC OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR ADD-ON EQUIPMENT 5
DESIGN LOADS 6
CONTROL SYSTEM SUPPORT STRUCTURE 12
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: ELECTROSTATIC 12
PRECIPITATOR, DRY TYPE
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: ELECTROSTATIC 18
PRECIPITATOR, WET TYPE
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: COOLING CHAMBERS 19
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: VENTURI SCRUBBER 20
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: FABRIC FILTER 21
BAGHOUSE
SKETCHES A-l
11
-------
LIST OF TABLES
NO.
Summary of Particulate Emission Data for
Electrostatic Precipitator on Reverberatory
Furnace - Magma Copper Company, San Manuel,
Arizona
111
-------
LIST OF SKETCHES
No. Page
A-l Dry Electrostatic Precipitator with a Cooling A-l
Chamber
A-2 Wet Electrostatic Precipitator with a Cooling A-2
Chamber
A-3 Wet Electrostatic Precipitator A-3
A-4 Cooling Chamber A-4
A-5 Venturi Scrubber A-5
A-6 Fabric Filter Baghouse A-6
IV
-------
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (COPPER SMELTER)
It is the intent of these specifications to provide the
contractor with sufficient information to furnish and in-
stall a gas-cleaning system, including the control equipment
to treat exhaust gases from an already-installed electro-
static precipitator on a copper concentrate smelting rever-
beratory furnace at the Magma plant at San Manuel, Arizona.
SCOPE OF WORK
Major items of work to be accomplished by contractor
consist of the following:
1. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level from the
discharge of the existing hot electrostatic
precipitator flue to the inlet nozzles of the
required add-on control equipment. The contractor
shall provide heat insulation on flues.
2. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level up the
required support structure for the add-on control
equipment, including all required walkways, stair-
ways, and handrails. The supporting structure
-------
system will exclude foundations, which will be
supplied and furnished by others.
3. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate and deliver add-on control equipment,
complete with all electrical equipment required to
place the unit into operation.
4. Erect the add-on control equipment, including
furnishing and installing heat insulation on the
add-on control equipment where required. The
erection portion excludes furnishing wire and
conduit or a control room for electrical equip-
ment.
5. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level up the
discharge flues starting at the outlet nozzle
flange of the add-on control equipment and termi-
nating at the new inlet to the present stack.
6. Provide qualified personnel for the initial start-
up of the complete system. Start-up is to include
all testing, adjustments, and modifications neces-
sary to ensure proper operation of the units at or
above the collection efficiency levels specified
herein. Start-up is also to include the training
of owner's operating and maintenance personnel to
operate and maintain the equipment.
-------
7. The contractor shall provide the services of a
qualified Field Erection Engineer who shall give
supervision and technical assistance as required
during assembly, field erection, and start-up of
the equipment.
8. The contractor will furnish a test model of the
add-on control equipment and the flue systems for
gas-flow study.
GENERAL INFORMATION
An additional fan to handle the pressure drop shall be
included with any add-on control equipment.
All electrical, water, and other services will be
within 100 feet of the new facilities.
Site leveling and preparation by others.
The units are to operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per
year.
The layouts for particulate removal control systems are
shown on attached Sketches A-l through A-6. The length of
duct runs are shown on the sketches.
DESIGN CRITERIA AND GUARANTEE
1. Collection Efficiency
The add-on control equipment will have a minimum
guaranteed collection efficiency of 98.2 percent
by weight of the entering particulate matter as
-------
determined by EPA Test Method 5, with a filter
temperature of 250°F.
2. Efficiency Tests
The owner shall make regular tests to check the
collecting efficiency. The contractor and owner
shall jointly test the add-on control equipment
for collection efficiency immediately after com-
pletion of all construction, at 6 months and at 11
months after completion. The test at 11 months
will determine the guarantee performance.
3. Efficiency Curves
The contractor shall furnish with its proposal
expected efficiency curves, showing the guarantee
point. Curves will show expected efficiency
versus volume, grain loading, percent moisture,
gas temperature, percent SO3 in gas, percent lead,
and any other significant parameters affecting
efficiency of the add-on control equipment.
4. Draft Loss
The draft loss between inlet and outlet flanges of
the nozzles will be held to a minimum to attain
the removal efficiency required.
-------
5. Gas Velocity
The gas velocity through the precipitator proper
will not exceed 3 feet per second; and the veloc-
ity through a venturi scrubber or baghouse shall
be recommended by the vendor.
6. Gas Flow Study
The contractor shall construct a test model of the
system from and including the outlets of the waste
heat boilers to the stack.
7. Redundancy
The control equipment shall be sized with a con-
fidence level of at least 90 percent when the
system is operating at a full mode.
SPECIFIC OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT
The add-on control equipment will be capable of han-
dling copper smelting reverberatory furnace exhaust gases
described as follows:
1. Amount of gases per precipitator: 329,000 scfm.
(641,000 acfm)
2. Operating temperature of gases: 573°F.
3. Short-term temperature surges to 650°F during
furnace charging periods.
4. Nominal dust particle inlet loading is 0.77 grain
per SCF. Estimated dust particulate inlet loading
is 1.25 grains per SCF during furnace charging
periods.
-------
5. Particle size analysis - flue gas at 573°F con-
tained about 77 cuitunulative percent particulate
present in a size less than 7 micrometers and about
26 cummulative percent particulate present in a
size less than 0.26 micrometers.
6. Expected volumetric analysis of gas component and
percent: See attached Table 1.
7- Estimated bulk density of collected dust, dry
pounds per cubic foot: Not available.
8. Acid dew point of gas: Not available.
9. Expected composition of dust: See attached Table
1 and use outlet composition.
DESIGN LOADS
This should include vertical live loads, lateral loads,
and earthquake considerations.
FLUE SYSTEM:
1. The flue system shall begin at the outlet flange
of the existing hot electrostatic precipitator and
proceed to the inlet flanges of the add-on control
equipment.
2. The ductwork from the outlet flange of the exist-
ing hot electrostatic precipitator to the add-on
control equipment shall be sized for minimum gas
velocity of 3500 feet per minute under maximum
-------
Table 1. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE - MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Item
Design
Actual
(1)
Compliance tests
conducted by
company
October 30 and
31, 1975 (2)
EPA compliance
tests by NEIC
May 14 to 18,
1976 (3)
ESP manufacturer
ESP Inlet Conditions
Volume flow at continuous
rating, acfm
scfm
Temperature, °F
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
by instack/outstack filter,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
by EPA Test Method 5,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
ESP Outlet Conditions
Volume flow at continuous
rating acfm
scfm
Research
Cottrell
560,000
(Calc.)
284,000
500-670
0.836
2035
(calc.)
560,000
(calc.)
284,000
500-670
0.836
2035
(calc.)
331,200
170,000
329,000
169,000
-------
Table 1 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE - MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
oo
Item
ESP Outlet Conditions
(continued)~
Temperature, °F
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter
gr/scf
Ib/hr
by instack/outstack filter,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
by EPA Test Method 5,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
ESP control efficiency, %
Allowable emissions,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
At ESP Outlet
SO- emission, ppm
SO, emissions, ppm
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
COji volume percent
O2» volume percent
H2O, volume percent
Design
0.01254
30.53 (calc.)
98. Og
Actual
(1)
Compliance tests
conducted by
company (2)
October 30 and
31, 1975
573
0.1201 to 0.3924d
EPA compliance
tests by NEIC
May 14 to 18,
1976 (3)
573
0.77?
2180f
0.014 (calc.)
39.7
5400
17820
15.91
66.1
4.03
14.17
8.70
-------
Table 1 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE - MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Item
Metal analysis, Ib/hr
Tin (SnP
Arsenic (As)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Copper (Cu)
Lead (Pb)
Mercury (Hg)
Molybdenum (MO)
Nickel (Ni)
Selenium (Se)
Vanadium (V)
Zinc (Zn)
Design
(Da
Actual
(1)
Compliance tests
conducted by
company ( 2 )
October 30 and
31, 1975
EPA compliance
tests by NEIC
May 14 to 18,
1976 (3)
0.16
5.2
0.25
0.10
9.8
3.4
0.06
0.81
0.03
1.3
5.*
VD
Included in Appendix
The actual flow rates were
Numbers in parenthesis represent corresponding reference listed.
Average of four compliance test runs conducted by Magma on October 30 and 31, 1975.
A, Magma Petition for Revision Table 1, page 4. NEIC report.
Average of three compliance tests conducted by NEIC from May 14-22, 1976.
345,000, 313,000, and 328,300 scfm, respectively.
Actual emissions during four compliance tests conducted by Magma on October 30 and 31, 1975 were 0.3268,
0.2202, 0.1201, and 0.3924 gr/scf, respectively. Isokinetic conditions were not met during all the tests.
Average of three test runs (0.71, 0.85, and 0.71 gr/scf) conducted.
Actual emissions during the three tests were 2090, 2450, and 2000 Ib/hr.
" Based on instack filter tests.
Average of three test runs. Actual measurements were 4500, 6670, and 5030 ppm, respectively.
Average of three test runs. Actual measurements were 12.8, 16.2, and 18.7 ppm, respectively.
-1 Metals identified in particulates collected by EPA method 5 in ESP outlet during the second compliance
test run.
1^
Filter zinc results are questionable.
-------
Table 1 (Cont'd). SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE - MAGMA COPPER COMPANY, SAN MANUEL, ARIZONA
Reference
(1) State Implementation Plan Inspection of San Manuel Division Smelter, Magma Copper Company, San
Manuel, Arizona. June 1976. In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter, San
Manuel, Arizona, by National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA-330/2-76-029. May 2-22, 1976.
(2) Appendix A, Magma Petition for Revision In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter,
San Manuel, Arizona, by National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA-330/2-76-029. May 2-22,
1976.
(3) Test Results: In: Emission Testing at the Magma Copper Company Smelter, San Manuel, Arizona, by
National Enforcement Investigations Center. EPA 330/2-76-029. May 12-22, 1976,
-------
future gas flow conditions of 641,200 acfm. This
ductwork shall be rectangular in crosssection,
fabricated of 1/4-inch-thick (minimum) steel plate
consistent with the acidity of the gas stream, and
be equipped with suitably reinforced stiffeners.
An expansion joint in both the vertical and hori-
zontal portions of this ductwork shall be pro-
vided. Any right-angle turns in this ductwork
shall be of the largest centerline radius possible
and designed to minimize pressure drop. The
interface between the throat of the right-angle
turn and the gathering plenum shall be designed to
minimize any particulate material buildup. Turn-
ing vanes will be installed to streamline the flow
where required. Flue shall also be tapered so as
to minimize the entry pressure loss.
3. Outlets from the gathering flue to the nozzles of
the control system shall be optimized and designed
to provide uniform distribution of flow to the
inlet nozzles, with a minimum pressure drop re-
quired to achieve this optimization. Each outlet
shall also include an air-lock damper at the inlet
nozzle to the add-on control equipment and all
necessary platforms, headframes, and hoists re-
quired for operation of the air-lock dampers.
11
-------
4. Expansion joints shall be provided at the inter-
face of the inlet nozzles and the gathering plenum
outlets.
5. Gas sampling stations and access platforms shall
be provided at points designated by the EPA method
of testing (at system inlet and outlet).
CONTROL SYSTEM SUPPORT STRUCTURE
The add-on control equipment support structure shall be
provided complete with access and stairway landings. Struc-
tural elements required to support the add-on control equip-
ment, access walkways, and stairways should be designed to
provide clearance for any roadways or railroad equipment
that must continue to operate during construction and after
completion of the project.
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT:
Electrostatic Precipitators; Dry Type (Sketch A-l)
1. The electrostatic precipitators will be horizon-
tal-flow, plate-type of heavy-duty construction
and shall be sectionalized and compartmentized for
flexibility. Two separate inlet and outlet noz-
zles are to be provided to make each compartment
isolated from the other one.
2. Mild-steel, high-voltage insulator compartments
are to be provided. These compartments are to, be
12
-------
insulated and heated by hot-air, positive pressure
blower systems utilizing electric heating and
inlet air filtering.
3. Access doors and internal walkways between elec-
trical sections will be provided.
4. All access openings will be provided with an
automatic key interlock system to protect per-
sonnel and equipment. Structural and component
design will provide allowance for free expansion
so as to prevent permanent structure deformation at
continuous gas operating temperatures of 600°F.
5. The precipitator housing is to be able to with-
stand the maximum internal negative pressure that
might be created in operation.
PRECIPITATOR CASING
1. The precipitator casing will be of steel plate
construction properly reinforced to withstand the
acidity of the gas stream. Materials will meet
specifications as described in the latest edition
of the ASTM Standards.
2. Inlet and outlet nozzles to precipitator are to be
provided by the contractor. Each nozzle will
include necessary internal supports, guide vanes,
distribution plates and appropriately located U
13
-------
tube and sample ports. Flanges for attaching
flues are to be included.
3. Casing and nozzles will be fabricated; from steel
plate.
HOPPERS
1. Dust hoppers will be located under the collecting
sections and shall be V-shaped trough or bunker
type.
2. Hoppers will be constructed of steel plate with &
minimum thickness of 1/4 inch and to withstand the
acidity of the gas stream.
3. Hoppers will be welded construction, having a.
minimum slope of 60°.
4. Each hopper will be provided with a 15" x 15" x 1"
manual impact plate spaced at 3—foot centers along
both sides of hoppers at accessible locations.
Impact plate and poke holes are to be combined.,
5. Provisions shall be made with double "Plattco"
type valves or equivalent to prevent infiltration
of air through the screw conveyors to the gas
stream.
6. Screw conveyors shall be provided beneath all
precipitator hoppers. Conveyors shall be sized
and powered to handle expected dust loading, but
14
-------
in no case shall they be less than 12 inches in
diameter or have less than 7-1/2 horsepower drives,
RAPPERS
1. Rappers are to be of the electromagnetic or drop-
hammer type with a heavy rapping force.
KEY INTERLOCKS
1. Key interlocks, to deenergize the unit, will be of
lock and key type to protect operating personnel
from high-voltage electrical equipment. Inter-
locks will be provided for the power panel, high-
voltage switches, rectifier-transformer sets, and
all access doors in the shell, housing, and hop-
pers that provide entrance into the electrodes in
the high-voltage connections.
ELECTRODES
1. Collecting plate electrodes are to be minimum
16/18 gauge steel and designed to provide minimum
reentrainment of dust by gas stream during rapping
periods to be compatible with the acidity of the
gas stream.
2. Discharge wires or solid electrodes will be held
in place parallel to and at equal distances from
the collecting plates by structural steel frames
hanging from high-voltage, with isostatically
15
-------
pressed alumina or equivalent support insulators
located in the shell roof.
3. Approximate spacing between collecting plates will
be 9 inches.
RECTIFIER-TRANSFORMER SETS
1. Each precipitator field will be supplied with its
own separately controlled rectifier-transformer
set.
2. The selenium rectifier-transformers will be 50%
oversized, have adequate surge protection, and
will be the oil-emersed, self-cool type.
3. The rectifier-transformer will be capable of half-
wave or full-wave power by way of the associated
switch.
4. Other accessories should include automatic control-
ler, and meters for primary current, primary volt-
age, secondary current, and secondary voltage.
PRECIPITATOR DISCHARGE FLUE
1. The precipitator discharge flue shall begin at the
outlet nozzle flange of the precipitators and
terminate at the interface of this flue with the
same point of discharge now used by the hot
electrostatic precipitator.
2. A manually operated poised-blade louver damper
shall be installed at the outlet nozzle flanges of
16
-------
each precipitator. Damper and operating mechanism
shall be fabricated of type 316 stainless steel
and shall have a minimum-leakage characteristic.
3. An air-lock damper and an expansion joint shall be
installed between the flow-control damper and the
main flue on each of the two precipitator outlets,
along with all necessary platforms.
4. Gas sampling stations and access platforms shall
be provided at points designated by EPA Method 5
testing.
5. Structural elements required to support the dis-
charge flue, access walkways and stairways shall
be designed to provide clearance for railway
equipment that must continue to operate during
construction and after completion of the project.
6. Expansion joints shall be provided as required to
prevent permanent structural deformations from
occuring at a continuous operating temperature of
600°F.
PRECIPITATOR REDUNDANCY
1. The precipitation equipment shall be designed so
that guarantee is met with one full width elec-
trical field out of service.
2. The precipitation equipment shall be sized with a
confidence level of at least 90 percent when all
fields are in service.
17
-------
Electrostatic Precipitator; Wet Type (Sketch A-2 & A-3)
See attached Sketch A-7 for the wet electrostatic ,
precipitator circuitry.
The portions of the specification for the dry electro-
static precipitator that are applicable to the wet electro-
static precipitator shall apply.
The following factors shall be included:
1. Materials of construction shall withstand the
corrosive atmosphere of acidity present in the gas
stream.
2.* Heavy rapping forces are required, 50 "g's" or
greater and continuous cleaning. (Lead and zinc
in the discharge stream can form lead or zinc
oxides that tend to destroy the cleaning capa-
bility of inlet field of the precipitator, there-
fore the necessity of continuous cleaning; zinc
will galvanize to the collecting surfaces and thus
the requirement for heavy rapping.)
3. If the wet ESP system as shown in Sketch A-7 is
quoted as a complete system with hold tank, pH
control, clarifier, vacuum filtration, pumps,
etc., identify the major materials of construc-
tion, gpm, and estimated sludge discharge (in gpm)
to the pond.
* not applicable
18
-------
4. If the wet ESP system as shown in Sketch A-3
consists of only the electrostatic precipitator,
indicate the gpm of water required, the number of
nozzles for water sprays being supplied, and the
head in inches of water required at the point of
discharge into the precipitator. Also the esti-
mated gpm discharged from the hoppers of the wet
electrostatic gravity and the gpm of make-up water
required.
5. As shown in Sketch A-2, a cooling chamber ahead of
the wet-electrostatic precipitator would cool the
gas to 250°F (+25°F) prior to its entry into the
wet electrostatic precipitator.
6. As shown in Sketch A-3, the wet electrostatic
precipitator receiving a gas stream at approxi-
mately 600°F would discharge the cleaned and
cooled gas stream at 250°F (+25°F).
7. The removal efficiency required would be 98.2%.
COOLING CHAMBERS: (Sketch A-l, A-2, A-4, A-6)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
to the following: two cooling chambers of the downflow type
and dry bottom design with a water filtration and pumping
system, automatic apparatus for control of exit temperature,
and all necessary piping, insulation, etc. Also supply the
19
-------
supports and ductwork, with insulation, to convey the cooled
gases at 250°F (+25°F) from the discharge of the cooling
tower to the precipitator. The chamber will have clean-out
doors permitting man-entry and front-end unloaders for
clean-up purposes.
The water system will be a closed-loop type. The
materials of construction shall be compatible with the
corrosive atmosphere of the gases.
Foundations will be by others.
VENTURI SCRUBBER: (Sketch A-5)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
to the following: one venturi scrubber with a holding tank,
pumps, piping, variable-throat control, pH control, clari-
fier, vacuum filtration, flocculant additive system, struc-
tural supports, walkways, platforms, insulation, valving,
ductwork as required, demister, etc. The pressure drop will
be suggested by bidder. The materials of a construction
shall be compatible with the corrosive atmosphere of the
gases.
The water system will be a closed-loop type.
The materials of construction shall be compatible with
the corrosive atmosphere of the gases.
Foundations will be by others.
20
-------
FABRIC FILTER BAGHOUSE: (Sketch A-6)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
to the following: one fabric filter (pulse-jet type, etc.
will be left to the discretion of the vendor), baghouse,
readily changeable bags, clean-out doors for interior clean-
ing of collectors and inspection; cooling chamber, pumps,
etc. The bags and materials of construction shall be
compatible with the acidity of the treated gases.
GENERAL DESIGN COMMENTS
1. All systems will be tabulated and broken down into
major components, i.e., electrostatic precipitator,
ductwork, structural steel, controls, (electrical,
etc.) with their erected costs.
2. Each major piece of equipment (i.e., electrostatic
precipitator, baghouse, etc.) will be reported as
to square feet of collection area, number of
fields, rapping force, type of electrodes, mate-
rials of construction, total weight in tons, size,
height, duct size, number of bags, size, type,
etc.).
3. Annual operating costs with quantities of elec-
tricity, water, etc. used; operating manpower,
maintenance manpower, and costs; estimated life of
the control equipment.
21
-------
4. Equipment shall be in conforraance with the National
Electrical Code, OSHA, Federal, State, and local
regulations.
5. Satisfactory performance tests will be as indi-
cated in the dry electrostatic precipitator.
22
-------
SKETCHES
-------
S^AtLT£R
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 100'
TO C.C. 20'
TO ESP 50'
TO STACK 150'
REFINERY
OFFICE
MAGMA: SMELTER AT
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF DRY
ELECTROSTATIC PREC.
WITH A COOLING
(SPRAY TYPE) CHAMBER
AS ADD-ON UNITS .
-------
a
CZD
~^4~
•;H
!.(
V..
/'on
i *•<'.
IM •'.,'•
•i-W"
Coots A/6-
STATION
>- V
P/LOr f*tArtT
f — x —X,
//
/' SN\LTR
OFF»Ct-
ri''f&#se
-£>L/sr/zeifc;i
-*G43
-- f,.f.
6-^
SHELTER
c
k^.'^&(. Wi
w'••*$>
^©•••fe.©,©-:-S
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 100'
TO C.C. 20'
TO ESP 50'
TO STACK 150'
MAGMA: SMELTER AT
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF WET
ELECTROSTATIC PREC.
WITH A COOLING
(SPRAY TYPE) CHAMBER,
THICKENER, VACUUM
FILTER, ETC. AS ADD-
ON UNITS
-------
SMELTER
DU-.-S7
•'/>.
ST^CK
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN TOO'
TO C.C. 20'
TO ESP 50'
TO STACK 130'
R6F1MEUV
OFFICE
MAGMA: SMELTER AT
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF WET
ELECTROSTATIC PREC..
THICKENER, VACUUM
FILTER, ETC. AS ADD-
ON UNITS
-------
TXA*A ****g*y,j\
**tr#*»rJ'r£ "f/rs
$ So ^^MVEHTtR)[, -_
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
;-l>.
MAGMA: SMELTER AT
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF COOLING
(SPRAY TYPE) CHAMBER
-------
STACK .
iCOUVtSTtR)
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 100'
TO C.C. 20'
TO VENTURI 50'
TO STACK 130'
MAGMA: SMELTER TO
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF VENTURI
SCRUBBER, THICKENER,
VACUUM FILTER, ETC.
AS ADD-ON UNITS
-------
I
,_/ -
-T^/^ f
V fc.
ic^frrl
A»^T
J"_
•f—x,
//
//SN\\JR
OPF^Ct-
•Xr-'-A li-- v" •-
^^.^V;
J ^
J J/ ^ G
:r«.
n'str/sse
/'.
MAY
tift-i
rv
S BELTER
d
^ZZZl"
\
•^ •»
s
*V7f
SLoiJffc
use:
T/MF cez
REFINERY
OFFICE
^-s f~\ ' " "••'
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 100'
TO C.C. 20'
TO BAGHOUSE 50'
TO STACK 150'
MAGMA: SMELTER AT
SAN MANUEL, ARIZ.
RETROFIT OF FILTER
BAGHOUSE, COOLING
(SPRAY TYPE) CHAMBER,
ETC. AS ADD-ON UNITS
-------
APPENDIX C
C-l
-------
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL
11499 CHESTER ROAD
CINCINNATI. OHIO 45246
(513) 7S2-4VOO
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADD-ON
CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR REVERBERATORY
FURNACE AT PHELPS DODGE COPPER COMPANY,
AJO, ARIZONA
Prepared by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
PEDCo Project Number: 3287-B
June 28, 1977
BRANCH OFFICES
CHESTER TOWERS
Crown Center
Kansas City. Mo.
Professional Village
Chapel Hill. N.C.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SCOPE OF WORK 1
GENERAL INFORMATION 3
DESIGN CRITERIA AND GUARANTEE 3
SPECIFIC OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR ADD-ON EQUIPMENT 5
DESIGN LOADS 6
CONTROL SYSTEM SUPPORT STRUCTURE 12
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: ELECTROSTATIC 12
PRECIPITATOR, DRY TYPE
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: ELECTROSTATIC 18
PRECIPITATOR, WET TYPE
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: COOLING CHAMBERS 19
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: VENTURI SCRUBBER 20
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT: FABRIC FILTER 20
BAGHOUSE
SKETCHES A-l
11
-------
LIST OF TABLES
NO.
Summary of Electrostatic Precipitator Design
Parameters and Operating Data at Phelps Dodge
Copper Company, Ajo, Arizona
111
-------
LIST OF SKETCHES
No.
A-l Dry Electrostatic Precipitator A-l
A-2 Wet Electrostatic Precipitator/Cooling Chamber A-2
A-3 Wet Electrostatic Precipitator A-3
A-4 Cooling Chamber A-4
A-5 Venturi Scrubber A-5
A-6 Fabric Filter Baghouse A-6
IV
-------
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (COPPER SMELTER)
It is the intent of these specifications to provide the
contractor with sufficient information to furnish and in-
stall gas-cleaning systems, including the control equipment
to treat exhaust gases from an already-installed electro-
static precipitator on a copper concentrate smelting rever-
beratory furnace at the Phelps Dodge plant at Ajo, Arizona.
SCOPE OF WORK
Major items of work to be accomplished by contractor
consist of the following:
1. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level from the
discharge of the existing hot electrostatic
precipitator flue to the inlet nozzles of the
required add-on control equipment. The contractor
shall provide heat insulation on flues.
2. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level up the
required support structure for the add-on control
equipment, including all required walkways, stair-
ways, and handrails. The supporting structure
system will exclude foundations, which will be
supplied and furnished by others.
-------
3. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and deliver add-on control equipment,
complete with all electrical equipment required to
place the unit into operation.
4. Erect the add-on control equipment, including
furnishing and installing heat insulation on the
add-on control equipment where required. The
erection portion excludes furnishing wire and
conduit or a control room for electrical equip-
ment.
5. Engineer, design, procure materials and equipment,
fabricate, and erect from ground level up the
discharge flues starting at the outlet nozzle
flange of the add-on control equipment and termi-
nating at the present discharge to the ducting
utilized by the existing hot electrostatic pre-
cipitator.
6. Provide qualified personnel for the initial start-
up of the complete system. Start-up is to include
all testing, adjustments, and modifications neces-
sary to ensure proper operation of the units at or
above the collection efficiency levels specified
herein. Start-up is also to include the training
of owner's operating and maintenance personnel to
operate and maintain the equipment.
-------
7. The contractor shall provide the services of a
qualified Field Erection Engineer who shall give
supervision and technical assistance as required
during assembly, field erection, and start-up of
the equipment.
8. The contractor will furnish a test model of the
add-on control equipment and the flue systems for
gas-flow study.
GENERAL INFORMATION
An additional fan to handle the pressure drop shall be
included with any add-on control equipment.
All electrical, water, and other services will be
within 100 feet of the new facilities.
Site leveling and preparation by others.
The units are to operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per
year.
The layouts for particulate removal control system are
shown on attached Sketches A-l through A-6. The length of
duct runs are shown on the sketches.
DESIGN CRITERIA AND GUARANTEE
1. Collection Efficiency
The add-on control equipment will have a minimum
guaranteed collection efficiency of 93 percent by
-------
weight of the entering particulate matter as
determined by EPA Test Method 5, with a filter
temperature of 250°F.
2. Efficiency Tests
The owner shall make regular tests to check the
collecting efficiency. The contractor and owner
shall jointly test the add-on control equipment
for collection efficiency immediately after com-
pletion of all construction, at 6 months and at 11
months after completion. The test at 11 months
will determine the guarantee performance.
3 . Efficiency Curves
The contractor shall furnish with its proposal
expected efficiency curves, showing the guarantee
point. Curves will show expected efficiency
versus volume, grain loading, percent moisture,
gas temperature, percent SO3 in gas, percent lead,
and any other significant parameters affecting
efficiency of the add-on control equipment.
4. Draft Loss
The draft loss between inlet and outlet flanges of
the nozzles will be held to a minimum to attain
the removal efficiency required.
-------
5. Gas Velocity
The gas velocity through the precipitator proper
will not exceed 3 feet per second; and the veloc-
ity through a venturi scrubber or baghouse shall
be recommended by the vendor.
6. Gas Flow Study
The contractor shall construct a test model of the
system from and including the outlets of the waste
heat boilers to the stack.
7. Redundancy
The control equipment shall be sized with a con-
fidence level of at least 90 percent when the
system is operating at a full mode.
SPECIFIC OPERATING CONDITIONS FOR ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT
The add-on control equipment will be capable of han-
dling copper smelting reverberatory furnace exhaust gases
described as follows:
1. Amount of gases per precipitator: 186,000 acfm.
2. Operating temperature of gases: 598°F.
3. Short-term temperature surges to 650°F during
furnace charging periods.
4. Nominal dust particle inlet loading is 0.56 grain
per SCF. Estimated dust particulate inlet loading
is 1.37 grains per SCF during furnace charging
periods.
-------
5. Expected dust screen analysis mesh and percent:
Not available.
6. Expected volumetric analysis of gas component and
percent: See attached Table 1.
7. Estimated bulk density of collected dust, dry
pounds per cubic foot: Not available.
8. Acid dew point of gas: Not available.
9. Expected composition of dust: Table 2 presents
element analysis at existing electrostatic pre-
cipitator inlet and outlet.
DESIGN LOADS
This should include vertical live loads, lateral loads,
and earthquake considerations.
FLUE SYSTEM:
1. The flue system shall begin at the outlet flange
of the existing hot electrostatic precipitator and
proceed to the inlet flanges of the add-on control
equipment.
2. The ductwork from the outlet flange of the exist-
ing hot electrostatic preeipitator to the add-on
control equipment shall be sized for minimum gas
velocity of 3500 feet per minute under maximum
future gas-flow conditions of 186,000 acfm. This
ductwork shall be rectangular in cross section,
fabricated of 1/4-inch-thick (minimum) steel plate
consistent with the acidity of the gas stream, and
-------
Table 1. SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE -
PHELPS DODGE COPPER SMELTER, AJO, ARIZONA
Item
ESP manufacturer
ESP inlet conditions
Velocity, fps
Volume flow at con-
tinous rating, acfm
scfm
Temperature, °F
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter.
gr/scf
Ib/hr
by instack/outstack
filter, gr/scf
Ib/hr
by EPA test method 5,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
ESP outlet conditions
Velocity, fps
Volume flow at con-
tinuous rating, acfm
scfm
Temperature, °F
Gas dust loadings:
by instack filter,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
Design
(l)a
Joy Western
at 13.8 psia
150,000°
75,000 (calc)
600 (max.)
2.25 (max.)6
1446.43
(calc max. )
0.063
40 (guar-
anteed)
Actual
(1)
164,000
450 to 550
0.592
(calc.)
42ie
0.067
(calc)
47D
Radian
test results
July 6-16, 1976
(2)
55 to 5^
160,0003
77,580 (calc)
633
avg. 0.6 (9. 17
SRI test
results
July 9-10, 1976
(3)
to 1.55)e f
avg. 403 (calc)
1.56 to 2.4713
1041 to 1648
(calc.)
114
185,330
92,840 (calc)
598
0.021
13.44 (calc)
Aerotherm
test results
July 15-30, 1976
(4)
77.17
U
116,200"
59,500 (calc)
550 to 600
0.42 (calc)
V-
212. 8*
-------
Table 1 (continued). SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSION DATA FOR EXISTING
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR ON REVERBERATORY FURNACE -
PHELPS DODGE COPPER SMELTER, AJO, ARIZONA
op
Item
ESP outlet conditions
(continued)
by instack/outstack
filter, gr/scf
Ib/hr
by EPA test method 5,
gr/scf
Ib/hr
ESP control efficiency, %
Dust size analysis
at ESP inlet
at ESP outlet
Gas composition, %
H20
°2
co2
S02
S03
Design
(l)a
96.83P
Actual
(1)
Radian
test results
July 6-16, 1976
(2)
0.84 to 1.371
560 to 914
(calc.)
ESPS ESPS
inlet outlet
13.2 12.3
10.7 9.5
6.0 6.5
0.33 0.56
0.006 0.012
SRI test
results
July 9-10, 1976
(3)
96.7*3
>10ymr
Aerotherm
test results
July 15-30, 1976
(4)
0.83 (calc.)
423. 5"1
0.56 (calc.)
285. 4n
ESP3
outlet
12.2
13.6
4.1
8.1
0.0034
-------
Footnotes
a
Numbers in parentheses represent corresponding references listed.
b Actual measurements in each of the two inlet ducts to the ESP were 55 and 57 fps, respectively.
c At 32°F and 14.7 psia.
d Average of six tests conducted on July 7 through July 10, 1976. During the test runs, the volume rate
varies from 148,000 to 167,000 acfm.
e 1975 tests by Engineering Testing Laboratories, using WP Method 50, hard particulates only.
- , ct:'f £/1V! te8t run8 conducted ^ly 8 through July 10, 1976. Actual emissions varied from 0.17
to 1.55 gr/scf.
f According to Radian, the outlet sampling locations was much more favorable than the inlet and for this
reason to gas flow rate obtained at the outlet 78,400 scfm was used to calculate the flow rates of gas
through the ESP. Based on this gas flow rate and average loading of 0.6 gr/scf, Radian calculated
a mass flow rate of 340 Ib/hr.
9 Results of two test runs performed at a single point in the one duct (two ducts lead into ESP). Test
run 1 collected 0.58 gr/scf on instack filter and 1.89 gr/scf on outstack filter, and test run 2
collected 0.31 gr/scf on instack filter and 1.25 gr/scf on outstack filter.
h Average of 11 tests conducted July 20 to 30, 1976, during which the volume flow was between 46,700 and
70,000 scfm.
1 Average of five test conducted on July 8 to 10, 1976. The minimum and maximum dust loadings obtained
during the test were 0.017 and 0.025 gr/scf, respectively.
J 1975 tests by Engineering Testing Laboratories, using EPA method 5 with sulfates deducted.
Average particulate collected on instack filter during two tests conducted by using instack/outstack
filters on July 29 and 30, 1976. The actual readings were 217.2 and 208.4 Ib/hr.
Results of three test runs. The actual readings were 0.97, 0.84, and 1.37 gr/scf. Amounts collected
on instack filters in these three test runs were 0.027, 0.072, and 0.019 gr/scf, respectively.
m Average of two test runs conducted on July 29 and 30, 197G. Actual readings were 423.0 and 423.9 Ib/hr.
n Average of seven test runs during July 21-28, 1976. The minimum and maximum readings were 216.2 and
331.3 Ib/hr, respectively.
P Guaranteed efficiency based on instack filter tests.
^ Using instack filter method.
r Overall mass median diameter.
s Average of many measurements.
-------
Table 2. ANALYSES OF TOTAL PARTICULATE (SOLID PHASE AND
VAPOR PHASE PARTICULATE AT THE EXISTING ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR OUTLET (IN POUNDS PER HOUR)
Element
As
Ba
Be
Cd
Cr
Cu
F
Fe
Hg
MO
Ni
Pb
Sb
Se
V
Zn
Total particulate
(measured on
7/11/76)
140
ND
0.011
0.016
0.011
1.0
7.5
_
5.6xlO-3
0.16
0.085
0.079
0.33
0.97
0.062
0.082
Total particulate
(measured on
7/13/76)
76
0.64
3.4x10-3
7.6
0.044
18
9.4
0.55
0.033
0.17
0.011
0.38
0.030
0.65
0.027
0.22
Vapor phase
(measured on
7/16/76)
15
0.27
< 4x10-3
l.lxlO~4
0.036
2.94
11.0
0.196
0.062
0.016
0.031
8.7x10-3
3.0x10-3
0.21
0.020
0.036
Existing ESP in operating at 598°F.
In addition, 2210 Ibs/hr of sulfur was collected as S02
and 50 Ib/hr sulfur as S03.
(Radian Corporation conducted gas particulate sampling
on the reverberatory furnace and its control system at
Phelps-Dodge Copper Company during July 1976. During the
sampling program, they measured the total particulate solid
phase and vapor phase, present in the existing electrostatic
precipitator outlet by using a wet electrostatic precipitate
sampler in series with a set of impingers. They also
measured only vapor phase particulate content of the gas at
the existing ESP outlet by using a cyclone and filter to
separate solid phase particulate of the gas, and a set of
impingers in series to trap the vapor phase particulate.
Table 2 presents analyses of total particulate and vapor
phase particulate.)
10
-------
be equipped with suitably reinforced stiffeners.
An expansion joint in both the vertical and hori-
zontal portions of this ductwork shall be pro-
vided. Any right-angle turns in this ductwork
shall be of the largest centerline radius possible
and designed to minimize pressure drop. The
interface between the throat of the right-angle
turn and the gathering plenum shall be designed to
minimize any particulate material buildup. Turning
vanes will be installed to streamline the flow
where required. Flue shall also be tapered so as
to minimize the entry pressure loss.
3. Outlets from the gathering flue to the nozzles of
the control system shall be optimized and designed
to provide uniform distribution of flow to the
inlet nozzles, with a minimum pressure drop re-
quired to achieve this optimization. Each outlet
shall also include an air-lock damper at the inlet
nozzle to the add-on control equipment and all
necessary platforms, headframes, and hoists re-
quired for operation of the air-lock dampers.
4. Expansion joints shall be provided at the inter-
face of the inlet nozzles and the gathering plenum
outlets.
11
-------
5. Gas sampling stations and access platforms shall
be provided at points designated by the EPA method
of testing.
CONTROL SYSTEM SUPPORT STRUCTURE
The add-on control equipment support structure shall be
provided complete with access and stairway landings. Struc-
tural elements required to support the add-on control equip-
ment, access walkways, and stairways should be designed to
provide clearance for any roadways or railroad equipment
that must continue to operate during construction and after
completion of the project.
ADD-ON CONTROL EQUIPMENT:
Electrostatic Precipitators; Dry Type (Sketch A-l)
1. The electrostatic precipitators will be horizontal-
flow, plate-type of heavy-duty construction and
shall be sectionalized and compartmentized for
flexibility. Two separate inlet and outlet noz-
zles are to be provided to make each compartment
isolated from the other one.
2. Mild-steel, high-voltage insulator compartments
are to be provided. These compartments are to be
insulated and heated by hot-air, positive-pressure
blower systems utilizing electric heating and
inlet air filtering.
12
-------
3. Access doors and internal walkways between elec-
trical sections will be provided.
4. All access openings will be provided with an
automatic key interlock system to protect per-
sonnel and equipment. Structural and component
design will provide allowance for free expansion
so as to prevent permanent structure deformation
from occurring at continuous gas operating tempera-
tures of 600°F.
5. The precipitator housing is to be able to with-
stand the maximum internal negative pressure that
might be created in operation.
PRECIPITATOR CASING
1. The precipitator casing will be of steel plate
construction properly reinforced to withstand the
acidity of the gas stream. Materials will meet
specifications as described in the latest edition
of the ASTM Standards.
2. Inlet and outlet nozzles to precipitator are to be
provided by the contractor. Each nozzle will
include necessary internal supports, guide vanes,
distribution plates and appropriately located U
tube and sample ports. Flanges for attaching
flues are to be included.
3. Casing and nozzles will be fabricated from steel
plate.
13
-------
HOPPERS
1. Dust hoppers will be located under the collecting
sections and shall be V-shaped trough or bunker
type.
2. Hoppers will be constructed of steel plate with a
minimum thickness of 1/4 inch and to withstand the
acidity of the gas stream.
3. Hoppers will be welded construction, having a
minimum slope of 60°.
4. Each hopper will be provided with a 15" x 15" x 1"
manual impact plate spaced at 3-foot centers along
both sides of hoppers at accessible locations.
Impact plate and poke holes are to be combined.
5. Provisions shall be made with double "Plattco"
type valves or equivalent to prevent infiltration
of air through the screw conveyors to the gas
stream.
6. Screw conveyors shall be provided beneath all
precipitator hoppers. Conveyors shall be sized
and powered to handle expected dust loading, but
in no case shall they be less than 12 inches in
diameter or have less than 7-1/2 horsepower
drives.
14
-------
RAPPERS
1. Rappers are to be of the electromagnetic or drop
hammer type with a heavy rapping force.
KEY INTERLOCKS
1. Key interlocks, to deenergize the unit, will be of
lock and key type to protect operating personnel
from high-voltage electrical equipment. Inter-
locks will be provided for the power panel, high-
voltage switches, rectifier-transformer sets, and
all access doors in the shell, housing, and hoppers
that provide entrance into the electrodes in the
high-voltage connections.
ELECTRODES
1. Collecting plate electrodes are to be minimum
16/18 gauge steel and designed to provide minimum
reentrainment of dust by gas stream during rapping
periods to be compatible with the acidity of the
gas stream.
2. Discharge wires or solid electrodes will be held
in place parallel to and at equal distances from
the collecting plates by structural steel frames
hanging from high-voltage, with isostatically
pressed alumina or equivalent support insulators
located in the shell roof.
15
-------
3. Approximate spacing between collecting plates will
be 9 inches.
RECTIFIER-TRANSFORMER SETS
1. Each precipitator field will be supplied with its
own separately controlled rectifier-transformer
set.
2. The selenixim rectifier-transformers will be 50%
oversized, have adequate surge protection, and
will be the oil-emersed, self-cool type.
3. The rectifier-transformer will be capable of half^
wave or full-wave power by way of the associated
switch.
4. Other accessories should include automatic con-
troller, meters for primary current/ primary
voltage, secondary current and secondary voltage.
PRECIPITATOR DISCHARGE FLUE
1. The precipitator discharge flue shall begin at the
outlet nozzle flange of the precipitators and
terminate at the interface of this flue with the
same point of discharge now used by the hot
electrostatic precipitator.
2. A manually operated poised-blade louver damper
shall be installed at the outlet nozzle flanges of
each precipitator. Damper and operating mechanism
shall be fabricated of type 316 stainless steel
and shall have a minimum-leakage characteristic.
16
-------
3. An air-lock damper and an expansion joint shall be
installed between the flow-control damper and the
main flue on each of the two precipitator outlets,
along with all necessary platforms.
4. Gas sampling stations and access platforms shall
be provided at points designated by EPA Method 5
testing.
5. Structural elements required to support the dis-
charge flue, access walkways, and stairways shall
be designed to provide clearance for railway
equipment that must continue to operate during
construction and after completion of the project.
6. Expansion joints shall be provided as required to
prevent permanent structural deformations from
occuring at a continuous operating temperature of
600°F.
PRECIPITATOR REDUNDANCY
1. The precipitation equipment shall be designed so
that guarantee is met with one full-width elec-
trical field out of service.
2. The precipitation equipment shall be sized with a
confidence level of at least 90 percent when all
fields are in service.
17
-------
Electrostatic Precipitator; Wet Type (Sketch A-2 & A-3)
See attached Sketch A-7 for the wet electrostatic
precipitator circuitry.
The portions of the specification for the dry electro-
static precipitator that are applicable to the wet electro-
static precipitator shall apply.
The following factors shall be included:
1. Materials of construction shall withstand the
corrosive atmosphere of acidity present in the gas
stream.
2. If the wet ESP system as shown in Sketch A-7 is
quoted as a complete system with hold tank, pH
control, clarifier, vacuum filtration, pumps,
etc., identify the major materials of construc-
tion, gpm, and estimated sludge discharge (in gpm)
to the pond.
3. If the wet ESP system as shown in Sketch A-3
consists of only the electrostatic precipitator,
indicate the gpm of water required, the number of
nozzles for water sprays being supplied, and the
head in inches of water required at the point of
discharge into the precipitator, amount of water
required for flashing and water flushing frequency.
Also the estimated gpm discharged from the hoppers
18
-------
of the wet electrostatic gravity, and the gpm of
make-up water required.
4. As shown in Sketch A-2, a cooling chamber ahead of
the wet-electrostatic precipitator would cool the
gas to 250°F (+25°F) prior to its entry into the
wet electrostatic precipitator.
5. As shown in Sketch A-3, the wet electrostatic
precipitator receiving a gas stream at approxi-
mately 600°F would discharge the cleaned and
cooled gas stream at 250°F (+25°F).
6. The removal efficiency required would be 93%.
COOLING CHAMBERS: (Sketch A-l, A-2, A-4, A-6)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
to the following: two cooling chambers of the downflow type
and dry bottom design with a water filtration and pumping
system, automatic apparatus for control of exit temperature,
and all necessary piping, insulation, etc. Also supply the
supports and ductwork, with insulation, to convey the cooled
gases at 250°F (+25°F) from the discharge of the cooling
tower to the precipitator. The chamber will have clean-out
doors permitting man-entry and front-end unloaders for
clean-up purposes.
The water system will be a closed-loop type. The
materials of construction shall be compatible with the
corrosive atmosphere of the gases.
19
-------
Foundations will be by others.
VENTURI SCRUBBER: (Sketch A-5)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
\
to the following: one venturi scrubber with a holding tank,
pumps, piping, variable-throat control, pH control, clari-
fier, vacuum filtration, flocculant additive system, struc-
tural supports, walkways, platforms, insulation, valving,
ductwork as required, demister, etc. The pressure drop will
be suggested by the bidder. The materials of a construction
shall be compatible with the corrosive atmosphere of the
gases.
The water system will be a closed-loop type.
The materials of construction shall be compatible with
the corrosive atmosphere of the gases.
Foundations will be by others.
FABRIC FILTER BAGHOUSE: (Sketch A-6)
Supply a complete system consisting of but not limited
to the following: one fabric filter (pulse-jet type, etc.
will be left to the discretion of the vendor) , bagliouse,
readily changeable bags, clean-out doors for interior clean-
ing of collectors and inspection; cooling chambers, pumps,
piping, etc. The bags and all materials of construction
shall be compatible with the acidity of the treated gases.
Temperature of gases to the baghouse will be 250°F (+25°F).
20
-------
GENERAL DESIGN COMMENTS:
1. All systems will be tabulated and broken down into
major components, i.e., electrostatic precipitator,
ductwork, structural steel, controls (electrical,
etc.) with their erected costs.
2. Each major piece of equipment (i.e., electrostatic
precipitator, baghouse, etc.) will be reported as
to square feet of collection area, number of
fields, rapping force, type of electrodes, mate-
rials of construction, total weight in tons, size,
height, duct size, number of bags, size, type,
etc.).
3. Annual operating costs with quantities of elec-
tricity, water, etc. used; operating manpower,
maintenance manpower and costs; estimated life of
the control equipment.
4. Equipment shall be in conformance with the National
Electrical Code, OSHA, Federal, State, and local
regulations.
5. Satisfactory performance tests will be as indi-
cated in the dry electrostatic precipitator.
21
-------
SKETCHES
-------
PHELPS DODGE AT
AJO, ARIZONA
SK-A-1
DRY ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 20.0'
TO C.C. 20.0'
TO ESP 45.0'
RETURN 140.0'
-------
. .. ?*.i-j£i '.~TL ?31-<•;!.
-V40.- -1 <*•-»-:•<>--
PHELPS DODGE AT
AJO, ARIZONA
SK-A-2
*"m RIB] .
WET ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
CB/.\.LOOM » LUE C
LIU _
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 20.0'
TO C.C. 20.0'
TO ESP 45.0'
RETURN 140.0'
-------
crrw?
PHELPS DODGE AT
F \LTEg. AJO, ARIZONA
r WM w . I - * tt-«
' RIB .
WET ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 20'
TO ESP 45'
RETURN 110'
-------
uiTh/ouT
6-c- * outr
TO ACID
PHELPS DODGE AT
AJO, ARIZONA
UUCT
TO sr A. ci<
SK-A-4
COOLING CHAMBER
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
-------
/ ! C/r
PHELPS DODGE AT
AJO, ARIZONA
SK-A-5
VENTURI SCRUBBER
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 20.0'
TO VENTURI 50.0'
RETURN 110.0'
-------
PHELPS DODGE AT
AJO, ARIZONA
GENERAL NOTES: N.T.S.
DUCTWORK
TO FAN 20.0'
TO C.C. 20.0'
TO FILTER 45.O1
RETURN 140.0'
-------
APPENDIX D
D-l
-------
EPA PROCESS WEIGHT REGULATIONS:
PARTICULATE MATTER FROM STATIONARY PROCESS SOURCES,
D-2
-------
Subpart P — Standards of Performance for
Primary Copper Smelters 26
{MM Ml Apiilirnltililjr ami (Initiation
of »(Tc<-U-d furilil)-.
The provisions of this Kubpart are ap-
plicable to the following affected facilities
in primary copper smelters: Dryer.
roaster, smelting furnace, and copper
converter.
{AIM A I
As used in this subpart, all terms not
defined herein shall have the meaning
given them in the Act and in subpart
A of this part.
(a) "Primary copper smelter" means
any installation or any Intermediate
process engaged in the production of
copper from copper sulfide ore concen-
trates through the use of pyrometallurgl-
cal techniques.
fb> "Dryer" means any facility In
which a copper sulflde ore concentrate
charge Is heated In the presence of air
to eliminate a portion of the moisture
from the charge, provided less than 5
percent of the sulfur contained In the
charge Is eliminated In the facility.
(c) "Roaster" means any facility In
which a copper sulfide ore concentrate
charge Is heated In the presence of air
to eliminate a significant portion (5 per-
cent or more) of the sulfur contained
in the charge.
"Total smelter charge" means the
weight (dry basis) of all copper sulfides
ore concentrates processed at a primary
copper smelter, plus the weight of all
other solid materials introduced Into the
roasters and smelting furnaces at a pri-
mary copper smelter, except calcine, over
a one-month period.
(1) "High level of volatile Impurities"
means a total smelter charge containing
more than 0.2 weight percent arsenic, 0.1
weight percent antimony, 4.5 weight per-
cent lead or 5.5 weight percent zinc, on
a dry baiU.
§ 60.162 Slandurd for pirlirnUir mul-
\er.
(a) 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 dryer any
gases which contain particulate matter
In excess of 50 mg/dscm (0.022 gr/dscf).
§ 60.163 Standard for nulfur
-------
§60.166 TrM mrllitid* and prarriliireii.
(a> The reference methods In Ap-
pendix A to this part, except as provided
for in S 60.8 For Method 5, Method 1 shall be
used for selecting the sampling site and
the number of traverse points, Method 2
for determining velocity and volumetric
flow rate and Method 3 for determining
the gas analysis. The sampling time for
each run shall be at least 60 minutes and
the minimum sampling volume shall be
0.85 dscm (30 dscf) except that smaller
times or volumes, when necessitated by
process variables or other factors, may
be approved by the Administrator.
D-4
-------
8 52.12ft Control Mratcpy anil regula-
tion*: I'iirlivuliilc mutter.
(a) The requirements of §551.13 and
51.22 of this chapter are not met since
the plan does not provide the degree of
control necessary to attain and main-
tain the national standards for particu-
late matter in the Phoenix-Tucson
Intrastate Region. Therefore, Regula-
tion 7-1-3.6 (process industries) of the
Arizona Rules and .Regulations for Air
Pollution Control, Rule 3,1 (E) (process
Industries i in Regulation III of the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Rules and Regulations, and Rule 2(Bi
(process industries) in Regulation II. of
the Rules and Regulations of the Pima
County Air Pollution Control District
are disapproved for the Phoenix-Tucson
Intrastate Region."
(b) Replacement regulation for Regu-
lation 7-1-3.6 of the Arizona Rules and
Regulations for Air Pollution Control,
Rule 3KE) of Regulation III of the Mari-
copa County Air Pollution Control Rules
and Regulations, and Rule 2(B) of Reg-
ulation II of the Rules and Regulations
of Pima County Air Pollution Control
District (Phoenix-Tucson Intrastate Re-
gion).—(1) No owner or operator of any
stationary process source in the Phoenix-
Tucson Intrastate Region (§ 81.36 of this
chapter) shall discharge or cause the
discharge of participate matter into the
atmosphere in excess of the hourly rate
shown in the following table for the proc-
jss weight rate identified for such
source:
Proem
weight rat*
(pounds
per hour)
W
100
(00
1,000..
8,000
10,11110. .
ao.ouo
Emission
rate
(pounds
per hour)
0 X
0 55
1.53
2.25
ft 31
9 73
14 IW
Process
weight rale
(pounds
per hour)
60 000
ftO 000
120 000
100 nou
2IX) 01)1)
400 1)111)
1 000 OUO
Emission
rate
(pounds
per hour)
29.60
31.19
33.28
14. US
3fi. 11
40.36
40. n
(i) Interpolation of the data in the ta-
ble for process weight rates up to 60,000
Ibs/hr shall be accomplished by use of
the equation:
E = 3.59P"M F<30tons/h
and Interpolation and extrapolation of
the data for process weight rates in ex-
cess of 60.000 Ibs/hr shall be accom-
plished by use of the equation:
£ = 17.31 P°." P> 30 tons/h
Where: E = Emissions In pounds per hour
P= Process weight In tons per hour
Cii) Process weignt is the cotai weign>
of all materials and solid fuels introduceu
into any specific process. Liquid and
gaseous fuels and combustion air will
not be considered as part of the process
weight. For a cyclical or batch operation,
the process weight per hour will be de-
rived by dividing the total process weight
by the number of hours in one complete
operation from the beginning of the
given process to the completion thereof,
excluding any time during which the
equipment is idle. For a continuous op-
eration, the process weight per hour will
be derived by dividing the process weight
for a given period of time by the num-
ber of hours in that penod.
(iii) For purposes of this regulation,
the total process weight from all similar
units employing a similar type process
shall be used in determining the maxi-
mum allowable emission of participate
matter.
(2) Paragraph 'b;(l> of this section
shall not apply to incinerators, fuel
burning installations, or Portland cement
plants having a proce-,:; weight rate in
excess of 250,000 Ib/h.
(3) No owner or operator of a Port-
land cement plant in the Phoenix-Tucson
Intrastate Region (§ 81.36 of th;s chap-
ter) with a process weight rate in excess
of 250,000 Ib/h shall discharge or cause
the discharge of participate matter into
the atmosphere in excess of the amount
specified in § 60.62 of this chapter.
(5) The test methods and procedures
used to determine compliance with this
paragraph are set forth below. The meth-
ods referenced are contained in the ap-
pendix to part 60 of this chapter. Equiv-
alent methods and procedures may be
used if approved by the Administrator.
(i) For each sampling repetition, the
average concentration of participate
matter shall be determined by using
method 5. Traversing during sampling
by method 5 shall be according to meth-
od 1. The minimum sampling time shall
be 2 hours and the minimum sampling
volume shall be 60 ft1 (1.70 m1), cor-
rected to standard conditions on a dry
basis.
!cctii!cr.t rcouic.ticn /or Regu-
lation 7-.'~'!*c) (Fasil fuel-fired sti-am
tj,. -i-.'ratjrs i.-t Ckc four Curncrs Intcr-
sU-le r.so'.on) . (1) Tins pai-agrai/ii ;:; sxp-
V/ik"il>.i! to the fossil fuel-nren i.team
generating equipment designated as
Units :, L', and 3 it the Nav.ijo Power
Pla,;',. in the A:';/.ona pori.on of the Four
Corners Interstate Region (§ S1.11U oi
this chapter) .
(2) No owner or operator ol the fossil
fuel-fired steam generating equipmem
to which this paragraph is applicabl*
shall discharge or cause the discharge ol
sulfur oxides into the atmosphere in ex-
cess of the amount prescribed by the fol-
lowing equations:
where: E — Allowable sulfur oxides emissions
(lb./lO«B t u.).
e = Allowable suuur oxiaes enuvjioua
(gm/10" gm.-c«l.).
S = Sulfur content. In percent by
weight, of fuel being burived.
7/ = Hcat content of fuel (B.t.u./lb.).
7i = Heat content of fuel (gm.-cal./
gm.) .
(3) For the purposes of this para-
graph :
(i) E shall not exceed 0.90 Ib. SO'/IO*
B.t.u. (1.6 gm. SO./10* gm.-cal.).
(ii) If emissions are less than 0.16 Ib.
SO:/10* B.t.u. (0.29 gm'. SO/10' gm.-cal.) .
the requirements of paragraph (c) (2) of
this section shall not apply.
(4) Compliance with this paragraph
shall be in accordance with the provi-
sions of § 52.134 (a).
(5) The test methods and procedure;
used to determine compliance with this
paragraph shall be those prescribed In
§ 60.46 (c), (d), and (e) of this chapter.
D-5
-------
EPA TEST METHODS 1 THROUGH 8 PROCEDURES
D-6
-------
THURSDAY, AUGUST 18,1977
PART II
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
Revision to*Refercnce Method f-8
D-7
-------
• t
417S4
CHAPTER
PROTECTION AOO4CV
PART 60— STANDARDS OP PERFORM-
ANCE FOR NIW STATIONARY SOURCE*
ftevteton to Reteranea HotfMfe l-»
AOTOCT: Eavlroemaratftl Prot«cHo»
Agency.
ACTION: Final Bute
SUMMARY: This rule revises Reference
Methods 1 through 9, the detailed re-
quirements used to measure emission*
from affected facilities to detennln*
whether they are in compliance with a
standard of pert ormance. The methods
wera originally promulgated December
23, i»71. and since that time several re-
vtetae became apparent which would
clarify, correct and improve the mettt-
odd. These revisions make the methods
easier to us®, and Improve their accuracy
and reliability.
DATS: September 19.
ADDRESSES: Copteo of the comment
letters are available for public Inspection
and copying at the UJ3. Environmental
Protection Agency, Publle Information
Reference Unit (EPA Library). Room
2932, 401 M Street, S.W.. Washington,
D.C. 20460. A summary of the comment*
and EPA 'a response* may be obtained
upon written request from the EPA Pub'
lie Information Center (PM-218). 401
M Street. 8.W, Washington. D.C. 204«C
(specify "Publlo Commeot Summary:
Revisions to Reference Methods 1-1 In
Appendix A of Standard! of Performance1
for New Stationary Source*").
FOB FUKTHKH INFORMATION CON-
TACT:
Don R. Goodwin, Emission Standards
and Engineering Division, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park. North Carolina 27711,
telephone No. S19-541-5371.
SUPPLEMDJTABY INFORMATION:
The amendments were proposed on June
8. 1976 (40 FB 23060) . A total of 50 com-
ment letters were received during the
comment period — 34 from Industry. 19
from governmental agencies, and 9 from
other interested parties. They contained
numerous suggestions which were Incor-
porated in the final revisions.
Chaagae comrade to all eight of the
reference methods are: (1) the clarifica-
tion of procedures and equipment spec-
ifications resulting from the comments,
(2> the addition of guidelines for aJ-
.temative procedures and equipment to
make prior approval of the Administra-
tor unnecessary and (3) the addition of
an Introduction to each reference meth-
od discussing th« general use off the
method and delineating the procedure
for using alternative methods and equip-
ment
Specific changes 69 toe me&ods are:
MBTHGSJ 1
1. Th« provision for the us® of more
than two traverse diameters, when spes-
RULfS AND REGULATIONS
ifled 1*r ta* Administrator, has bees*
deleted. If one traverse diameter is in a
pla&e containing the greatest expected
concentration variation, the Intended
purpose of the deleted paragraph will be.
fulfilled.
a. Based on recent data from Fluldynt)
(Parttculat* Sampling Strategies for
Large Power Plants Including Nonuni-
form Flow, EPA-aoo/a-7«-170, Juns>
1979) and Entropy Environmentalists
(Determination of the Optimum Number
of Traverse Points: An Analysis of
Method 1 Criteria (draft), Contract No.
88-01-3173),- the number of traverse
point* for velocity measurements has
been reduced and the 2:1 length to width-
ratio requirement for cross-sectional lay-
out of rectangular ducts has been re-
placed by A "balanced matrix" scheme.
3. Guidelines for sampling In stack*
containing eyctoale flow and stacks
smaller than about 031 meter in diam~
eter or 0.071 m* in cross-sectional are*
will be published at a later date.
4. Clarification has been mad* as to
when a check for cyclonic flow Is neces-
sary; also, the suggested procedure for
determination of unacceptable flow con-
ditions has been revised.
MKHOB »
1. The calibration of certain pitot tubes
has been made optional Appropriate con-
struction and application guidelines have
been Included.
2. A detailed calibration procedure for
temperature gauges has been included.
3. A leak check procedure for pitot
lines has been included.
MRHOB S
1. The applicability of the method has
been confined to fossil-fuel combustion
processes and to other processes where It
has been, determined that components
other than O,. CO., CO, and N, are not
present in concentrations sufficient to
affect the final results.
2. Based on recent research informa-
tion (Partitulate Sampling Strategies for
Large Power Plants Including Nonuni-
form Plow, EPA-600/2-76-170, June
1970), the requirement for proportional
sampling has been dropped and replaced
with the requirement for constant rate
sampling. Proportional and constant rate
sampling have been found to give essen-
tially the same result.
3. The "three consecutive" require-
ment has been replaced by "any three"
for the determination of molecular
weight, CO, and O*.'
4. The equation for excess air has been
revised to account for the presence of CO. •
9. A clearer distinction has been made
between molecular weight determination
and emission rate correction factor
determination.
6. Single point, integrated sampling.
has been Included.
MITHOB 4-
1. The sampling time of 1 hour has
been changed to a total sampling time
which will span the length of time the
pollutant emission rate is being deter-
mined or such time as specified in aa
appllca&to subpart of the standard*.
3. Th» requirement for proportional
sampling has been dropped and replaced
with the requirement for constant rate
sampling.
3. The leak check before the test run
has been made optional; the leak check
aft^y th^ ru& remains mandatory.
METHOD ft
1. The following alternatives- have
been included in the method:
a. The use of metal probe linen. -
' b. The use of other materials of con-
struction for filter holders and probe
liner part*.
o. The use of polyethylene wash bot-
tles and lamp1^ storage containers.
d. The use of deslccants other than
silica gel or- ralclnm sulfate, when
appropriate.
. e. The use of stopcock grease other
than silicons grease, when appropriate.
f. The drying of filters and probe-filter
catches at elevated temperatures, when
appropriate.
g. The combining of the filter and
probe washes into one container.
3. The leak check prior to a test run
has been made optional. The post-test
leak check remains mandatory. A meth-
od for correcting sample volume for ex-
cessive leakage rates has been included.
3. Detailed leak check and calibration
procedures for the metering system have
been included.
Mrrao*. 8
1. Possible interfering agents of the
method have been delineated.
2. The options of: (a) using a Method
8 impinger system, or (h> determining
SO, simultaneously with partlculats
matter, have been Included in the
method.
3. Based OB recent research data, the
requirement for proportional sampling
has been dropped and replaced with the
requirement for constant rate sampling.
4. Testa have shown that Isopropanoi
obtained from commercial sources oc-
casionally has peroxide impurities that
will cause erroneously low SOi measure-
ments. Therefore, a test for detecting
peroxides In Isopropanoi has been In-
cluded in the method.
5. The leak check before the test run
has been made optional; the leak check
after the run remains mandatory.
6. A detailed calibration procedure for
the metering system has been Included
in the method.
MSTHOO 7
1. For variable wave length spectro-
photometen, a scanning procedure (or
determining the point of maximum ab-
sorbance has been incorporated as aa
optic*.
MSTBOB S
1. Known interfering compounds hare
been listed to avoid misapplication of
the method;
a. The. determination of filterable
particulate matter (Including acid mist)
simultaneously with SO, and SO, has
been allowed where applicable.
3. Since occaaatonaUy some commer-
cially available quantities of Isopropanoi
ras«M MWTsa. vot, 43, NO. 1*0—THUIJOAV, AIKMJST it. 1*77
D-i
-------
AND
4I755
Have peroxide Impurities that wffl oaus*
betarion of Bctbod* IB thb app«n41i I
•a ao •Ddomment or tenU) of Ihtir appUoabllltj u>
K, & test T^JT pci t>i.ld8s bi
panol has been included to the method.
4. The gravimetric technique for mois-
ture content (rmther than volumetric)
hae been ipeclfled because a mixture of
Isopropyl alcohol and water will have a
volume less than the cum of the volume*
•fits content.
~t. A closer correspondence has been
made between similar parts of Methods
tandS.
•AlSCCLLAMEOUS
Several commenters questioned the
meaning of the term "subject to the ap-
proval of the Administrator" in relation
to using alternate test methods and pro-
cedures. As defined In I 00.2 of subpart
A, the "Administrator" Includes any au-
' thorlzed representative of the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protection
Agency. Authorized representatives are
f2PA officials in EPA Regional Offices or
State, local, and regional governmental
officials who have been delegated the re-
sponsibility of enforcing regulations un-
der 40 CFR 60. These officials in consulta-
tion with other staff members familiar
with technical aspects of source testing
will render decisions regarding accept-
able Alternate test procedures.
In accordance with section 117 of the
Act, publication of these methods was
ejteteJed by consultation with appropri-
ate advisory committees, Independent
experts, and Federal departments, and
agencies.
. M-404, «4 Atftt.
1603; *ec. i(a) of Pub. L. Mb. 61-004. M Btat.
U87; eec. 9 Of Pub. U No. 90-148, 81 Btat. MM
|«3 U.S.C. lH7e-e. IM7o-«, 186Tg(ft) ).)
^ Hon.— The •JtovlronmentaJ Protection
agvnc; baa determined that thla document
doe* not contain • major propoeeJ requiring
SjMpentton of an •oonomic Impact Analyst*
under Kxecutlre Orden 11831 and 11M9 and
OUB Circular A-107.
Dated : August 10, 1977.
DOUGLAS M. OOSTLE,
.• JUlmtMittrator.
Part 60 of Chapter X of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations Is amended
by revising Methods 1 through 8 of Ap-
pendix A — Reference Methods «s
follows:
AFPENDtx A— Hxntaxxcx IICIBOM
The reference methods ID thh Bppr 'ill err wrenrd to
to 140.8 (Performance TMU) end I «0. 11 (Compliance
With Standards end Maintenance Reqatramntt) of *0
CFR Pert 60, Buhpert A (Omen) Piuviitom). Specific
BOM of these reference methods ere described tn the
efandardt of performance contained tn tbt fnbparta,
bee luninf with Bubnart D. .
Within wen standard of performance, t section titled
"Test Methods and Procedures" si provided to (1)
Identify the test methods applicable to Uu
•object to the iwpecUTt tUnaird and (2) IdeoUty ao;
»peel»l IciinicUoiu or eoudltlom to b« fcllowfd wbco
apply IK a nuthod u> tbt rctpMtlTe kdllt^. Bueb In-
•InicUont (for uamplt, wUbUab •ampling latct TO)-
•m*>, or Umpwaturai) an to be oasd elibw lo addition
to, or M a lubtUtuU tor procodnr** In a nltitoet nwtliod.
SlmiWIy. lor louraM mb)«et to unlKton mODiurti^
nqoiremcou, ipectftc itutnietloni pcrtalnlnf to any HM
•f a ralerenoe BMUtod an prorMvd la UH iitbpan «r la
Apptndii B.
ttrtbod* tn pofeflUalrx «ppbtab>» to othw t
iver, applleablUty tboujd b* oonfirmrd by tartful
and appropnatf traiuatioo of UM eoodlUoiu pnraluii
at *neh louroei.
' Tbt approach feTJovtd In th* fennnlatton of UM rcf-
OMOM metbodi IOTOITM tpcdlVoaUora tor tqarpacDt.
procwdurrs, and pertonntnrr. ID oODocpt. a porfcji uianrr
•ptelficallon approacb would b* Dnfarablr in all mttbodi
- bteaoM thu iJlowi the fnateti ftdlbUlly lo the otrr
In prvllct, hoveTcr, tbii approacb U IrapncUcal In moil
ratrn bccanw prrtonutnet cpeclflcatfora cannot bt
•Mabllshed. Most »f tht roetbodj dtterlbrd bertln
Uvreforr, InToUt tpKlfic «]mmnenl cpKiftraiioni and
prorrdurn. and onl; t few mrUiodi In tLu a|ipo>du r*ly
on perlonntnn crilrrlt.
Minor chaniH In Ibt nfcrenot mrtbodi aboold not
rMmmrily tlt'-rl th» Tilidliy of Ihr rrturu and II to
nvngnlrx) tbai tltfmahTt and *milT»lrnt mtthodi
nltt Section MJ K provldet aKborlti for tht Administra-
tor lo ipfcify or approve 0) tqolTtlenl method], (2)
allmutlTe mffhoda, and (I) minor ehanfrc In tbe
metbodolory of Wit nioranre mflhodi It thonld b>
clearly andrmobd that nnkae otberwiw kteotined all
•ucb m* Ihodf and dhanf «e mult have prior approTt) of
In* AdmtnlntraloT. An owner employlnf >urh mttbofli or
4evtabons irtrm the reference methods without dblalninc
prior approi-ftl dora to tt the rt«k of mtnx|u>nl dlaa|v
proral and relMlini wltb approrodarUiods.
•Titbin tbe ralerane* mctbadi. certain •yrclftc eqolp-
ue-nt or proctdunt an raoornlMd at btlnt aonptable
or potentially acceptable and arc ipfclflc*lly Identified
tn tbt metbodt. Tbt lUnu MtnUfltd M acceptable op-
ttoiu ma; b> n»d withottt approval but n»ut bt Idtnu-
ftod la tb» t«ft report. Tbt potentially approTable op-
ttoot are aMed a> "nb]e«t to tbe approral of iht
AdmlnMrator" or ai "or oqnlTalent." Buch potentially
•pprovible ttennlquM or altcmatlT*s may bt njeetlOD2.4), (113 In.') la aim lac
ttonal ana, or (8) tbe meaniremtnl rite li txai than two
•tack or duct diameters downstream or !«• than a half
ejametn utaueaiii from a Bow disturbance.
The requirements of this method most bt aDnddered
Mbn otmitroctkm of a new facility from which emiarioni
vfll be meamred; tallore to do so may nxjulir so berg arm
-alttrsttons 10 Ibt stack or dtvlation from tbe standard
procedure CMgs Involvinc variants an sablect to tp-
pnrva) by tbe Administrator, TJ.B. Environmental
ProtecUon JLstnry.
X.I Baterlon ef Meaaorrmmt Bite. Bempllnf er
velocity BMasonment Is performed at a site knated at
least esjhl suck or duet diameters downstream and two
• distances:
« aiR'
1, VOL 4J, MO. ls>0 IHUtlDAT, AHOUn 18. 1*77
D-9
-------
4175ft
RUlU AH® REOUUriQNt
SO
40
8
UC
O.S
DUG? DIAMETERS UPSTREAM FROM PLOW DISTURBANCE (DISTANCE A>
1.0 1.§ 2.0
2.5
I
I
I
I
I
I30
20
S
I 10
\ I'
1
T
A
i
1
•
\
1
I
i
DISTURBANCE
MEASUREMENT
:- SITE
*
DISTURBANCE
r— i - .
FROM POINT OF ANY TYPE Of
DISTURBANCE (BEND, EXPANSION. CONTRACTION, ETC.)
I
6
8
10
DUCT DIAMETERS DOWNSTREAM FROM FLOW DISTURBANCE (DISTANCE B)
Figure 1-1. Minimum number of traverse points for particulate traverse*
where £-lencth and If-width.
2J Determining Uw Number ol Tr»T«rse Point*.
2.2.1 ParttouUU Traverse!. When the ei»ht- and
two-diameter criterion can be met, the mi,.im.im n umbel
ol travera poLnU ahtll bet (1) tweln. Cor clrcolaf of
reottnfnlmr itioki with dlunetan (or equivalent dl-
uneton) pmtar thtn O.«l meter (M la.); (2) elf ht, tot
circular itteki with dUnuten between 0.30 uid 0.m«t«r criterion cumat b*
met, the minimum number of traverse polDU Is deter-
mined from Figure 1-1. Before referrlnc to the flfure,
however, determine the dl5taoeee from the chown me*»
urement rite to the neanet upstream and downjtreaiB
dlsturbenoea, and divide each dlatanoe by the stack
diameter or equivalent diameter, to determine UM
distance In termi of the number of duet dlamelen. Then.
determine from Pleura 1-1 the minimum number ot
traverse polnU that comeponda: (1) to the number of
duet dlameten upstream; and (2) to the number ot
dlameten downstream. Select the hl(her of the twe)
mtnimnm numben of traTerae polnU, or a (reater valna>
so that for circular stack? the number U a multiple of 4.
and tor rectanfolaf itaelo, the number U one M thoe«
shown In Table 1-L
Tiai» l-l.
rtttt»fwltr Mete
umejr of rrtxrw peMtr
11..
U...
ax.
2*..
3D..
St..
(Ha
ut
S<4
5t
ta
JIWtStH. V9I. 41, NO. 14f—THUKSOAT, AU4UST \»,
D-10
-------
0.5
AND IIOUUTKmS
DUCTO4AMETERS UPSTREAM FROM FLOW DISTURBANCE (DISTANCE A)
1.0 1.6 , 2.0
41757
25
1
I
\
I
I
40
fc
85.
20
T
A
6
i
^DISTURBANCE
MEASUREMENT
h >- SITE
1 10
DISTURBANCE
I
I
I
! 3 4 5 678 9 10
1>UCT DIAMETERS DOWNSTREAM FROM FLOW DISTURBANCE (DISTANCE R)
Figure 1-2. Minimum number of traverse points for velocity (nonparticulate) traverses.
12.2 Velocity (Non-Partteulau) Tr»T«fM.
valocJty or volumetric floir rale it to be determined (bat
not partlcalate matter), the aune procedure w that far
••rBcnlaw tnrcoM (Section 2.2.1) to followed, amp*
that Kurort 1-2 may be o*ed Injtead of Flfurt 1-1.
M Croa»-8«cUana) L*yaol and Location ol Tnrem
Point*.
ZJ-1 CinakLT Bucks. lxx»t« tb« OKTITH wrtntt on
tvt) p«rpendicul*r dl&met«n ftdoordiuf lo T«bl« 1-2 And
4he «xamplt tfaown ic Fl« BlbUocrapby) thai
«j»<* lb< «»mr ralo«> M tboac In Table 1-2 may b» and
to tteo of Table 1-1
• For particulat« tTBTerve*. ooeof UHdiaroetcnmoit b«
is plant contMnlnf theimlnt upect«d oooouitnUoo
UOD. »J . aher btDOi, on« diameter thalJ be in UM
pi.r • nf th» bend. Thll requirraQent btoomn kali erlllaal
at UK dliiaooe tmr, tbe dljturbanoe locnaae«, ibenJon,
jafhfi diA-mf t«r kical k>M may o* ucad, iub)ect to approral
»«f Ibc Administrator.
In addiuon for nackj buTinj diarn«<«> (ntUr Uiaa
atl ID (» In.) oo tnttne pcHnO >bal] be tocaux] within
».» «nilmet«n (1.00 In ) of the »uek milt, AIM! It* clack
4iamet«n equal to or leB tbao 0.61 m (24 ID.), DO traverae
pelnuihaUbetocaied within l.tcm (0.60in.) of tb«Mack
walli To nucl tb«M criteria, otmrr* ttM prooadim
KlTco below.
U 1.1 «cacki With DiuMtan Onatw Tbao «,«! m
CM in.). When any of tbe tr»rtr»t prtnu at loeaud in
fctkm2J.1 fcBiHtbJn2Jem (1.00io.)oAT, JttftMCT M, f*T7
-------
41751
TRAVfM
POINT
I
4
9
Ftgun t4L Eiumfto ttowfng circular stack era* section dfvkted fata
12 tqu«8 *rw*4 with location of tnvcn* points IndlcatM^
-
the iam
In'rtr
w«*«h Untf to hMhxs* nrtrUnc; la
UM umtnt* or abtanc* at cyclonic Bow at •
* location mo* b* detanmW. Th* Uknrfem
p....!- 1- .1.1. .... - '~"-t
. .. 1 .
•« . 0 ' J «
-r- |- -
« 0 1 0
1
1 1
? ;
1 .
_i
1
1
1 *
L
RgurtM. Example showing rctangil*
MCtkMi divided Into 12 tqu«l *r**t, with
point it centre*) of MC*) aratv
Tabfe 1-2, LOCATION Of TRAVERSI POINTS IN CIRCULAR STACKS
(Pfcrcant of stack d'omettr from Inside will to travtm point)
Tr«v«rs«
point
m«b«r
on * .
(ilMttrt
I
2
a
j
8
J
8
9
10
11
' "1
13
14
IS
If
J7
18
If
2
tntar mutt b* eootaetod tor reeoluUoa of r
».« "
L*r«i tad M« th* nuromnNr. Comnet • ISrpt •
pttot tub* to to* mtnnin««r. Padttoa ID* TTP* • pilot
cab* u <*oh tnrtn* point. In 5ocoeMl*n, •> thit to*
pUaM ot UM (MM openlif* of the pltot tab* tnmrandkv
ulv to UM fUok cro3»-»cUoa»l ptoat: when tn* Tn« •
pMot rab»ta in tUi partttgB, It U M "0* ntltrane*." Now
tte dlffannital pragun (Ap) nodlnf tt Mob Ofnrm
• - "- •- • ' •• • •• • • • ^^ _. a
i null (uro) pltot reading It obtained i
referenc* tt t gives) traverse point, tn aoaaptabst now
condition esJatt at that point. ills* pltot reading b not
s*n**ITTtprtotrabe(npto±«r< yt*7
angle), until aasslnadlag Isobtalned. C artfully deltnDln*
tadnmrd the value ol th* rotation aagl* (a) I* tb*
nearest degree. After tn* noil technique tut been applied
tt etch trtTTs* point, «»i«ni»«» th* treng* of tb* abso-
lute T&hiat of a; anlgn a Tthu* of If to thoee pokttt (or
which no rotation was required, tnd Inclad* these ta tbt
overall tTerage. If the aTerageValu* of a Is greaUr thai
10*. the overall flow condition In the stank It limn. naOhU
tnd tlternatlTe methodoloiy, subject to th* appro-rat of .
tb* Administrator, moat be used to partorm taswtt*
sampl* and Teloetty trar
1. Detarmlnlni Dntt ConetntrtUoa hi t Ot* ftrMB.
ASMK. Ptrfarmtnet T«tt Cod* No. S7. Ntw York.
1967.
•_». DoTorMn. Howtrd, »< , ti. Ate PtOtUloti Boon*
THlU*J ***"M^ ASf PuttUltOB CVDttVl DittflOt. Lot.
Angela, CA. Noremb«r IMi
3. Methods tor D*unnlntUoa ol Vgfcetty. Vohnnt,
Dust tnd Mist Content of Out*. Western PnelpiUtlOB
DtVUon of JOT MtaatetalacCo. Lot Anfttat, CA.
BnH«tn> WP-W. WB*X
4. Standard Method tor BtmpUM Stacks tor PirUooJtU
Mtttar. tn: 1971 Book of ASTM SttndtnU. Ptrt &
ASTM Deelfnation D-JWS-71. Pblladelphl*, Ft. 1971.
5. Banna. H. A..et tL PsrtlcaltU Sunpunt 8tnte(l*>
tor Larn Pow*r Plant* lortncMnf Nononlrann Flow.
D3EPA. ORD, ESRL, Research Trltnfl* Park, NX!.
EPA-fl«y2-7»-170. June 197«.
«. Entropr EnrtroamentaUiti. Ino. Detarmlnttkm ol
the Optimum Number of Sampling Point*: An Analyst
of Method 1 Criteria. Environmental Protection Anna*.
Research Trlanfte Park. N.C. BPA Contnet No. e*-0t-
3173, Ttak 7.
MlTBOD J— DmUONiTIOK OF STACK Oil VU.OOTT '
AMD VOLDMtTUC FLOW BAT! (TTTI S PJTOT TDBt)
L Prindfli tmi AppOcuMHt
1.1 Principle. The treraf* (M Telocity la t stack to
determined tram the gas density and from m<
of the average Telocity head with a Typ* 3 (Stanstehelb*
or reverse type) pltot tub*.
1.3 Applicability. This method la eppllcabl* tor
measurement of the tTeragt Telocity of t gta stream tod
(or quantifying gas now.
This procedure Is not applicable at measurement sltat
which nvll to meet the criteria of Method I. Section 1L
Also, the method cannot be used (or direct measurement
tn cyclonic or swirling (as streams; Section 1.4 of Method
1 shows how to determine cyclonic or swirling flow cot>
dltlons. When unacceptable conditions eilst, altarnatl<»
proeedurea, subject to the approral of the Administrator,,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, mutt b* ena>
ployed to make accurate flow rate determlnauontL
examples of snob alternatlTe procedures an: (1) to Instil
straightening Tanas; (3) to calculate tha total votametrs*
flow rat* itolchlometncally, or (t) to move to anothlf
measartmant alt* at which th* flow ls tootptabkv
. ._ . thegrtdoon-
loa. DlTld* ta* fttck era*t-**ctiam lot* a* many
-------
jtUUES. AND
41759
].iO-2.Mcm«
{I 75 • 1.C in.)
rVvfllB^X^ZIsSI^M^^^^
i 7.62 cm (3 in.)*
-| TEMPERATURE SENSOR
LEAK-FREE
'tONNECTIONS
•SUGGESTED (INTERFERENCE FREE)
fITOT TUBE • THERMOCOUPLE SPACING
Figure 2-1. Type S pitot tube manometer assembly.
1.1
_ . I atu* tab*
(ftgan 4-1) ihall b* made o( m«ul tQbtnf (iu., lUlri-
(•» n«el). It to noonuBiDdx) tint UM vurnd
Trp* i Hurt Tob«. Tb« Trp*
4-1) ihall b* made o( m«ul tQbtnf
0.«6
PA uxl
U b»
ptun
(dtmrailoD D,, flfan }-2b) b*
tan (Vi. w>d H loot).
« (ram ttx b«M of «*ot k
tebe to lu ko*-«p«nlQf piu» -3b); it U raoonim«r>ded tbtt t
- .>«i»iii-m 1U> uid 1JC OJD« tbe CTHTD»J table* Ml
TtM tec* op*alQft of lb> pttot tcW tb^D, piwnb); to*
;BUCT>«J H tborn In rtftm 3-1, bcnr»T«» , tOibt ml^iro-
••QU of tb« ofwolDfi v« pcrmlMJ b)« CM* Ti^m >-fl) .
ft* Trp* 8 pilot utw cx»U kin t knm «n«ffltii«m,
4n«inlii«d w ooUirxri In ••ettoo t Ac M«ctlAa»Uoii
b«» ab*ll b* iiatnnil U UM pttat ttrtw
b*
murtw) «r
«e UM feody
»AY, «O«*VtT M,
D-]
-------
iUllf ANfc
TRANSVERSE
TUBE AXIS.
FACE
p*- OPENING'
PLANES
A SIDE PLANE
IQTCITUDINAi
T&Sf AXIS-
NOTE:
1.05Dt
-------
AND REGULATIONS
«761
TRAKSVERSE
TUBE AXIS "
10NGITUDINAL
TUBE AXIS—
Figure 2-3. Types of face-opening misalignment that c«n rwult from field UM or Im-
proper construction of Type S pltot tubes. These wiU net affect the baseline value
of Cp(s) «o long as 01 and a2 < 10°, Ui and 02 < 5°. z < 0.32 cm 11/8 In.) and w <
CX08 cm (1/32 In.) (citation 11 In Section 6).
VOL M», MO. l«l—fMU*S»AY,
D-15
-------
&tttt^&ESSSS$ °££Z2
and 4.2; nofa, how*«ff, thai to» statta and Impart
prestof* tolas ol standard pltot tabes an nasarptlbls fe
plootaf IB partlculete-ladsn fat itr
RUUf AN0
canton fton and net b* attached t* tt* pttot tubs*
it* alterna^T*-!* rantat* » UM appall tt tha
MarrlagaX
pltot tab*
or O) by cattbradoo
rwtlcal maammtar, bartsaj Mi-la. UjU oinnons on to*
0- ta 14n. InaUnod seal*, and awo, HiO dlTiiloot on Uw
1- to 104n. wdcal wal», Tht* trpe ol mcnometw (or
otber gaufa of cqnlnOant woaltlTtty) b satlilactory ft*
tha maaionmeat «< Ac nluea at tnr ss 1.3 mm (0.06 In.)
HiO. How*7«r, a dtffiarenttal preesor* sang* ol greater
amUtlTUy ateli t» etad (»abj«t I* tka a«4>ro*al oi U»
Admlnfcittator), U an* *j aeteBowtef S fcnad k> b*
M t t
1* Pressure Pro be and O»ug». A p
within 3J mm Hg (0.1 In. Hg) may be oasd. In many
, the barometric reading may D* obtained from •
i station, In wWon —-
it* baronu
pressure) shall b* requested and an adjustment tor
eleTaUoo differences between th* weather, station and
the sampling point shall be applied at a rate ol mlnu*
3.3 mm (0.1 In.) Hg per 30-meter (100 loot) elevation
Increase, or rice-Tana for eleTation decrease.
2.6 Oat Density Determination Equipment. Method
3 equipment, U needed (see Section 3.6), to determine
th* stack gat dry motanatar weatka, aad Reference
u..h~< i or Method 9 equipment lor moisture content
determination; other method* may ba uaad tobjaot t*
approval ol tbe Administrator.
2.7 Calibration Pltot Tuba. Wben caUanUaB of r -
tandeftfi
!uli~wfa~M~!O; (2) for torena «* Uof more point*, more than IS
psnwol ol tn* IndlTldnal A« nadiogs an baloB U am
(O.S5 In.) HjO; (V far Ust<«M ol fewar than 11 potata,
more than OWB 4preading te M0wl.tnnM.oein.) HiO.
ClteOm !3 In Section tTdetofte* onmmenlallr anilabl*
Instrameatatiaa kc ib* maamramaat oltatr-nng* g*a
TWAMUUSW,
•A£ aa altematlT* ta crltjrte (1) tnroaga (») abor*, tba
K4levtng calnnlatlmi may b* performed ta determiiie taa
neaesliy ol natat] a more mn&ttTa diflercnUal pnaaor*
&iti— Individual
i at a I
'otal nomba? ol DBTI
19 mm HuO wben mei
0.003 la H*O wkaa XngUfb onltt an
D T to greata? ttea 1.0*. tbe velocity bead data an
nnaceeptabl* and a men saoatU** dlflerantial vtmfM*
gauge mutt be Mad,
NOTS.-U dlSereotial prtawra gaaga otnar thas
IncUoed manonwters are used (e.g,, magnebelic satvaft).
their calibration moat be checked after eaoh test"ted**,
To chock the calibration ol a dUhrentlal pcaaaare gsaga.
eompsn Ap nadiagi ol tbe fauge with tbote olagmgs-
oll manometor at a minimum tf three points, apfsnst-
mataly reprasentmg the range ol Ap Talues In the stack.
I/, ft£ eacb point, the values ol Ap sa read by the diflentft.
tial presfon gang* and gauge-oil manometer urat a*
within i percent, tbe diflerentlal preason gauge abaat be
considered to be In proper calibration. OttMrwta*. dw
teat series shall oltbar be voided, or procedures la e4M
the measnrftd Ap values and anal resulu sbafl be us*a>
sobject to the approval ol th* Administrate.
2J Temperaton Oangs. A thermoconpla, l!qold-
fillad bolb thermometer, blmetalll« tharmomeUr. mar-
cury-in-glefii thermometsr, or other faoge capable of
ateaeorlng temperaton to within 1.3 percent ol tbe mini*
mum abeolut* stack temperature shall be osed. Th*
temperature K»og« shall be attached to the pltot mb*
sues that the sensor Up does not touch any metal; tot>
gauge shall b* In an Interference-free ei i ai SIIIM nirt wtt
respeet to the pltot tube (ace opvrtass (sm FlgQn M.
and alt* Fl«Tin2-71n 3ecUoa4). AltamatepceiUonsaBaii
be uasd U tbe pttoe tutw-tsmtMs^B* iimijt svataa ti
calibrated according to th* procedur* ol Section 4. Pm-
vlded that a dlAereces ol not more than 1 percent In tha
velocity Eneecs&«me9S U) Introduced, tb* '•"
f*g*
tub»
VUUM»U, prelerably, hav*a &uu «»»«««»»., vu»»^_
either (1) directly from the National Bureau ol Stand-
arda, Boot* 270, Qolnm Orahard Road, •- •
tbe external tube, following the 90 degree bend.
2.7.4 Static preamre hole* ol equal alia (epproitmalej*
0.1 D). equally spaced In • ptesometar ring conAgaraUosl
3.7.* Ninety dcgn* bead, wltb curved or altar*!
Junction.
2.6 Differential Pretenn Gang* tor Typ* • Ptto*
Tab* Calibration. An Inrllnad manometer or eqalvaUot
to used. II the single-velocity calibration technique to
employed (see Section 4.1.2J), the calibration differen-
tial pressure gaog* shall b* readable to the nearest 0.11
mm HtO (0.009 In. HrO). For moltiveloclty calibration*.
tbe rauge shall ba readable to the nearest O.u mm HiO
(0.006 In HjO) lor Ap value* betweea 1.3 and 25 mm HjO
(0.06 and 1.0 In. BK». aad t* th* assnat IJ mm Hi"
lav HsO) lay A> valoet abwr* 25 mm HrO 0.01
;. A rpedal, man seastttv* faaaa wtU be r*qi
to read Ap vane* below L» mm HsO [OM La.
(*** Cltatia* U aa Section t).
f
CURVED Off
MITEREO JUMCT101
STATIC
HOLES
(-0.101
HEMISWIERICAL
TIP
Figure 2-4. Standard pitot tube design specifications.
8.1 Set np th* appantot at shown In Flgua* 3-1.
Capillary tubing or surg* tanks Installed between to*
manometer and pltot tube may be used to dampen AB '
fluctuation*. It U recommended, but not required, that
a pretest leak-check be conducted, at lollowt: (1) blow
through the pltot Impact opening until at least 7.6 am
(3 in.) H
-------
-------
4178*
34 DvtarmtaM tit* stock (** dry motonifM
For oombmttoB proaaaM or promo* the* emit
Ually COi, On CO, andiNi, a» Method 3. For [UTii.iimejl
emitting nj*anHiilly air, an analytli and not b* «e>
ducted; a» a dry molerolM weljbt a! 29.0, Far otto
pf ni MM*, other method*, jubjert to UM approval al tba
AdmlnlJtrator, moat b* awl.
3.7 Obtala UM molftun eontan* am ReJarem
Method 4 (or aqalnlmt) or bam Method it
34 Determine UM eroaMcUonal an* of UM «task
or dart U tb* aunptlne; location. Wb*o«»» ponibaa,
pbrrtcaUy m*aann UM rtaek ftlnMmitoin rather USA
uttnf blu*pcliitB>
«. CWeratie* ' r
4.1 TTP» 8 Ptfart Tuba. B«faf» Ni InltWust,
fully txudno UM Type 8 pilot tub* In top, aid*.
«nd Ttovt t* nrtty that tb* (M* op«nln(i o( tb* tub*
•ntllnMd within UurndflcattontUluitnttd IB Finn
M or"5-». Tb* plUH bib* ttuJl not b* OM! U It MM t»
m**t UMM sU&nu&t im
•UUf AIM-REOUlATIONft
, dlftADCW
Aft* TtrUjrlat UM ku» optoloc kllfnnMnt. m**jon
•sit mart UMloDMwtDB •f-~-"'J*-T «« UM pita) tnb«
(») UM at«n«l tabtn* dtamftw (<
i-lb); u4 (b) tlMbM*-«o-op«nini ,
(dJnundoai Pi and Pi. Flmr* i-Jb). & fl, U b*tw««
0.48 and 0.96 em W, wd H In.) «nd U ^ »nd P. M»
*qtml and b*tw«« 1.06 and 1 SO R,, then an two pcodbl*
options: (1) UM pltot tub* may b* cullbnUd aooordlna
to UM procwdun outllnad In BvMoot 4.1.J throuǤ
4.1J bdow. or (2) a bawlln* (l»olat*d tub*) co«fflcl*nt
valoa of O.M may b* lajlfnod to UM pltot tab*. Not*,
how»r*r, that If th* pltot tub* It part of an unmbly,
callbratlaD may fUM b* rtqolnd, doplta knowl«d«*
of UM turtllnt eo*fflcl«ni r»lu* CM* Scctloo 4.1.1V
If Dt, PA, and Pi an outdd* th« ip*cifl«d limit*, UM
pltot tub* must b* calibrated a* outlined In 4.1.J throtufc.
11.5 baloir.
4.1.1 Typ* 8 Pttot Tab* Aaanbllal. Darin* aampk
and nlodty trartraM, tb* Isolated Typ* 8 pitol tab* to
not alwayi mod: In many Uutano**, tb* pltot tab* I*
and In combination wltb other source aampllng oompoa-
•nt* (thennoeoapu, sampUnf prob*, ooul*) M part at
an "aawmbly." Th* presence of other aamplloc oompa*
nentt can aom«tlme* afleot the baaelln* value ol the TyjM
8 pltot tab* ooefflotent (Citation tin Section 6); tbenbr*
an aialfn*4 (or otherwl** known) hamlln* coemeUn*
feaaelln* and aawmbly ooefflclent rafaei will b* !• ._
only when tb* reiatiT* placement of tb* component* ji
the uaembly la «aen_that aerodrnamlc Inlerfeteaot
effe«u an eliminated. Plfnna 2-6 throat b 2-« Uhutrala
Interfennee-In* oomponent arranajemanti lor Typ* f
pilot tabea barlni eiternal tablnc dlameten betwtai
0.41 aod O.M cm (H. and H In.). Typ* 8 pltot tDbeaaHBk
bile* that 1*0 to meet any or all of th* ipeelflcatloai <3
Flcnre* 1-6 throacb t-t shall b* c^bnteTaeoocdlnii Z
lh* prooedon oatUned la Section) 4.1.1 throath 111
below, and prior to calibration, tb* Tahua of tb* lni*>
component ipaclnn (pltoUooul*, pltot-t
pttotprob. ab«UbTaaaa b* mea^and a
Nora.—Do not o*a any Typ* 8 pilot tab* l
which li coutractod inch that UM Impaot praoon O.
In* plan* of th* pltot tab* li bale* UM anln pteeaaftb*
notal* (ae* Finn J-6b).
4.1.2 Calibration Setop. If UMTTpaBnltoltabibfj
b* callbnted, one let of tb* tab* ihaU b* parmaomU*
marked A, and th* other, J. Calibration ihaUb* done hi
flow ryitaM bawtaf UM loOowtnf awaUil ««*]•
IfL
TYff SmOTTUli
£ 14ft en (3/4 it) FOR 0N • U tm (1/2 tal
A. iOTTGM VIEW SNOWIM6 MINNNUM rITOT-NOZZlE SEPARATION;
SAMHIN0
PROM
11
v
SAMPIIN8
NOZZLf
STATIC rHESSVIH»
OPENIN6 PLAMt
IMPACT PRESSUMI
OPENING PLANt
TYPit
mOTTUBI
NOZZLE ENTRY
PLANI
SIOE VIEW: TO PREVENT PITOT TUII
FROM INTERFERING WITH GAS FLOW
STREAMLINES APPROACHING THI
MOZILE. THE IMPACT PRESSURI
OP£E9tNG PLANE OF THE PITOT TUII
SHALL 8£ EVEN WITH OR A10VI THI
NOZZLE ENTRY PLANE.
F!gurt 2-0. Proper pitof tut* • sampling nozzla configuration to preV«ht
atrodynamte Interference; buttonhook • type nozzle; centers of nozzi*
and pi tot opening aligned; Dj between 0.48 and 0.95 cm (3/16 and
3/8 in.).
FCOKM IMtlTn, VOL 41, NO, IwQ—TMUISOAXr AUOUSf !•» \977
- • ' •» . • - , - ^ • I
D-18""
-------
•EGULATONS
4J-
TmtmtTTaW
figure 2-7. Proper thermocouple placement to prevent Interference;
Dt between 0.48 and 0.95 cm (3/16 and 3/8 in.).
TYPE SPITOT TUBE
figure 2-8. Minimum phot-sample probe separation needed to prevent interference;
Ot between XJ.48 and 0.95 cm (3/16 and 3/8 in.}.
4JAI n» flowing (M ftraam tms* b* confined to a
Aid *f daOnlle eran-aactional ana, cither etrcnlar or
ncUoiulv. For dreulv uumtKUaat, Urn
eta <£am*t« *halj be WJ omXli In. )-.-fcr
«n»i sections, U> width tvborter tide) stall b* at
11.4 cm (lOln.X
«.1A» Th» !•>«• s».*Luml arm a* tb« oahbraUm 4wi
•at b* mrutam rr«r » (tourer ol 10 «r man tort
ttameUrt. For a recUmular anm mctton, oat i
tan diameter imloal*t«d (ram UM tallowing
te4i»eml»« tke nnmb«r«< doe* dtemeim:
•tarn
£qu»Uan2-l -JX^Jd^
V-WidUi
T» «raoj» UM prmnoe of iUbit, tuUj d«T«lop*d flow
•ptlUnu »> tb« o»llt>rrUoD ij{«, or "Met MCUOD." th«
«U mnji b* tooted »t U»sl ««hi diuoeUn downstream
rvo diftm«t4n opvtraam from UM iMarwt
Ncrt.—Tbe aifbt- aod two-diameter criteria ar* not
abeotat*; other test section locaUocu may be oasd (sob-
Ject to spproTsJ ad tbe Adjnlninrwtor), proTlded that tbe
low at the u«t slu to (table and damoomablr paralkJ
*> Ih* duct ails.
4.1JJ Tb* flow syvtam ahaD have UM eapaeltr to
> a laa) ssrhnti raioolty aroond tit so/min 9JOOO
Thl> »
•actioriaJ plane durlaf calibration. To fecUjtau allxn-
nent of the pltot tubes diiriuc oaUbrauon, It U advisable
that tbe ust MCUOD be oooom«
other transparent material.
4.1J Call braUon Prooedora. NoU that thlj prooednjt
to a feoeral ooe and nui5t Dot b« ojed without flnt
raterrlnf U) tbe ipcclal ooaslderaUonj praanled Lc Bee-
COD 4.1-5. Nou also that thii procedure applies onJf to
•tnfle-Tsloclit oaLbratloa. To obtain oallbraUoD data
tor tbe A Rod B tide* o( UM Type B pltot tab*, prooted
as loUowi:
4.1J 1 44ti« »3J» that UM macomeUr It proptrtj
fllied and Uiat the oU If CTM from contamination and U of
the proper denjdir. Inipect and taak-ch«ct all pltot HUM;
npalr «r raplaoe U pini«ir).
- Lml and avo th* maDometer Turn on tha
kn and allow UM flow to Kihllli* Saal UM Tjpe B antry
4.1 JJ Xnmnthattb«iMDonwtarbtrralandMroed.
FodUoo tbe (tacdard pilot tuhe at UM oaUbraUon point
(determined as outlined in fiction 4.U.1), and allfn the
tube Mtbat in Up to poumd directly Into the flow. Par
ticalar oan airaura be taken In allfninc the to be to aroid
raw and pitch aniles. Make «irt that UM entry port
•irroundint UM tqbe li propwly nal«d.
4.1J4 ttead AIWW and record IU Talu* In a data table
elmllar to th* oo* «bown In Hfnr» a-g Ramove tb*
•tandard pltot tDB« trom the duct and disconnect U trom
tb* manometer. Seal UM itandard entry port
4.1-US Ooonert the Type 6 pilot tub* to the manom-
eter. Open UM TTTX B entry port. Cheok the »«~-n.
•Ur lereJ and aero, inswl and alien tb* Type B prftot tube
•D Uiit IU A Bde Impart opdlnj to at tb* aame petal u
VM UM ataadvd ptutt tob* and ts pctaUd dirsnUy into
m* Uvw. Make aon that O» amtry pert mamuidiot the
tube ii properly sealed.
4J J « £ead 4p, and enter IU rain* in UM data UbU.
Bamon thi Type B prtot tub* (ram UM daot and dii-
•ounecl It from UM manom«ter.
4.1.17 Repeatnene4.1XtUm)a(h4.14.«abov*imtU
thr*» pain of Ap raadiufi hare been obtained.
4.1 J.I Eepeat supe 4.1.LI throo(h 4.1O.7 abe-*« br
tb* B Ude of the Type 8 pltot tube.
4-1J » Perlorm oalculaUooi, at ilaauinoj IB &KUOD
*.!.« baiow.
a.1.4 OakossOoos.
4.1.4.1 for each at tb* ill pain of a* nolioci 0^.
thne £rotn *ld« A and thra* trom dd* B) abtaLwd In
••eUoo 4.1J abort, aajcolate th* ralo* of tb* Type •
pltot tub* unaffrlam at toUowi.
-------
4179*
RUUS ANO
PITOTTUBI IDENTIFICATION NUMBER*
CALIBRATED lYf _ ___ _
. OATff.
RUNN&
1
2
3
"A" SIDE CALIBRATION
'AM •
e»H20
OcHjO)
AKi)
««HjO
(ln.H20>
Op (SIDE A)
CpM
g
DEVIATION-
Cp(») • CpUf-
RUUO*.
1
I
3
"B" SIDE CALIBRATION
Afttf
ernHjO
(!•. H20)
Ap;j
cnHzO
(ta.H20>
Cp (SIDE B)
c>w
•
' DEVIATION
Crfd-VW
•
.••-
AVERAGE DEVIATION • 0 (A OR B)
£JC,(t)-?,(AORB)}
•MU3TBCO.B1
j (^ (SIDE A)-if, (SIDE B)]
Figure 2-9. Pitot tube calibration data.
Equttioa 3-2
J-TTP* 8 ptto* tab* otaOetal
.(•a -Standard pttot tub* m»ffl,-Velocity head mea*m«i by tk* Typ* B pttat
tuba, em HiO (to. HjO)
4.1.4J Calcalato C, (eld* AX the •>•*• A-*U* ee*V
Bclvt, and ?, (aid* 3\ to*
eakoaH* th* dlffcrane* b*ti
•( C,(.) from ?, (rid* A X "id th*d*rl*ttatf
•Mb B-dd* nb» o< C,(.) from C, feldt B). U» UM W.
or B)
Equation 2-3
4.1.4.4 Cileukto ». th*
• (side A of B)-
Equation 2-4
4.1.4.4 Uw U>* TTP* B pilot Wbt only Utb*nlDw<<
* did* A) ud r did* B) m km Una oc tqaal to 0.01
•nd If Uu *b«tDt« Trnln* of th* dUTtnnM bihim ?,
(A) «nd Z1, (B) U 0.01 or IML
4.1.1 Specif ootaldwmaon*.
4.1 J.1 8«l«ettOD of caUbntion point.
4.1 J.I.I When in Intatod Trp* 8 pilot tub* li etB*
bnod, «ol«ct t otUbrmtton point *t or new the center ot
UM duot, tod follow the procedorw oatllned In SeeUon
4.1.3 4nd 4.1.4 tbOT*. The Type S pilot mfflctenti •
obuined, L*.,?, (aid* A) *nd ?, (ride B), will b* Tilli
» lone u either: (i) UM lioUt«d pilot tab* I* nod; at
(2) the pilot tab* ta used with other component) (notilt,
thernuwoaple, Mm pie probe) In «a urmnfenunt that to
Ire* from Mrodynimw Intcrfmng* eActi (M* Flnni
3-6 through M).
4.1J.O For Typ* 8 pltot tabe-Uxrmoooople oov>
binttfon* (without tampl* probe). Mlect * eutbntloi
point M or near th* center of th* duet, and follow th*
procedure* outlined In Section* 4.1 J and 4.1.4 •boru
The coefficient* to obtained will b* TaUd w leaf u the
pltot tube-tnermooottpl* combination la osed bj ItMH
or with other component! In an Interfereoec-fre* imo(*>
ment (n«nn* 3-
-------
AMD tfOULATrONS
«T767
w
ESTIMATED
SHEATH
'•LOCKAGE
OUCTAREA
tflfl
Figure 2-10. Projected area models fpr typical pi tot tube assemblies.
4-U PWd Use knd E«MJIbf»tkm.
4J.H.1 Meld Use.
4.1.8.1.1 Worn » Typ* S pilot tab* (tooiktad tube or
•Kmbly) ui naed In the n*ld, tat ipproprteu oaefficknit
Vklut (wbetber udcned or obtained by calibration ) thill
M used to perform T«lodtr calculation! For csJibrkted
Trpe B pilot tub«. tbe A tide coefficient tbAll be u*»d
When the A sidcoftbe tubefkcm tbe Bow, knd the B side
coefficient shsll be used when the B title luxe tbe Bow;
•HemstlTeJy. the arithmetic kTerkf t of tbe A knd B ride
weffldenl Ttltnt m»j be need, IrrespectlTe of which dde
hon the Bow.
4.1.U.2 When t probe tssembly li used to simple •
•mil dart (12 to M In. In dl»metwX tbe probe kbektb
smneUmee blocb k stfnlnasnt put of tbe duct craft-
action, ovuinj a reduction In tb* kdectlre Tklue ot
T.I.I Consult Citation 8 In Section « lor details Coo-
TtnUonal _plUH-*kmpltnj probe knembUes are not
Mcommended lor use in duett hkTirjf Inside diameters
smaller than 13 Inches (Oltttton 16 to Section 6).
4.1.6.2 EKkllbretlon.
lie.I.l I«ol*t«dPluitTa>>« AA«r neb field use, tfae
Jltot tube tb*U be omfullyraaiKmlned In top. tide, «Dd
mi Tlewi II Ibe pilot (»» openlnfs are »U11 ilined
within tbe tpectnatlont Uluitnted to Flfure 2-2 or 2-*,
• OKI be unimed th»t tbe Dwell ne omffldmt ot tbe pltot
Bbe DM not cbknied 11, bowev«r, tbe tube bu been
4tmi|M) u> tbe extent th»t It no lonfer meeta tbe tpeclfi-
•tlonj of Plfure 1-2 or J-s. the d*m*«e «t*lJ either b*
ni^lnd to revtore proper frUrnment of tb« SAO* ocwnlcn
• lb< tube inal] be ditorded
4.U^J PltM Tub* AvembllM. AfKr web field DM.
•«* lh« h« opexdrn »llj[imeDt of tbe pilot tob«, w
» B*ctloc 4.1.4J.1, klio. rameMurf tbe toteroomponeDt
•pKlnfioflheuMmblT. If the totercompocent (pkclrin
HTI not cbknfed kod tbe btoe openinf illioment u
*ce»pUblt. It cm be ummed Ibtl th« ooefflcicDt of th«
blj bu nol cbAnjed. If the t*oe o
•Mm .
• no kmrw within tht fpeclflotflonj of Flfim* t-i or
M wtber nptlr tbe dAmw or replace th« pilot tob«
to»llbr»tlnt tbe new mrm'-lj , U rrnrmT) U tbe Inter-
tomponant BD«cln{0 b»
V*cui(i or rallbrtU
U Standard pltet tube (U »pplio«bVe) . U«ft»nd«rt
plot toU li med fcr tb* rejoclt 7 cnrtne tb< tobe itul)
bioonitruin«(3*ooordin4 to thearturi* of Beclloo 2.7 *cd
b« MrtxDed k b*Klln> eo«fflrient Tklue ot CL»
« tab* H BMd M pkrt
4tw tab* *b*ll be Ic
<*Db)«ot to tb* kpprcTkl of the Ad
4-1 TMnpmton O.
kraU (Ukl UMrmameWn, liqnlcMUlad butt)
•ten, thvnvjeoople-potentlaiiMtar iy«t
« 4 Bwmotar. O*Ubnt* tb* b*roaMt«r ia»d ^ktoct
• mercury b*roro*t*r.
Omrrr out CklcolktloTts. rttklnJac kt tast OEM oxtn
declmkl 6fun beyond tbkt of tb* koqulnd tetk Bound
off fifun* kfxef ft"*i okloiilkUon.
$.\
-Wkl«r T»por In the cat stnkm droci Matbod 6 or
Bcforenw Method «), proportion by
,»Ptto< tube ao*ffld*ot, din
,-Pius tube OODSUCI,
-. 0_ ^
»ec
(•K)(mmH,0)
fcr tb» «a*tric sr*Um kod
^ - n*. dry buls (M
•Motion a.t) tft-cnok Ob/lb-mole).
Jt-Moleculai wvicbt of stack gaa, vvt bMk, t/i-
Pw«,-B»rometrtc prwwn kt »>*««rim«iil Mu, jam
Hi (In. BLi)
P,-Bl*c» »utjc pr»mmr», mm Bf On_ Hj)
/•.— Abkoluu suok (w pncsnn, mm H« (In. HI).
m.
kbcnmte piitjun, Mo mm Bf (3B.H
romnMCrto sUok CM flow rkte eornoUd to
*undkrd eondltloni, djcmAir (d*ct/iu).
(,— Buck temperature, *C rF).
r.-Absoluu iUak umnmtan, *X (•£).
t.ao'K rsir iu
—^ v— >, m/nc (ft^ec).
Ap- Vktocity n«*d of stack n*, mm HiO (In- BiO).
•XtOO^OonTvtlon factor, avc/nr.
U.O-Molecular v«lfbt of mar, sjr--
sool*).
U Arsnt* Mask pi **loelty.
Equation 2-0
L («s dry Tohuaatrte Bow tkta^
«--8,600(l-B..)f.X (^^) (^)
EouAtJon 8-10
CT^ H • • i i
JHNBIf IBJMf
1. Mark. L S. M*nhairlea.l Knrlnwn' Handbook. Ntw
Tort McOrkw-HJU Book Co In* 1W1
t:P1JT7, > B Chmmloal KncUMn- Handnoot. K.w
Tcrt taoOnw-Hlll Book CoTTlao. IMa
D-2J
-------
41768*
RfOUATIONfr
S. Shlgehcn, B. T., W~. F. Todd, and W. 8. Smitfc.
Slgnificaae* of Emm In Stack Sampling Measurement*.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RteeeroB
tie Park, N.C. (Presented at the Annual Meeting of
Probe*. Prepared br the Unlvmtty of Wtadwr to th»
MlnlstrTof the InTiiiMsiert, Toronto, Caned*. F«»>
ruary 1874,
the Ahr Pollution Control Association, St Louis,Ho.,
June 14-19, 1979.)
4. Standard Method to Sampling Stacks for Paniculate
Matter. In: 1*71 Book of ABTM Standards, Part 2S.
Philadelphia, Pa. 1971. A8TM Designation D-29»-n.
i. Vennard, J. E. Elementary Fluid Meobanlos. New
York. John Wiley and Sons, In*. 1947.
«. ThM Meters—Their Theory and Application.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers^ New York,
7. ASH BAB Handbook of Fundamentals. 1977. p. Me..
$. Annual Book OS ASTM Standards, Part tt. 1974. p.
». VoUare, B. F. Guideline* to Type 8 Pltot Tab*
r&Ubmlott. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Research Tlangls Park, N.C. (Presented at 1st Annual
Meeting, Source Evaluation Society, Dayton, Ohio,
September U, 197t.>
ia Vollaro. B. F. A Type 8 Pltot Tub* Calibration
Study. U.S. Envtronmeotai Protection Agency, Eml*.
sloo MeaguremoDt Brands, Heeenfih Tnangi* Park.
N.C. July 1W1
11. Vouare, B. F. The ECfcts of Impvet Opening
Mlnllgumeat on the Vame of the Type 8 Pltot Tube
Co«fflcl«at U.S. EBTtroaznantai ProttotlOB A|«noT.
EmlMioa Mneoramart Braaefa, B«w*nfa Trlenfl*
Pufc, N.C. October 197&
!1 VolUro. B. F. E«t*l>U«tun«i« a( * BuMlln* CotSA-
ctea* V&h» to Proparly ConstrucWd Type B Pltot
Tubt*. U.S. EnTiroamenUJ Protoctton AiencT, EmJ»
9k>n Me*innmu>t Breoeli, Bn»n»r«*i Tnaafk Puk,
N.C. NoTtmbw 1»78.
13. Vollcre, B. F. Affl Enhutlan of Slngto-Vdoelty
C allbratloa Technique! u a MMUB a( Determining Typ»
S Pltot Tab« CoefflcienU. U.S. EoTlronmenUl Protee-
tioa Acme;, EmiMion M«*5imm«Dt Branch, Ramnb
Trtu»l> Part, N.C. Auput 197S.
147volluo, B. F. Th« UM of Typ* 8 Pltot Tnbw to
the MeMaran«ntof Low VdocltlM. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Emlaion Mttuonmeat Branch,
R«m*reh Triangle Park, N.C. Noremoer 197*.
IS. Smith. Marrui L. Velocity Calibration of EPA
Type Soon* Sampling Probe. United Toehnologlw
Corporation, Pratt and Whitney Aircraft DlTtdoa,
Bait Barttod, Conn. Itn.
14. Vollaro, R. F. R«ooounended Proeednre to Sample,
Traverm* In Doeti Smaller than 13 Inchec In Diameter.
U.S. Environmental Protection Aj«wy. Frnlnriea
Meaetirament Branah, Begeareb Trl«n»le Park, N.O.
November ItTt*
17. Oww, B. and B. C^PanUmnt. Th« Meeenrnoee*
»> Air Flow, 4tb Ed.. London, Peffamon Prwe. 19M.
18. Vollaro, B. F. A sorrey of Commercially Available
InitrameDtatfen ^ the Meaurement of Low-Range
Oee Velocities, U.S. EnvlrormienUl Proteetloa Agency,
Emlsdon Mraforement Branch, R«merch Tnangle
Park, N.C. November 1978. (Unpublished Paper)
19. Onyp, A. W,. C. C. 8t Pierre, D. 8. Smith, D.
Motion, and J. Steiner. An Experimental Investlfaaoa
of the Effect at Pltot Tube-Sampling Probe Conngnre-
lions on the Magninde of the S Type Pltot Tube Co-
efficient to Commercially Available 8o«n* Sampling
Mmov 9— OA» AJfainel ro» CAIBO* DIOHD*V
Ononr, ZXCIM Am, am Day Mououva* WEBB*
1.1 Prlndpl*. A cae ample U extracUd from a ftack,
by oae of the foUowtng methodi: (1) slngU-point, grab
sampling* (]) dngle-poliK, integrated aampUng; or (»
muiu-polnt. Integrated mmpUng. The gai sample )•
analyud (or percent carbon dioxide (COi). percent OTJ-
gen (Oi), and, I/ neceoaary, percent carboo monoildie
(CO). Ii a dry molecular weight determination U to be
mad*, either an Onst or a Fyrlte < analyier may be naei
for the analyali; for exceei air or emiuloa rate correction
factor determination, an Oraat analyier mint be OMd.
1.3 Applicability. Thl* method U applicable for de-
termining COi and Oi concentration!, eicese air, and
dry molecular weight of a sample from a gu itraam of. »
loa»ll-riiei oombtutlon procee*. The method may al*o be
applicable toother nroceaaee where It haf been determined
that compound! other than CO>, Oi, CO, and nltmgeB-
(Nt) are not pmenf la concentnttooi «nM»i«iit |«
affect the result*.
Other methoda, ai well u modlfteatloM to the proce-
dure deacrlbed herein, are also applicable for some or all;
of the above determination*. Eiamplei of specific meth-
od] and modification! Include: (1) a multi-point samp-
ling method using an Onat anatyur to analyze lndn>
Tlcfnal grab aample* obtained at each point; (2) a method-
osing COi or Oi and stolchlometrle calculation! to deter-
mine dry molecular weight and eicea air; (3) aadgnlng e
value of 30.0 for dry molecular weight, In lien of actual
measurement*, (or procenea burning natural gu, coal, at
o4L These method! and modincaUon! may be used, btft
are subject to the approval of the Administrator.
2. /ifiperetw
Aj an alternative to the sampling apperatni and sy»>
tenu deacrlbed herein, other sampling system! (e.g.,
liquid displacement) may be used provided such system*
are capable of obtaining a representative sample and
maintaining a constant sampling rate, and an otherwise ~
capable of yielding acceptable result*. Use of such
systems l! subject to the approval of the Administrator.
2.1 Grab Sampling (Figure 3-1).
2.1.1 Probe. The probe should be made of stalnleat.
iteel or boroetlicote gJaei tubing and should be equipped
with an In-etack or out-otack niter to remove pertlcwatB
matter (a plug of glass wool is satisfactory lor this pur-
pose). Any other material Inert to Ot COt, CO, and Ns
and resistant to temperature at sampling conditions maw
be used (or the probe; eiamples of sueh material am
aluminum, copper, quartz glass and Tenon.
2.1.2 Pump. A one-way squees* bnlb, or equivalent,
Is used to transport the gas sample to tin enelyMSV
2.2 Integrated Sampling (Figure 3-1).
2.2.1 Probe. A probe sochai that described in Seetkal
2.1.1 is sol tabte>
i Mention of trade names or specific products does net
constitute endorsement by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.
43,
D-22
-------
AND REGULATIONS
41769
PROBE
FLEXIBLE TUBING
\
FILTER (GLASS WOOL)
tQUEEZEBULB
TO ANALYZER
Fjgure3-1. Grab sampling train.
AIR-COOLED
CONDENSER
PROBE
\
FILTER
{GLASS WOOL)
flIGID CONTAINER
figure 3-2. Integrated gas-umpling train.
-------
RUUi AMfr 81 GUUTfOMBk
1.3,2 CondttWT. Aa alii«eoJ*d *r vatar-eooM
d«nctf, o* «4fe» oasdsnew that will act remove O«,
COt, CO, tad Nfc may b» OMd to ramon mtm moMo*
which tb* opsratea of tb» pomp
and flew ia*tef.
1.7.1 ValTO, A zK*ate wl*a la and t» adjwt samp**
go* flow rate,
2.J.« Poet*, A letk-fev, dtaenragin-t™ pomp. V
eqoivtknt. It awd to transport sample1 gat ta to* fleilbw
big. Install a small tors* tank between ta* pomp ant
nit* ta*ter to eUminat* th* polaaUae «fi«9t a( tb* dt*>
phragm munp on the rotazneur.
1.3.6 Rate M«Ur. Th« rotam*t*r, or equivalent raft)
met*r, mod should tw capsbl* of measuring flow rate
to within ±3 poroent o( In* selected flow rate. A 00V
rat* rang* of tuX) to 1000 cm'/mra Is surfest»d.
•2.2.S Flezlbl* Ba*. Any leak-free plastic («.f.. TedTaT,
Mylar, Teflon) or plastic-coated aluminum (e.g., aluml-
nlud Mylar) bac, 07 equivalent, bavin* * capacity
cunsiewat with the selected Bow ral« ana rim* length
of UM tat ma, mar b« ottd. A capacity In UM rang* ol
M to «0 liters is suggest*!
To leak-check the oaf, connect It to a water manomet**
andprearorli* the baglo S to 10cm HtO (2 to 4 In. HiO).
Allow to stand tot 10 mlnnta*. Any displacement In th*
«n»4«r nwnomet«r Indicated a leak. An alternative leak-
cb«ek mothon! to to preasurlM th* b«f to 4 to 10 cm HiO
<2 to 4 in. HiO) and allow to stead overnight. A deflat«d
tec Indicate a l«Jt.
117 Preesun Gangs. A watar-ftltod TJ-tub* manom-
Mar. « «quiv»J«nt, of about» em (12 In.) la used te
th* flexlbb bag leak-cheek.
3-JJ Vacuum O*ug». A mercury manom*t*f. at
•qoinlant, of Bt least 780 mm He (30ln. Hf)Kuw4 te
tba sampling train le*j[-checiL.
S.J Analyst. For Ortat and Fyrlt* anatynr maln-
tenaae* and operatkm procedures, follow tb* Instruction
recommended by ths manufacturer, anksjj oth*rvl*»
specified hereto.
2.3.! Dry Motoeolfls Weight Detvmtoatioa. Aat Orat
amlyiar as Fyrtt* typ* cambatttan CM anaiyiaT may tw
•5*- !^»w»i»"f"to»i"i**«bt*»»*at«tawdlMt»v «.
S3T'
2.1 J Imlatai Bate Conrotion Tartar « EXCM Atr
DoctnalMtkx). An Orsat wiatytw most b* and. Tor
low COt (l«a tba« 4.0 pcrcant) or hl(b O> (greetar thin
19.0 poreojrt) eoacentratloD*, tb* m«a
cJbeek la opUooftL
3.1^ Puc* tbo prob« In the stack, with t!w Hp of tb*
probe potttloned at tba sampling point; pargt the sampi*
iof lloa. Dmv a sample Into the aoalyter and Unm*-
dlauly uialTMltforperoeat COjand peroeot Ot Det«r-
mlM tb« psrtenus* ol the CM that Is Ni and CO by
subtracting the sum of ths percent COt and percent Oi
(ram 100 percent. Cakulat* the dry molcealM ««Kbt «
Indicated In Section «.»,
3.1.4 Repeat the aampllnf. analytta, end calculation
procedures, until the dry molecular v*t«hu of any thr»*
(Tab sampla* dlflat from their mean by no man than .
8.J «A-mol» (OJ lb/lb-moi«). Arerac* tbe*» thr«
. .
ular veifht% and report tb* noalto to tb* n*anft
*.l|/(-mol* Ob/lb-mote). ,
3.3 Slngto-PoSnt, Ina«»teJ8smpHasaad Analytical
Procedure.
3.2.1 The mrapling point In th* dnot abaJl be located
a*q*cinedln8*elton3,l.l. ,
3.2.2 L»kst. connect the '>«« and make sun that an
cnnnnMlont are Ught and le«6 fre*.
3.2.3 Sample at a constant rat*. Tbe sampling ran
nhoiud ta ilmultanami* wltfi, and tor tb* a%m* total
Irnrtb ol time tt, the pollutant omuaioti rat* deurmlnav
n'yriw-typa combus^on |aa analyur. If an Oraat ao*j>
lyief U ua*d. It I* recommended that tb* Orsat leek-
. heck de*crlb«d In 8«ctlo,i 9 be p«r(brm*d before thto
determin&Uoo; bowever, UM i-hork is optional. D«Ut>
mine Uu parcaoUg* of Uie f»e that 1< Ni and CO by tub*
tb* turn «i Ui* pvcaat COj and peroavt Oi
(XI Bjpatt ttx analyt and eaJculattai preoriuia
rnittl tb* IndlTidual dry molecular welgbti te any tbnt)
nulm* diflar from tbair aimn by no morc than OJ
g/g-mol* (OS Ib/lb-moke). Anragt) UM*> tan* DobcolaT
wtlgbt9,and report UM ntnlt* to to* ncanat O.I g/g mol*
S.« UulU-Foint, Int*«n««d SampMng and AaarrUcai
1X1 (Jaleat otharwlH speclded by tt* Admlnia-
trator, a mlnlmnm of eigbt traTent point* shall b* and
fat eijcular itackt baring diameters len tben 0.61 m
CM In.), a minimum of nine shall b* used for rectangular
stacks baring *q.alTalent dlameten leal thin O.il m
(34 In.), and a minimum of twelr* traverse point* shaU
b* and tar all other case*. The traverse polnu shall b*
located according to Method 1. The use of lewer point*
U subject to approval of tb* Administrator.
3.JJ Follow the procedam outlined In Sections 3.2J
through 3.2.1, eicrpt tor the (oljowlng: traverse all sam-
pling point* and sampl* at each point for an equal length
of Urn*. Record sampling daU at shown In Figure 3-t.
Nora.—A ryrtt*4yp» eombmtlon rat analyiar d a*«
aooepUbl* te
% DEV *
i
(MUST BE < 10%)
Figure 3 3- Samplirx| rate data.
4.1.1 Plae* tbe probe In the stack, with tbe tip al tbo
probe positioned at the sampling point; pane the mm-
pllng Un*. Craw a sample Into tbe analyser. For emission
rat* eomotloo faetor determination. Immediately ana>
ly» tbe sample, as outlined In Sections 4.1.4 and 4.1.4,
for percent COi or percent Oi. If uceas ate is dostntd,
proceed a* follows: (1) immediately analyu the sampl*,
at In Sections 4.1.4 and 4.1.S, (or perosnt COi. OL and
CO; (2) determla* tb* percentage of the «at that la Ns
by snbtracting the sum of th* percent CO), percent Ot,
and percent CO from 100 peraant; and (3) calculate
percent excess air at outlined In Section ft.2.
4.1.4 To ensure complete absorption of th* COi, Os,
or If applicable, CO, mike repeated passes throngb. nacb
ftbeorblng solution until two consecutive readings ar*
the same. Several pasa«a (three or four) should b* mad*
between reading!. (If constant readings cannot b*
obtained alter three consecutive reading*, replace tb*
absorbing solution.)
4.1.4 After the analyst* Is completed, teak-cheek
(mandatory) the Orsat inalyter once again, as described
Jn Section J. For the result* of th* analysis to b« valid,
the Orut analyter mutt past this leak test t»fon ana
after the analysis. NTorc.—Sine* this single-point, grab
sampling and analytical procedure Is normally conducted
In conjunction with a single-point, grab sampling and
analytical procedure for a pollutant, only one analysto
li ordinarily conducted. Thrrtfon, great can must ba
taken to obtain a valid sample and analysis. Although
In moat ca**t only COi or Oi I* required. It li rwom.
mendad that both COi and Oi b* meamnd. and ths*
Citation 5 In tbe Bibliography b* u**d Us valldat* Uk»
> analytical data.
4.J dlnglft-Polnt, Intograted Sampling and Analytical
Procedun.
4.2.1 The sampling point In the duct shall be located
as specllVil In Section 4.1.1.
4.2.2 Lenk
tween readings. (It constant readings cannot b* obtain*!
after tbre* oonawutlv* readings, replaoa tb* abMfbtnf
solution.) .
4.2.« Repeat tb* analyiU until UM bOowini o««l»
are met:
4.2.4.1 For percent COt, repeat th* analytkal pro-
cedure, until th* retulu of any thre* analyse* differ by *•
more than (a) 0.3 percent by volume when COi Is irtttit
than 4.0 percent or (b) 0.2 pemnt by votom* when COt
Is let* than or equal to 4.0 peraut. Average th* three *»
ceptabl* varnet o* pereent COi and report th* ratnltiia
th* neareMO.l peroanL
4.2.U For paroentOt, repeat tb* anarytwal pfo*t4at»
unUl tb* ratulti of any tbn* analyse* dUwr by a* toam
VOL 4X, M&. 1*4—TNUMOAT, AU«at tw,.
D-24
-------
-JRH.ES AND IEGULAT1QNS
41771
<|»n (a) OJ parwnt b; vorome when Oi I* la* than IS 0
Bjrmnl or (t>> 0.2 p»rc*n< bv volume, when Qi U nmler
(teo 15 0percent. Arera«e lie thrw aomxrtablt vaJae* of
prowl Oi and raport UM multi to la* Marat 0.1
. Foe p«rc«iit CO, nfMt Uw aoaJvtioal proof-
ton until the raculu at any thrw analvmi dfflw by no
than O.t EwroMit Avwaft the thrw aooepuble.
of pvnot CO and report UM NBoUi to Uw
DrrwfWATion or Wocrmi
^1 pcroaol.
tl? After tb» «nalv«ls 1* completed, Wai-cheek
(BandiUrj) th» On*l analywrooc* Kiln, u «aund, and that Citation 5 m the Bibliography
^mHJ to validate the analytical data
II Multi-Point, Integrate*) Sampling and AoalyUoal
PlDoadurc.
O.1 Both the minimum numbw of aamplinf polnU
Vid the •impllng poiot location ioall b* u ip«cln«d ID
lection S.3.1 of thl£ melbod. Tbe u*e of fewer points ID»D
MdJtod y *ob)«ct to tb* ipprortJ of the AdjaloLrtrmUir
4JJ follow the proc«durw outliDeO In Sections C2 J
throuxh 4.2.7, except lor the loUoving Tr»TerB* til
MrBpuni polot« KDO Mjnplf ml kftch point for ftn equ&l
|u(tb oTtime. Baoord «un[xUas d*U u Jho» n ID Figure
»-J.
I. I«i-Ct Pro<»^*rf /or Or Ml Amtiitm
UoTlnf ao Orwt HQAlyler fr«qD«ntJy o&uses It to ta&k.
Therelore, in Or»»t »n»lyi«r tbould be thoroughly le&k-
tttacked on cite b«lbr« the Bue (is t&mple u Intxoduoed
totolt. The procedure for ta*k-ob«ckjni ao Orwt aamlyx«7
A.I.I Brine the Uqald level In eftcb plp^tt« ap to the
rtlereooe mjk on tbe oapiuary tubing and then dose the
plpett* itopoork
1.1.2 lUm tbe terellnf balb •nfficlenlly to brint the
eonnolnf liqujd meaiicus onto the (rrmduftted porUou of
the burette and then close the manifold uopcock.
ft. 1.8 Record tbe meniscus poslUon.
6.1.4 Observe tbe meniscus In Uie btirette and the
liquid level ID tbe pipette (or movement over tbe nert 4
minutes.
6.1. J For tbe Ormt analyw to p*« UK tak-ebeck,
tvo oondltloDj must b« met.
6.1.1.1 Tbe liquid level In each pipetU mnrt not fall
below the bottom of tbe capillary tubinf durini tbi<
4-mlnn te I n terval .
1.1.&.2 Tbe menlnni In the btmtu most not ohamje
by more than 0.2 ml during tbis 4- minute Interval.
t.l.t U tbe analyur falu the leak -check procedure, an
robber oonneotioa* and itopoccks iboula b< checked
nntll the cause ol the leak l» Identified. Leakini nopoocki
mu»t be dlmasembled, cleaned, and nfreased. Leaklnf
robber oonnectionfl moft be replaced. Alter tbe analyi«r
fa naasembled, tbe leak-cbeck procedure mull be
repeated.
Cl NomeixJatnre
J*/-Dry molecular »«l»bt.i/t-Baok (Ib,1b-moU).
. %EA»P«rtnn( excen air.
%OOi-P«ro»ni COiby volume (drr b*rii).
Oi«»P»roent Oi bv volume (drf baalsK
^O«Peroerit CO by voltune (ory basis).
s't-Paroent Ni by volume (dry t
W-Ratio of Oi to Ni LD air, v/v.
OJ80-Molecular w-eljhl of N,or CO, divided try JOO.
6.190- Molecular waif M of Oi divided by 100.
»,**0-Molecular watfbl of COi divided by MO.
$.2 Pejroent Eioe** Air Calculate the pffl-c*ru eseess
ftlj flf applicable), by iUb*lltuUaK tbe appropriate
values of perwntOs.CO.fcnd NI (obuJrwd from B«cdon
4.1.1 Of « 2 4) Into Equation »-l
%EA,
%O,-0.5%CO
100
1-264 %N,( %O,-0.5 %CO)
Equation 3-1
NOTT —The *qn&tlon above amiiini 11 thai ambient
air lj u»e-d a* the »ouroe of Oi and that the fuel does not
contain appreciable arooiLntj of Ni (aa do ooke ove.n or
blast fumaoe taAps) For Ihow ca«e« when appreciable
amounts of Ni are oreBrnl (ooal, oil. and natural iraa
do Dot oonlatn appreciable amounts of NI) or when
oarien enrtchjue.nl is osM, alternate mfttbodj;. wbject
to approval of tbe AdjulnLitrmtor, are required
OJ Dry Molecular Weight Ute Equation (-2 to
calculate the dry motacular w&lfht of tbe (tack fas
Equation 3-2
NOTI —The above equation doe« not aooslder arfon
lo air (about 00 p«roent, molecular veifbt of ff7 7).
A Degative error of about 04 percent la Introduced
Tbe tepUr may opt to Include argon in tbe analyBb using
procedure* aublect to approval of tbe Administrator
1. AlUbuQer A P. Btoraft of OaMB and Vapors In
Plaitlc Baits International Journal o( Aii and Waur
2. Conner, William D. and J. B. Nader. AJr Sampling
Plaatic BagB. Journal ot the American Industrial By-
(lene Araociallon. US)\-1S>1. 1»64.
V Barrel] Hanuul lor Oas Analy>t>, 8»vt«Jtb edition.
Surrell Corporation, 2Z23 Flftb Avanue, Pituburib,
Pa. 16218 1951.
4. Mitchell. W.I. and M. R. Mldietl. n«ld fijiUablUty
•/ tbe Orsat Analyur. Journal of Air PoilnUoo Cootrol
t. 8bif ehara, R T., R. M. Neulioht, end W. 8. Smith.
Valldadng Orsat Analyils Data from Fooil Fuel-Fired
BnlLs Btack Bampllnf Nev». ^(2)21-26. Aoput, l»7fi
1.1 FrUkdpVe A r« MmpW U citracttd at a
trnt* from Uw iwurc*, mot*Uirt ij fmmr>v*xl from Lh* t
and
IJ AppltcahflJty Thti method to appUcabk for
4*t*TTT] LaJ o/ lh« moLrturt oociani of Kack ji-
TV^ ja^>o*dur« are |1»en 7l>« ftrtt it t raterrno*
•wthod, tor aocurau determinatkmj of molnure oonifnt
(fl&cb u arc Dwd^d to eaJcuitle vmlMlon dau1 Thr
eeoond U an approilmatlon meihcxJ. which prcndf*
of pert* n I moLnurr to aid In *ettln4 uokmfuc
raws prior u> a pollutant soul**! on ro*»*uri*-
run Tbe »pproilmaiion m«tho<3 de*chb*<3 herein
b only a iu()te«iT>d approach, aK*raaLlTt m*>-
«i*Jy vltb t pollutant «Di»km meAJiirement run, when
H L*. oaiculauon of parotm L*okln*tlc. poUutani amlarion
rate, etc , tor tbe run aoail bv b**ed upon tbt> re*ulu> of
tb* rfifcrpnce melhod or lu equlTaleoi. the»e oaicuiationj
aoall noi be based upon the re*uJu of the approujnalton
method, onJe» thr approximaUon method U abown. to
tbe sattalariion of ibc Adjnloistraior. V 8 EnTironiDen-
taJ Protection Afency, 10 b* capable of fleJdJOf rwuJu
wlthJn 1 percent BrO of tbe referenc* method
NOTE — Tbe refertnce method may yVeld queetiooabW
nruJt! vb«n apphod to •aturmU^l (u vtmuDJ or to
•treamj that oonLaJn w»ter dropl*t.i TbereJorc when
tbeee> cotidltlon* exIM or arr »u»peirLfd. a aecond dei«--
miaatJon of the moisturr content thai) be made nmul-
taneoualy with the relerenr* method, as (oliowi AJwiune
tbat the fas ertreajB Li Miuraind Attach a temperaiurv?
•enaor [oapablf of meajrunn^ u> »]° C (2* F)| to tbe
raferenre method probe Measure U« itark n» tempera-
ture. at eftcb travane point (ie* Section 221) during tbe
rvterenoe method tracers? caJrulaU tbe averfeftf rta^ k
fu teraperatiire Netrt. determine tbe motrture pen^nt-
•gc. eltner by. (1) nslng a prycbrometric chart and
y**V-ing appropriate oorrrcUonj U vtack preaEure. U
dWerent (rom that of the cb*rt, or (2) tnlni mturauon
Tftpor pre^nin; table* lu cases wbare tbe peychrometnc
chart or tbe iaturation rapor prM5ure table* are not
Applicable (b«aed on eraJuauon of Uve proc«cs), alleraaU
method!, tub)ect to tbe appro r*J of tbe AdmlniAraXor,
'
Tbe proosdur* 4Mcrfbed tn Method 5 lor determinint
a»»ljtur» content Is acceptable ai a r%JereJic* OMthod
t-1 Afpftratiu A KaemaLic of tbe mmpllnc train
•ad In Ibis raieraiio* metbod LJ abown tn Ftfurv 4-1.
All components abail b* nmlnt*Jn*d and f*librmted
to tbe prooadort outlined Ln Method &
VOi. -41, MO.
I, «977
-------
EUUf ANB REGUlATIONf.
FILTIR
fEITHER IN STACK
OR OUT Of STACK)
STAC*
WALL
CONDENSER-ICE BATH SYSTEM INCLUOINO-
SILICA GEL TUBE —y
AIR-TIGHT
PUMP
Figure 4-1. Moisture sampling train-reference method.
11.1 Probe Th« probe )i constructed o( stalnlen
•tmi or sJaM tubing, sufficiently heated to prevent
wator condensation, and Is equipped with » filter, either
In-iuck (e.f., > pluf of (laat wool inserted Into the fad
tt Vh» probe) or heated out-rtack («-f., w described In
Method 8), to remove paniculate matter.
When stack conditions permit, other metals or plaatio
to blng m»7 be used to th« probs, subject to the approval
of th« Administrator.
IIJ Condenser. Th« condenser consist* o< tool
toapingCTS connected la seriee with ground glan, leak-
tree fittings or any similarly teak-free non-contaminating
fitting*. The Am, third, and tounh implngers shall b*
of the Oreeuburg-Snuth design, modified by replacing
the tip with t 1.3 oentimett* !H Inch) ID tlaa tab*
extending to about 1.3 cm (M In.) Irom the bottom at
tin flaik. The lecond implnger shall be of the Oreenbuif-
Smllh design with the standard tip, Modification* (e.g.,
using flexible connections between the impingers, using
mataruJs other lhan glaas. or using fleilble vacuum line*
to connect the niter holder to ibe roadenser) may b»
used, subject to the approval of the Administrator.
The •first two Impincen shall contain known volume*
•I wtur, the third shall be empty, tnd the fourth shall
contain a known weight of ft- to 16-meab indicating typ*
falioa gel, or equiTtient deftocact. II th« silica gel haft
been prerloualy used, dry at 17»* C IJW F) for 2 boon.
New liilci gel may tx uied w re«elT«L A thennotnetar,
capable of meanrlng temperature to within I* C (f F),
thai] be placed »t the ouUct of the lourth Unplngtr, tac
monitonnK purpoAec.
AlternAtlvely, any system msr b« o*e4 <*qb)aQi t«
the Approril of the Adminlatntor) that cooto tn* sampto
KU stream and aiiows measorem«at ol boUa th« wfttaf
that hai be*n oondenaed and the moUton learlnfl th«
condenser, eeteh to within 1 ml or 1 g. AcccptobU meaa*
are to meuon UM condenod water, either grmrt*
metrically or TotaiD«tr1cai}y, and to meaftin the mota»
ton learlnf Uw eoodetus by: (1) mooltorini UM
temperature and pi amm At tha exit ol to* oonaanaar
uid uatng Dalton'B law of partial pnoorw, at (2)
th« sample rat stream through a tared silica gel (or
equivalent deaiccant) trap, with exit guta kept below
20° C (08* F). and determining, the weight gala.
II means other than suioa gelare used to determine tba
amount of moisture leaving the condenser. Ik Ls recom*
mended that silica gel (or equivalent) still be used be-
tweeo the condenser ryst«m and pump, to prerent
moisture condensation In the pomp and meterlnc
dericM and to avoid the need to maie oorrectiotu tor
moisture In the met«red roluma.
2.1.) Cooling System. An loe bath container and
crushed Ice (or equivalent) an used to aid In condensing
moil ton.
2.1.4 Metering System. This system Includes a vac-
uum gauge, leak-tree pump, thermometers capabl* of
measuring temperature to within 3* C (5.4° F), dry rat
meter capable of measuring volume to within 2 percent,
and related equipment ai shown in Figure 4-1. Other
metering systems, capable of maintaining a constant
sampling rate and determining sample gai volume, may
be used, subject to the approval of the Administrator.
2,1.0 Barometer. Mercury, aneroid, or other barom-
eter capable of measuring atmospheric pressure to within
2.A mm Hg (0.1 in. Qg) may be used. In many caiefl, tha
barometric reading may be obUiined from a nearby
national weather service station, in which case the sta^
tlon value (which 14 the absolute barometric pressure)
shall be rcqueeted and an adjustment tor elevation
dlfferencee between the weather station and tbe sam-
pling point shall be applied at a rate of minus 2.S mm Hf
(01 In. Hg) per 30 m (100 ft) elevation increase or rto»
vena (or elevation decrease,
3.1.8 Graduated Cylinder and/or Balance. Theea
lUnu an used to meaiure condensed water and mobtur*
caught In the silica gel to within 1 ml or OJ g. Graduated
cylinder* shall have subdlvlslont no greater than 1 mL
Moat laboratory balances ore capabU of weighing to to*
nearett 04 g or last. Then balance* an lullabla tar
UM ben.
2.1 Pnmhm. The feuowlnc procedure b written tar
a -rm'ltnnr sr*t*m (such a* the Implngar sysUm de>
scribed in 3«ction 2.1.2) incorporating volumetric analy-
sis to measure the condensed moisture, and silica gel and
gravimetric analysis to measure the moisture leaving the)
condenser.
2.2.1 Unless otherwise specified by the Administrator,
a minimnm of eight traverse polnta shall be used foe
circular stacks having diameters leas than 0.61 m (24 In.).
a minimum of nine points shall be used for rectanfolir
stack* having equivalent diameten lee* than O.A1 •
(24 in.), and a minimum of twelve travers points shall
be used In all other case*. Tbe traverse points shall be
located according to Method 1. The use of fewer point*
is aubject to the approval of the Administrator. Select •
suitable probe and probe length such that all traven*
points can be sampled. Consider sampling from op posit*
tide* of the stack (four total sampling ports) for large
stacks, to permit use of shorter probe lengths. Mark tn*
probe with heat resistant tape or by aome other method
to denote the proper distance Into the stack or duct tar
each sampling point. Place knovra volume* of water la
the first two impingers. Weigh and record the weight ol
the silica gel to the nearest 0.5 g, and transfer the slliejk
gel to the fourth implnger; alternatively, the silica get
may first be transferred to the implnger, and the weigM
of the silica gel plus impinger recorded.
2.2.3 Select a total sampling time such that a mint
mum total fat volume of O.oO sera (21 xi) will b* oai>
lected, at a rate no greater than 0.021 rn'/uun (0.73 ctmk
When both moisture content and pollutant emission raB
an to be determined, the moisture determination IhM
be simultaneous with, and for the same total length ai
time M. the pollutant emlatlon rate run, uolesaotherwlaa
specified In an applicable subpart of the staodarda.
condenser; allow Urn* for the Umperaton* to rtalHtaai
Place crushed loe In the loe bath container, It la reopay
mended, but not required, that a l*ak ebeok b* ooaa, •*
follows: Dlaoonnect tb* protM from tba arat laplafat**
FBMfiM tfOOTiiX VQI. «V NO. Uft—THWBOJrT, AUQtOC ]«, 1
D-26
-------
«O12S AND RfGULATK>NS
41773
fliapplloabl*) from tb«flH*r bold«v Pli* Ui e tiJ«t to UM
StumpImw (of an*r boldv) UM) poIJ a MO mm (16 to.)
HI radium. » lowv Tacuum mat tx aj*i, prtrrld*d tbal
Jill DO! eioepdfcd during Lb« wt A Uaiafe rate ID
3 of 4 percent or tbe a^arat* mnpllof r»U or 0.00067
(0 02 dm), vblcbevftr Li WM, U on*oo«pl»bl«
' * i£»*ct Lb* prob« to Ui*
.. -"train.
J 4 LHirtrn UM mnpunf run, muntun \ »mp 11114
t 10 parownt ot oorut^nt rmt«, or M vpeotfied by
lb» A4minl*tr»tor For **cb run, noonj tb« d&t« r»-
•ulr»d on UM u&mpl* tbr
~~
LI
Flfun 4-1 ) and onlculftU UM moljtorr
In
tt* kCQULnd d»U. Eouod oC
tton
rond
ftrukl oklcult-
(•CATItm.
I HO..
MIIIErr TOITERATUM-
MMMETRIC raCSURE_
r*OU LEBtTX >(*!)
.
•MUMPlt TBft»E«»TUHE
AT B*Y MI METUt
•arr
rr«j.»cm
•
*
-------
41774
RUlH ANOF REGULATIONS
INITtM.
1U NestteoLatara. ' ~
S«-Proportioo of watoi vapor, by volunu, la
the gu rtream,
Mm- Molecular weight at water. 18,0 j/j-mole
(18.0lb/lb-mole).
PM«Absolut« preasnn (lor thU method, sam*
u barometrlcpretiun) at the dry g M mete*
mm Hg (In. EJg).
Pwj™ Standard abaoluU preesor*, 760 mm HI
(29.93 In. Hg).
J7-Ideal KM oonttent, 0.00231 (mm Hg) (m*)/
(g-mole) (°K) for metric QnlU and 21.84 (In.
Hg) (ff)/(ib-mole) (°R) for English unlta.
T.- Absolnte temperature at meter, *K (°R).
T*t~ Standard abaolut* temperalun, 2M* K
(52T R).
Vm- Dry gu volume meararoit by dry gal meter,
dom (dot).
AK»» Incremental dry ga* volume meanmd by
dry (at meter at each Inverse point, don»
(dcO.
V.(M<)~Dry fm voJum* meaturad by the dry ga*
,, ~meter, oometed to staadard condltioaa,
' ~
14. J
dsom (dao' , ~
(«<>— Vamme o< water vapor condensed correeted
to standard condition*, som (scl). —
iatt -Volnm* of water vapor collected In aUlco
gel cometed to standant condition*, sea
(sal).
V/ - Final volume of condenser water, mL •
V,- Initial volume, U any, of condenser wafer,
mL
IT, -Final weight of allies gel or silica gel pint]
Implngtr, gs
ITi-Inltlal weight o< silk* gel or silk* gel plo*
implnger, g.
V-Dry gu meter calibration factor.
r.- Density ol water, O.Mtt g/ml (0.0002m
Ib/ml).
Volume of water vapcc-eondeosed.
=/r,(v>-r.)
Equation 4-1
where:
£\—O.QOl3& mVml for metric onlta
-0.04707 rt'/ml far English nnltt
t.t.t Volume at water vapor collected In silica geL
„ (Wf-W<)RTtli
Equation 4-2
-17 « '
fcun Hg fcr melrfc uiilU
a. Hf tor English anin
No™.— H th* pott-tet* leak mtt (Seotlon 7.2 » *»•
ceede UM allowable rmU, correct the rain* of V, la
Equation 4-4, at described In 3«etlon » I o< Method i~
3.3.4 Moiaturs Content.
j (til)
'/i fer metric anlta
-0.047U ff/gtar English anlt»
34.4 Sample gu volume.
Equation 4-4
N'OTt.—fn saturated or moisture droplet-laden gas)
streams, two calculations of the moisture content of the)
stack gae shall be made, one using a value baaed upon
the saturated conditions (see Section 1.2), and mother
based upon the result* of the implnger analyata. Tbe>
lower of these two valuea of Bm shall be considered cor-
rect.
2.3 a Verification of constant sampling rale. For each
time Increment, determine the AK_ Calculate the)
averti*. If the value for any time Increment differs from
the average by more than 10 percent, reject toe result*
and repeat the ran.
3. Apprazinutin \ttOwt
The approximation method described below la pre-
sented only at a suggested method (see Section 1.2).
3.1 Apparatus.
3.1.1 Probe. Stainless steel or glass tubing, sufficiently
heated to prevent water condensation and equipped
with a Qlter (either In-slack or heated out-stack) to re-
more particulate matter. A plug of glass wool. Inserted
into the end of the probe, Is a satisfactory Biter.
3.1.2 Impingers. Two midget Implngen, eacb with
30 ml capacity, or equivalent.
3.1.3 Ice Bath. Container nd Ice, to aid In condens-
ing moisture In implngen.
3.1.4 Drying Tube. Tube packed with new or re-
generated ft- u> It-mesh indicating-type silica gel (or
equivalent deekcaat), to dry the sample gu and to pro-
tect tile meter and pump.
3.1.5 Valve. Needle valve, to regulate the sample gss>
flow rate.
3.1.a Pump. Leak-free, diaphragm type, or equivo-
lent, to pull the gu sample through the tralnv
3.1.7 Volume meter. Dry gu meter, soflUlently ac-
curate to measure the sample volume wtthin 2%, and
calibrated over the range of flow rates and oondltiona
actually encountered during sampling.
3.1.8 Rate Meter. Rotameter, to measure the flow-
range from 0 to 31 pm (0 to 0.11 eta).
3.1.9 Graduated Cylinder. 25 mL
3.1.10 Barometer. Mercury, aneroid, or other baronv-
eter, u described In Section J.I.5 above.
3.1.11 Vacuum Oauge. At least 780 mm Hg (30 In.
Hg) gauge, to be used lor the sampling leak cheek,
3.J Procedure.
3.3.1 Place eiactly 5 ml distilled water In each Im-
pinger. Assemble the apparatus without the probe u
shown in Figure 4-4. Leak check the train by placing a
vacuum gauge at the inlet to the first Implnger and
drawing a vacuum of at least 250 mm Hg (10 to. Hg),
plugging the outlet of the rotameter, and then turning
off the pump. The vacuum shall remain constant for at
east one minute. Carefully release th* vacuum gaugsk.
Ibefore unplugging the rotameter end.
. HO. i«o—THUISBAY,
D-28
-------
$ ftNO IFCUIATIONS
"41775
HEATED PROBE
\
SILICA GEL TUBE
I
i
•M^H
r
MIDGET IMPINGERS
PUMP
Figure 44. Moisture sampling train - approximation method.
LOCATION.
TEST
COMMENTS
DATE
OPERATOR
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE
CLOCK TIME
.
•
GAS VOLUME THROUGH
METER, (Vm),
m3 (ft3)
RATE METER SETTING
m3/min. (ft3/min.)
METER TEMPERATURE.
CC (°F)
i
-
Figure 45. Field moisture determination • approximation method.
-------
4177*
RUL8S ANO- •EOWATIOf*
SJLJ Connect til* profe* Insert It Into th« rtaok, an*}
nanpl* at s eomtant rat* oi 2 1pm (0.071 otm). Contlnnev
sampUnf until tbs dry gat meter reglaten about W
ateri(U ft") or until vWbl* Uqold droplets are carried
ova? from the firm tmplnger to tbe second. Record
temparatcre. preiiiair*, tod dry ga* mater reading* a*'
3A» After collseUng th* auapl*, eombia* th* ectv
Uota ol UM tva tapio(«n uid meonn lb« Toioau to tte
ne*rat0.8mL
it Caloul»Uon*. Th* calculation method prevented to
designed ta eetlmMe tb* mol*tur* IB tbe tuck gt*;
thereto*, other data, which are only Decenary for ee-
ear*** moUtan determination*, an not collected. The)
foll*wlzig eqnatktn* adequately «0tlm»U tb* motatnre
mcuot, tof UM parpen ol detMmlnln« UokinxJc aia-
pllnj rate nttlncL
i-i.1 Nom«nclator%.
B.o-Approilm»t» proportloB, \>r TOloro*, ol
wmttr rapor In tb* CM itreun l«*Ttnf
second Impinge, 0.02&
^- wmr T»p« In UM jus itraa, projMrtlae by
rf mt«, U.O c/l-mot*
(I8.01b/lb-mol«)
Pa-AbaotaU preoon (tar toll a«tbod, MOM a*.
b&romclrlo praamn) «t tb* dry u* mct«r.
J».w- Standard absolute proatraa, 7(0 mm Hf
(29.M In. HI). _
R— Ideal (U ooniUat, O.OBa* (mm Hf) (m
° and 21
(•-mote) (°K) foe metrlo nnlU
(In. HO cm/Ib-mol*) (°B) lor
T.
7M<
V>=
Vd»I
,
Abaohit* tampantDn at metw, *C (*R)
8tandvd abaolnt* Umptraton, 2ST I
(52T B)
Ftaatl TOhmM «t Implnccr cestcnti, mL
Inltljhl Tobun* of ImplTLfftr eontfiixtt, mL
F.™ Dry ru Tommc nuatond by dry (M auUr;
dom (d«f).
V»(iu)»Dry (a* Totmu meafond by dry gat metar.
oorraettd to rundard condluoaa, dMB
Idaof).
V«.(.u>**Volam« of water rapor eondennd, «gmet«a1
to standard condition*, son (set).
T. 0.9983 sMl (0.003301 Ib/ml).
Equation 4-5
O.Otin* m>/ml lor metric unite
0.0*707 ftVml tor EngUjb nnlta.
Equation 4-6
"K/rnm Eg for metric onita
-17.M 'B/tB. Eg for Engllaii ontta
Eqoatioa 4-7
4.1 for tb* reformat method, allbrat* equipment M
tpecloed In tb* following atctloni of Method 8: Section ».»
(meterln* syitem); Beetlon J.S (temperatnn (ante*);
and Section 9.7 (barometer). Tb* recommended leak
cbeck o/ the metertnf lynem (Section 5.8 of Method •)
alao appllet to the reterenc* method. For tb* approxlmo
Uon method, OM the prooedurw ontllned In Section 5.1.1
of Method • to callbrat* tb* mettrlng syitem, and tlM
prooednn o< Method », S*eUoa 6.7 M ailbrmt* UM
barometatv
1. Air Pollution Enflneertci Manual (Beoond Edition).
DanlelMB, /. A. (ed.). U.S. EnTlronmental Protecdoo
Agency, Offle* of Air Qoaltty Planning and Standard*.
Rraecrcb TrUngl* Park, N.C. PubUoation No, AP-*8,
1»7».
3. DeTorkm, Homrd, «t al. Air Pollution Soon* Te*V
Ing ManoaL Air Pollntion Control Dlatrlet, La* Angola*,
CtUl. November, 19M.
3. Method* (or Determination of Velocity, Votamav
Doit and Mlat Content ol OtM*. Wattem Pradplutloa
DlYldon of Joy Manafactarlng Co., Lot An«>i««. Calif.
Bulletin WP-JO. im,
mmidRnioii or riBncuun KHUOOICS
FROM BtiisONi*! Sotxci*
1.1 PrtoclpK Partiealaia matty to withdrawn 1m-
Unatically from til* soure* and colleoted oo a g'aai
fiber altar maintained at a temperature In the range of
12O±H« C (24S±2S* F) or such other temperature *•
speclnad by an applicable subpart ol tba standard* or '
approved by tbe Admlnl*trator, U.S. EnYlronmenMk
Proteetloa Agency, (or a particular application. Th»
partteiilat* ma**, which Inclode* any material that
condenae* at or above tbe al&adon temparatare, •*
determined gnTtmetrlaally after ramom of ilnmmMi»i
W*I*T.
1 J Applicability. Thie method I* appUeable fer tbe>
determination of particulat* emlssloni tram lUtknary
aooreei.
2. Appmtmt
11 Sampling Train. A schemata ol tb* sampttnf
train oaad In thl* method 1* shown bi Figure 5-1. Com-
plete construction detail* are jiren In APTD-OMt
(Citation 2 In Section 7); commercial model* of tnir
train are alio available. For change* from APTD-Osn
and for allowable modlAcatlon* of the train ibown la
Flgor* 5-1, see toe following subetction*.
Tbe operating and malotenanoe procednn* for UM
aampllng train are described In APTD:O67« (Citation t
In Section 7). Since correct usage 1* Important In obtain-
ing valid result*, aJQ oaen should reexl APTD-0878 and
adopt tb* operating and maintenance procedure* out-
lined In it, unleei otherwise specified herein. Tbe »am-
pllng train conslit* of tbe following component*:
4t, M,, >«•—IMUMBAV,
D-30
-------
tUWXATOWS
•err:
¥p»>
ERATURESENSOR
rTTJJTTUBE
~1KOBE
TBpVERATURE
KNSOB
WOBE /M STACK
V-/ [>-
REVERSE TYPE
HTOTTUBE
TRAIN efTfONAL.WAY 8E P«Er»tACEO
lYANEOUIVAlENTCOKDENSER
CHECK
VALVE
VACUUM
ilNE
\
VACUUM
CAUCE
THERMOMETERS
fcflY.ASWETER AIRTJGJHT
^jp
m*l!N VALVE
Figure 5 1. J*arUcutate-ttmplkig train.
•*» fUel ()U) er flM with
.a«rj>, kpm) haillni edge. Th* aa«le of taper iball
fe SID* and the taper ataall b» oo th* ouuld* to pnecrte
temtaol tnternaldlarattfr Th« proble noule thai! be
at thi bcttcro-book or elbow dWrn, onleei otherwise
•wdJ&ed bj the Administrator. I/ mad* of Rainier*
•Mi, the Doule shall be oomtructed from saamleai w b-
aar other material! of oomtrucucra may a» and, sab)ect
% tbe approval of tbe Administrator.
A range of naule stae* suitable tor l"""r****f ^n»pli"f
*ould be eTailabie, K., OJ2 to U7 em (H to H ln.>—
• kviw U hither Tolum« ««inpi*i»f traira an m*»a—
Mde diameter (ID) coiilel In tncnmwa of Q.U em
(fci la.), Kecb noai* shall b« aallbrated aaaanttoc to
: Be preaedani outlined in Section 6.
II. J Probe Liner. Boroailicate or quvtx (}MB tnbinf
U Uu alt wd dann( mmpiinj oTiatbtH0 C
f ), er neb Mber t*n>peratun M tpKLted by
-— y opt tooparmte lb* •qulpiiMOt.it»Umpcrmture
tonr HUB Out upcci^d.) Since Lhf *ctxuU tasmmnture
«tb»ouU*< of the probe ti not iwu-Ux mooltona darlnf
•mpllnj. probM oooitruct*d fcooardinj to APTD-0681
ftft<1 DOiiuin tb« tmUbrmQofi earr*. of APTD-067. (or
«lJbnu the »ppnyr»j ol tbe Admini*-
T^P ftolXminx tKnptriUxm t>r borodlicifti*) !•
; Q#r F). and'far qTmni U u 1 fa • C V,TK? F)
t praciicaJ, vr«ry aflon should b* made to B*»
t or ojDara rlaas prob* ttnerv A-rlenieulvely.
\- I . tlf iril-'-r PteeJ Inootoy 826 ' or other
m«a^t Bpetali} *"*^t* of aaem^eH mhtr>^ may
I oaad, sob>*c. 14 ttM approraJ at Lh« A dmlnlxtralor
t-U Pltol Tab* Trpe B, ai iaaolbed In Secttoo 2 1
• Method 2. er ether etna apprtrr*d by DM Admlnl*-
' Tbe pltet cube Aall b* ulecDed to Ikejjrot* i*i
> 4SoAy tte
U«tloc eJ tnwk r»m«i or ^ndflc prcxtocu doM oat
by t^* XnrlrcfXiDiaUA} Frot«o-
plan* of the pilot «nb«
b* Trp* B pilot
*ffi
ob« afaall be mo with or abort tbe tac tenperatore to alBloi F C V F) -
•t&l may U o«ed.
t.1.7 Oocdwer. Tb» faUowltu »ra*3i tSjifl bt and
t> fcnimita the Keek fa* naoutum BpaWEt: Fair
tapuaon nnnrnraod In Mrtei with lemfc-lrae cmind
|lus fltuiip or any similar k*ai-trte DOo-«anlamInaUa(
Bt^"ir" Tbe am, third, and (oonh Implnfen **>aJi b*
«l the OfMnburt-6mJib djaifn Bodlned by noUelnf
tax up viUi 1J UD CH In.) ID |iec lob* •ncndinc lo
About LJ cm CH In.) Crom the bottom of U>e Aaak.. Tbe
oaoood bmpti^er aball b* »f the Or«anburi-&iilLrj dealgo
Ibf et*odArd tip. UodlnaaJJooi '* | oMnf flexible
lim '• MBI the LmpiAgerv oa^ot
•Our tbac I'LMI *r u«a» flexible racuam Uo«
tfce oit*r it^rf** to lh* oonderjaer) nuy be QJ*d r
lo the approval •' Uke Admlnlnrator . Ttx fim and
••ocmd lni(.«tn«n aball *ooi*Jn known qoanuua ol
w»ter (Becilcm C1J). the third (ball be tmpty and th*
feonb abAlJ oonialn a tnowc «r«ijhi of «U
tared dlloa icl (or aqmnlerjl desiooanU trap
It ftam kept b*brw Sr C (•* T) and detem
a
mi
with
rtetarmlrlnt
ttam kept
(ain.
I/ neani other Man wOtm |*i ar» «a»d to ilalaalnu
l at maoKan haavlnc tte anriiianier. It U
ttet alllrja |«l (or «iulT»let)0 attll b*
•••MJ l"'4 • aau the orjodeaw tyvbu and pomp to pmect
moUture ooodooaUOE to la* pomp and Beurlnf drrton
•ad toa*old tbtoaad to aaa*« eorraoUm lor auattor* In
•Ih* meUnd vohuna.
Mori — II a doUnntnattiD trf the partteilen aanir
«oll«ote<] In tha Lrjrpixnon to (iealrad to addlUoo W noU-
tan oontanl. tb4 lmpln|er ryuam described aber« aball
to Bead. wlthoDl Bodlnoatioo. ladlridoai Buua or
••Qtral attcoiB nqolrlni tho InJomnuJoo anail b*
emlaetad M U) tbe aaple naunij ajtd afMOjtai *i tbe
bnpfnfer oonunu.
tlJ Uelertnt »7»lem. VaoaoD Bare, taal-trw
yump, thtrmnm«1en oapable of m«a»anoi Mmperatun
is wlihln f C (!> 4*F),dry(ai m*ur capable of meaaurlnt
walome to wlLtic t paroacu aod ralaied
•bcwr, tn F1(un »-l. Other naterlnf
malnUklnJof atrnpllnt nua within 10 percent of too-
and a^ dFUrmlalA( auopit Toiam*> lo within i
t nay Iw UMd, aubjeol u> th* aprjrjTaJ ol the
ur. Vban Ik* Baurtaf 1711*10 U aaed In
•oajuocuoo wltb a pilot tsba. La* qrttam (ball (Bable
•tMckj al IcokiDetlc rait*.
n-~ rMr< mini nlllir1ni»at arl nirrrt amir] aUxpafl fcr
fctgeer flcrw ruet Uui thai doaerlbed In AJTD-OiSJ or
APTD-067e may b* OMd pnrleW UMi La*
4tons &i ^ Mr aaj^hfid art otaL
£.1.9 n.~~.... w ----- y --- ^ trf
«apable of maMurlni aLmaepberic pnasun to within
t-6 mm HI (0.1 In Rji In macy earn, the baromttrlo
,
may b« obtained Cnrm a nearby o*ttoaa] weather
Aauon, In whlob OBM Uw itatioc rain* (which I*
wwwwtr, mwtffr
-------
ilKIS AND MIOULATtONS
the abeoiuw bsotBatria is-aaars) aS»B ba r«qaraM! oat
an adjustmsm fgr «!®vMl«B dlfiowwas l»tw»en to*
w«»U» station tAd sMBplieg £«*nt shall b« applied tt »
r»t* os aJaa 13 mm Hg (0.1 la. Hg) par 30 a» (100 ft)
f loraHsffl Inma** car « approval of to* Administrator.)
9.2 Sampfe a««w«?y. Ttes foOowtntr ItHBa M«
r«(tBti»nn«alr«4totk*iM^
. 8«M M Mt •
Derieawt. Aohydrooj eatatora nUtto, IndJea*.
lot typ*. Altenutlvelr, other tnm of dedceant* ma; b*
usad, fubjor* ta tto» appront ol tb* Admlniitrattr.
32.! ProHtos-Uner tad Probs-Norato Brush**. Kyiad
brtstks brashea with jtainleaB 3t**l win handle*. Tb*
probs brosb shall hav* extsndons (at toast a* long M
tb» probe) oi rtainlses steal, Nylon, Teflon, or similarly
in«rt materiel. Tb» bruahe* shall b* properly sited And
sh&ped to brush out tbs probe liner and no**J*>
2.2.2 Wart Bottle*— Two. Glass waah bottle* an
reooELtaandsiS; polyethylene wash bottle* may be used
us, tha opttoD ol the tefrwr. It la recommended that aceton*
not b* stared. to polyethylene bottba lot tongor then ft
mon&M.
2 3.8 aiass Stmplt 8teas» ContdiMn. ChemlaJlf
razlstant, boroKlllcat« ti»" bottlo, lot acetone wsabm,
MO ml or 1000 ml. Bcrav c»p linen shall either be rubber-
backed Teflon us1 snail tra oomtroctad co u to be leaker**
and resijftsot Co chemical ftttsck bv antoo«. (Namnr
mouth cletB bottlei have 'MSB found to be lex pron* to
tefitafjis.) AU«rn»t!'?a!T, poljatbyloi* botUe« may b*
used.
2 2.4 Fetri Dlsltes. Foi Mt«f samples, cla* or polA-
ethyleiM, unJ«a otlMrvin ipteiiM bjr UM Admln-
tetntof.
3.2.6 OraaSuisiwI CjUnd«f aad/or Belcac*. To meair
on MoAmewJ vat«r to withto 1 ml or 1 (- areduat«£
cTllDdera stutll h&n subdlTtaiani no greater than 2 nd.
Moat luboratasT balancaa s,™ capable oi weighing to th»
nearect 0.9 s or \et». An; o! tbeaa balanoM U suluble fcr
ua9 here asm In 3«ctloa 2.3.4.
2 2 .6 FlacUe 8torag» Cca^ians. AU-UgJrt omtataoc
t» store silica get
3J.7 FunjMt! aod Babba? Folkvnaau To kM ix
traoiw of slUon gal to container; no* meoMnar U sUta*
je! bt welghiHl In tb« SoM.
2.2J Fimjist. Qtaw ex pst^UilaM, to &M In nmpto
recowry.
2.8 Aaslj«tB. For ssn«Jy^», tfes toDowlnf eqalpmsat to
2.8.1 Olaes Weishtef DW6S6.
23J DaskcfiJ.tw.
3.S.S AnaJjtlta! B»itea«s»J'o mewura ta withls 0.8
nl^.
2.3.4 Batesss. Te measrafu to wlUnSn OJ j,
2.S.8 Bes^rs. 260 ml
2.3.8 HrpTjiaffiw To mee«ro UM rolatlm humidity
8$ UM tsboratory aaslronmcat.
Tempermt^;^ Ofiues< To meaoaire the temp«ra>
In amgtilnt sra
a. Rattfste
8.1 8&£9&&bs*^ Tbd
J.I.I FihVsn. QlMffi fifev fitter*, without
binder, exhibiting at le»*t 8».*S psroent efficiency (, be used. SomotteMS. guppllert trantiar
to glca bonks Erora metal contain*?*-, tbM,
oo» bl&akii ituUl to ran prtss te field out and ooly
tociMM with low bl*ate Tdaw <<(Uffl p*nMDt) shaU^b*
". In Effl CSBS atiaij e blaaJi ram* of greater tout f
4.1 SampUog. Th* complexity of thlf method I* snekr
that. In order to obtain reliable remit*; tetter* ibonld b*
trained and experienced with th* te*t procedure*.
4.1.1 Pretest Preparation. AH the component* anal
b* maintained and calibrated according to the procedure;
described in APTD-0479, onlen otherwise specified.
herein.
Weigh several 200 to MOr portions of silica gel In air-tight
container* to tbe nearest o.i g. Record the total weight of
th* silica gel pin* container, on each container. As aa
alternative, tbe silica gel need not be prewelghed, btrt
may b* weighed directly In It* implnger or sampling
bolder lust prior to train assembly.
C neck filters visually against light tor Imgnlaritle* and
fiaw* or plnhol* leak*. Label niters of the proper diameter
on the back side near the edge using numbering mac bin*
Ink. As an alternative, label the shipping container*
(glow or plastic petri dishes) and koep the niters In these
container* at aD time* except during sampling and
weighing.
Deeiccau the filters tt 20±8.«* C («8=fclO* F) and
ambient presrar* for at least 24 boon and weigh at in-
terval* of at lean 6 hours to a constant weight, I.e.,
<0.5 mg change (ram prevtou* weighing; record remit*
to the nearest 0.1 mg. During each weighing the filter
must not be exposed to the laboratory atmosphere (or e
period greater than 2 minute* and a relative humidity
above M percent. Alternatively (unless otherwise speci-
fied by the Administrator), the nlten ma; b* oven
dried at 106* C (220* F) for 2 to S boors, desiccated for 2
boor*, and weighed. Procedure* other than thoa* de-
scribed, which aeeount for relative humidity effect*, may
be used, subject to the approval of the Administrator.
4.1.2 Preliminary- Determination*. Select tbe sam-
pling site and the minimum number of sampling point*
according to Method 1 or as specified by the Administra-
tor. Determine the stack pressure, temperature, and th*
range of velocity heads using Method 2; It is recommended
that a leak-check of the pilot lines (see Method 2, Sec-
tion 3.1) be performed. Determine tbe moisture content
using Approximation Method 4 or it* alternative* (or
the purpose of making Isotlnetic sampling rate settings.
Determine the stack gas dry molecular weight, u des-
cribed In Method 2, Section 3.8; if. Integrated Method a
sampling is used for molecular weight determination, th*
Integrated bag sample shall be taken simultaneously
with, and for the same total length of time m, the par-
tlculate sample run-
Select a nozzle size based on the range of velocity head*,
such that It Is not necessary to change the nozile size In
order to maintain isoklnetlo sampling rate*. During the
ran, do not Chang* the nozzle size. Ensure that tb*
proper differential pressure gauge Is chosen (or the range
ol velocity head* encountered (see Section 2J2 ol Method
2).
Select a suitable probe liner and probe length soeb that
an traverse point* can b* sampfsd. Tor large stack*
consider sampling from oppoelt* side*, it the stack to
reduce the length of probe*.
Select a total sampling time greater than or equal to
the minimum total sampling tlm* specified in toe test
procedure* (or the speolAo Industry such that (1) th*
sampling time per point is not lee* than 2 mln (or some
greater time interval a* specified by tb* Administrator).
and (2) the sample volume taken (corrected to standard
conditions) will eiceed the required minimum total ga*
sampl* volume. Th* latter 1* based on an approximate
average sajnpling r»u>
It i* recommended that tha number of minute! Sana-
plod at eacb. point b* an Integer or an Integer pin* oo*>
haif minut*, in order to avoid timekeeping error*.
In some circumstance*, e.g., batch cycles, it ma; be)
necessary to sample for shorter time* at th* traverse
points and to o4>t«in smaller ga* sampi* volume*, la
these case*, the Administrator1! approval mu*t Orel
be obtained.
4 1.3 Preparation of Collection Train. During prep-
aration and aswmbly of tb* sampling train, keep all
opening* where contamination can occur covered until
lust prior to assembly or until sampling Is about to begin.
Place 100 ral of water In each of the first rwo Implnger*,
lee.v* the third Implnger empty, and transfer appral-
mat«ly 200 to MO g of prewelghed >W« gel (ram It*
container to th* fourth Implnger. More silk* gel ma; b*
ueed, but can should be taken to ensure that It I* net
entrained and carried out from th* Implnger during
sampling. Place tb* container In « clean place lor later
us* In tb* sempl* recovery. Alternatively, the weight of-
th* dike gel plu* Implnger may be determined to tb* sam
nearest 0 3 g and recorded. .
Using a tweeter or clean dtspoeabl* rurglcal i
plan* a labeled (Identified) an4 weighed niter ' .
Altar bolder. B« sore that the AHer I* property center**!
and th* gukct property placed *o M to prevent th*
lampl* res stream from circumventing tbe Alter. Check
tbe alter (or teen after asetmbl; 1* completed.
When class linen ar* ueed. Install tb* selected nonfe
aUng a vitoo A O-ring when stack temperature* era
lesTihan MC» C (SCO* r) and an eseerto* Wring pita*
wtesn t/BnsMS-stu™ an Mgb*». 8*» AiTD-Og?* Iv
detail*, Other ceonscttng ryitou ualng eitber 3M itaisr
lesD rteei or Teflaa temle*< may b* used. When metal
liner* are need. Install tb* noul* a* above ar by »leak-
fra* direct mechanical connccdoji. Mark tb* probe with
beat resistant tape or by some other method to denote
tb* proper dlftane* Into tb* stock or duct far each •sa-
pling point.
Bet up the train a* In figure 9-1, orlni (If necessary)
a very light' coat of slllcone grease on all ground (lass
Joint*, greasing-only tb* outer portion (see APTD-067J)
to avoid possibility of contamination b; tb* ilUcon*
gnat*. Subject to tb* approval of tb* Administrator, *
flu* cyclone may be used between tb* probe and liter
bolder when tb* total partlculat* catch I* expected to
eiceed 100 mg or when water droplet* an present In the
stack ga*.
Flac* crushed Ic* around tk* Implngtn,
4.1.4 LeakrCheck Procedure*.
4.1.4.1 Pretest Leak-Check. A pretest leak-check I*
recommended, but not required. If tb* teeter opt* to
conduct th* pretest leak-check, tb* following procedure
shall beu**d-
After th* sampling train ha* been assembled, turn on
and set th* fitter and probe heating system* tt tb* desired
operating temperature*. Allow time for the Km pen tun*
to stabilise. If » VIton A O-rtng or other leak-free conn**-
tlon Is used In assembling the probe notilo to th* probe
liner, leak-check the train at the sampling sit* by plug.
ling th* notal* and pulling a 380 nun Hg (14 In, Hg)
vacuum.
Nor».—A lower vacuum ma; b* used, provided that
ft I* not exceeded during the teat.
If an a&besto* string Is used, do not connect th* prob*
to tb* train during the leak-check. Instead, leak-check
tbe train by first plugging the Inlet to the Biter hold*
(cyclone, If applicable) and pulling a 380 mm Hg (U In.
Hg) vacuum (see Note immediately above). Then con.
nect the probe to the train and leak-check at about 15
mm Bg (fin. Hg) vacuum; alternatively, the probe miy
be leak-checked with the rest of the sampling train. In
one step, at 380 mm Hg (15 In. Hg) vacuum. Leakage
ratee In excess of 4 percent of tbe average sampling rat*
or 0.00067 m >/mln (0.03 ctm), whichever i* !*•, an
unacceptable.
The following leak-check Instructions for tbe sampling
tiain described In APTD-0676 and APTD-OM1 may b*
helpful. Start the pump with bypass valve fully open
&nd coarse adjust valve completely closed. Partially
open the coarse adjust valve and slowly close th* bypau
valve until the deeired vacuum Is reached. Do not revert*
direction of bypas* valve; this will cause water to back"
up Into tha filter bolder. If tbe desired vacuum 1* ex-
ceeded, either leak-check at this higher vacuum or tod
the leak check as shown below and start over.
When the leak-check Is completed, first slowly remov*
tbe plug from tbe inlet to the probe, filter holder, or
cyclone (If applicable) and Immediately turn off tb*
vaccum pump. This prevents the water In tbe Implngen
(rom being forced backward Into the fitter hoMer and
silica gel from being entrained backward into tb* third
Impinger. '
4.1.4.2 Leak-Checks During Sampl* Run. If, during
the sampling run, a component (e.g., filter asMmblr
or Implnger) change become* necessary, a leak an isokln*ti* sampling rMi
(within 10 percent of tro* laoktaMtte nnl«*i ethenrtu
specified bv th* Administrator) and a tampantnr*
around tbe Blur of 1M±14* C (24a±2»' 7), or *Mh other.
tamperaton a* tpecifbd by an apnUeabl* sobpart a! tin
standard* or approved by lb* Administrator. •
For e*oh run, record the daU required on a date ih*»
•nob a* tb* om* shown In Flgnn »-J. B* son to record tk*
Initial dry gu metar reading. Record tb* dry I** maW
reading* at tb* beginning and and of each •ampllng OM
InermneDt, wben change* IB flow rat** ar* mad*. •*»•»
and «/*« *nh M cbttk, and wbaa twpJtftg • a****
vot,
D-32
-------
AND
41779
«vv,
e i tworaired by Mrare t-t at l*at* MM
•leach *an>ple point dorlnf Moh ttm» tncniDwl and
TVTtton.i readlnp wbec atiTufloant ohacf e» CX> percent
wl>Uon In »»>oclty bead nadinp) oeoeaaltau addl-
Znal adjustment! in How rale. L»T»] tod Mm tb«
Lvuomtter Beoauae tht mtrtnmjiter laral and aero may
ErTdii* to TlbreUoni and temperature cfeanfee, ntakt
Zfftodlc obeoki durun Ux tnnm.
Ol*u the mrttoeM prter to tb* tat rm to
tht obvno» of (uapiiof topotittd material Te becto
BKDpttnf. moon tb« DOCU* aac, Tirtty tint tb* flJur
•ad prom beatini rynecM art np to tampemnre. and
that th« plux CUM and probe in properly petitioned.
PoaiUon UM noaiLle »t th« am trarto*jjolul with the Up
Minting directly Into tb* |u ttfuuLi. Ijumediately start
MM pump tod adjust tb* flow to tooklnetk wndiuonj.
Namofraphj *n erauabU, which aid In tb* r»pld adjuil-
•< tfc* lant-ttiarki *»o>pUac ran wlUwm
Mnpc tattoo*. Than aotnofrapiu an dadrowj tor o*e
UM TTP* I pi tot cob* eoeffioieoi u tJitOJE and
fu •qaJTktau d*o»1t7 (dry motamiv «T^h;
to »±rt APTLM3f.?t d«Ulli U» pnxwdon fcr
U» ncmu(nphi I/ C, >od U. tn gouldr ihr
^ rv>(« dc DM CM UM oocoofrkptij aa«w
Ran «•• C)t»Ucrc I Lo ttclloa 7) » tiieo
u far I
K.MT
UCATW»___
•KMTOR,
MTE
mm NO
IMPLEIOXNO..
WTEK 10X10..
tFACTOR_
KTOTTUIE COEFFICIENT, C.
KHEKATIC OF STACK CWSS MCTIO!<
**OIEU8STH,B(J|J. ,
"HOZZLE If EKTIFICATIOT DO
AVERAGE CALIIRAHD »02Zll MAtKUR. I
WOBE HEATER tFTTMe
IIAK RATE. nl/»*v4d») ___
WIOIE Ut»ER MATERIAL
iTATIC MEKURE, M Hi U*. H^
BLTER BO
TUVWH rowr
.NUWU
,
TOTAL
(AMP1ING
TIME
l«1. Mlru
AVEKAGE
VACUUM
mmH«
«n.H^
(TACK
ra«Mnj«
Hji
•C(»F)
VH-ocin
HCAD
lAPfc).
•MCn.^HjO
-
fc
fKSSUK
WFnKNTIAL
ACKOSS
•CWIFICE
ffitTEB
— MlO
fta. MjOl
QA3 SAMPU
VOUAE
Wlfl'l
OAS tAxru •reurouTuw
AT t*T OAJ kCTTR
•Arc
•c en
,
A^-
CWTUT
•c i*n
A^.
Av». .
f K.TU HOLD«
TBraukTud.
•CI'FI
TtkTOATUM
' Of OAJ
UAVINO
CONOCNSf* 0*
LAST fcTIHOU.
•C(f I
.
Wbm U» tUck b undfr df nUtoot nentlr« pracon
Owl|bt of UnplDcv Hem), uk« eftre to don tb« antnt
MJuit »mlT« btton kuertlnj the prob« Into Che §t»ck to
pnnt mt«r (ram b»ckanj Into tb« Alter boldor. If
•'••17, Uw pump m»7 be cam«3 an vitb tb* OOVM
•dluit nlTt cloand
Vtwn Uu probe It In position, tlocl oft tlx opeoln(>
•nmd the prob« and porthoM to pttrant unrepre-
MUtirc dJlutlon ol the CM !rtr»Arn
TnnrwtbtiUck (Too-Mctloii, u required by Uotbod
l*Hlptcll)«d by tbe AdmlnlltrtUiT, bcioj cmjVul not
w blUDp ibe prob* notiJe Into the rtAck wmlis when
•oiplJni netr the w»Uj or when removing or limrUtu
5* fn°t throu(b the portbolM; thii miT rw« fliuir »»emblr U LajtAUsd conduct > l«i-
••« tow 8«rUon 4 1 «J) Tbe total paniculate weight
«»u include tbf nimmmtlon of aU ftluf a«embl7 oatche«-
' A «tnf le train »haU b« u»ex3 lor the anur* •anopl* run.
Man wbtrr «lniiilt*D«oui ian3|>lki< U required
mm •epar»l» ductj or at two or mor» 4ifl«rent
i withiB tht iam« durt, or, In oaM« »b«r» tqulp-
•«ii dUur. DKMtltaio t chaise o/ tralru ID all oUx»
•"•Ooru, tb* UM of two or mor» trahu wlJ) b« mb>ect to
*** kpproral of IV
Flgur* 6-2. Particular field data.
Note that wban two or mon train* are o»ed, aapartt*
ta^eJnxe of the trout-half and (If applicable) Imptnfer
oatcbe* from each train ahAll be performed, unless identl-
flaj uo*rl* sliat were osed oc all trains, In which oaee, tb*
feral-half oalchei from She todlrldual train* m»y b*
combined (*< may tbe Imping*/ oaUihaa) and on* anal y^ls
atf front-half '-ten and on* analysis ol Implnier catch
may be periomed ConroJt with the AAmlnljtrator for
detail] concern -\g tbe calculation of reculu wben nro or
more trains are ued
At the end of (-be sample run, torn on tbe coane adjust
valve, remoTt tbe probe and nottlt troro the stack, turn
06 tbe pump, record tbe final dry ra» rostw nt-lini and
eondurt a posi-teet leak-cbeck, at outlined In Section
4.1 4 8 Al»o leak-check the pilot lines at described In
Method 2, Section 8.1; the lin« must pan this teak-dwelt,
to order to validate the Taloclty bead data
4.1.6 Calculation of Paroant JjoMnetlc Calculate
percent laokiasUc (see CalculiUoru. Section 6) to deter-
mine whether the run ww valid or Another test run
aiould be made If there ww difficulty Ln mainttlnlni
toofanetk rate* du* to aource conditions, consult with
tbe Administrator Jar p«wibl< ™lanc* oo th« torAlntUc
nun
4.2 Sample ReoorirT. Proper cleanup proe*dore
beflnj u aoon ti the prow Is remoTed from the stack at
tie end d the iarnpUnj period AJlow the probe to cool.
When tie probe oac be saieJy handled, wipe ofl all
•rternal nanlculait mstter neir tbe tip ol the probe
Doc tie ana pLfcr* a cap over it to prevent lofllQc* or ninl n^
partlculat* mattar. Do not cap ofl tbe probe tip Ucbtly
while the aamplloi train iJ oooUn^ down M thlt would
on*u a racuum Ln the filter bolder, tiius drawlflj «r»t*r
from the Implnf erg Into the filur bolder
Before moTlni the aample train -.0 the cleanup tiu,
f«aoT» tbe probt from tbe iampl* Sratn. wipe orS tbe
(raate, aod ap th* op«n ootM o/the prob*. B«
_ not to lo«e any ooodenale that mifbl be pnaent.
'Ipe ofl tbe slllcone (reaae from thl filttr Inlet when tbe
probe wat fastened and oap It. Eamon tb* nmbllloal
•crd from tbe last Lmplnffer and oap tb* bnpiofw. II a
flexible line la oaed batvMc tbt first Imxtlnfer or eorj-
denaar and tb* filter boldar, dijoorineoi tb* UIM at the
filter balder and M aoy eoodeaaed water or liquid
drain Into the lmpin»T« or ooodenaer AJW wlplnf ofl
tb* silicon* irreaae, -oap oC the filter bolder oatlat and
fanpinfer Inlet Klther rnrand-claat ttoppen, plastic
•jap*, or aerum oap* may be oa*d to oloae theae opaninf I
TVaniler the probe and filler-lmplnrer aaaembly to the
el*i.TUp area. Toil area should be clean aod protected
rom t£« wind K that the chanoe* at oontamlnarlni or
asdnx the aample will be minimii*d
BaT* a portion ol to* aceten* aaed tor elaannp M a
biazik. Take 90C ml of thii acetooe directly from tb* waab
eottle belnf and and plaoe It In a fje* Hzonet oootainv
labeled "aouon* blank."
sett any
.
tht tralo prtor to and dnrinf fttamiTnbrr
fcteormal eoodldou. Tnat UM aampl*
and
a*
O*(*fafr Wt. f. O»r»ralry rwnor» the firur fr«n tb«
filter bolder and plaoe tt In la IdeirclDad peul diab oon.
talne: Vtt a pair o/ tww»«n and/or ci»rj dlrpo*abl«
to handle It* filter. If It U
RLT-jIca! jkiT* to ane I* ter. oicui
kJcf tbt filter, do to inch that th* parOcolan oate U
la*de tbe lold. 0»ra(uUy trauifer to the pwtn di»b any
paniculate matter andjor 41t*r fibtn wnJci adher* u>
the fljtor holder r&ike', . by talni » dry nylon bn»tl*
broib andjor » ihjtrp-«lred blads. 9«aJ Ut« oocUloar
Cpmahu-r S't t Ta£n« oar» to •" that du* oo tk«
eerulds of ttx prota or other erurtor mrtao** doe* a
-------
RUU»AND RMULATION*
BttSna, press, faae, aed tan* ha* of tin att«r hoM* 1>y -
wachtag t&tao uacpsotnM «U) agaten* and ptaamf tb*.
wart la a (Ian «ont»tes». DistilM mrtw may b* and •
insert at ta*ans vtxn aparomd by Ml* Admfcilatabv
tad eaall b* osad when taKuM br the Administrator;
m then oaam a»e a water blank tod toUow KM Admin-
uuMor-i dnotioac oa a&alyah. Psrfona UM ae*yan»)-
rto*M M MlevK ,
Carefully remoT* the pn&* naatle ted clean the Inalda
«urffcte by riming with acetone fnna a wash bottle and
bnulung with a nykiu brtsito brush. Brush until th*'
.icMon* rtns. showi no risible panlclea, after whlok
make « And rln» of th* Inside surface with acetone.
Brush and rtnas th* Inside partt of th* Swaceloil
fitting with acetoM In » simuoff way until no slsibl*
particle* remain.
RJru* tha probe Hrws with ftfrton* by llltlnj tnd
routing the probe while sqmrUnc antww lot* lu uptMt
rnd » that aQ (nsld* suttscua will be w«tted with ac«-
tont. L«i th« ao«ioa« dr&la from tlM lover end Into tht.
sampto conulnfr. A fuoarl (glaw ot polyethylene) may
be used to aM ia traB*teTtn|| liquid wubei to th* «»-
lolner. Follow th« Metons HUM wltb a probe brush.
Hold Ute prata In aa liyllnxl pn«iii«i, sriuln aceton*
tnto the upptf eitd at ib« pmb« brusb Ij being pushad
uiib a twlotaf aotiaa thrmi(k Uw pro*>»; bold t mmpM
rontatuer undenmUi the lower end of th* probe, aod
riuelt afiT nMens end panteulM* matter which to
brushed trora Uw probe. Run the bruah tbrooth th*
proba chrM tlraea or morq antfl ao visible parnculmt*
uiMtef b carried out with the acetone or until noo»
rFTDatm In the probe How oo rtsual Inspection. Wltb
at UM bout baU at tk*>
Hur bolder by rubbing the stirfar*s with a nylon brlitl*
bruah aod rmaing wiUi aMtoaa. pinrt oach luiiasa
three Um« or mon If needed to remove visible partleo
IM*. laaku • ftn«J rln* «t Uw brut* and ftMw boMar.
Carefully rinse out the glaai cyclone, also (if applh-ubbe).
Atur all tfotoae —'•'•t' utd pvtieulM* mailer h**«-
be*o collected la the sample container, tighten the lid
OB tt» tan^tt esntaiiiM •> that acetone will not leak
out whan it U shipped to the laboratory. Mark th*
n«i«at al UM fluid le*«J t* determine whether or Re*
leakage occurred during cniuport, Label th* container
to clearly MaaUf* >
Contatiuf Nt. I. Note tbe color af th* indicating stile*
gal w determim Hit ha* been eonpietery spent an«Tmab»
a notation of lu condition. Transfer the silica gel from
the fourth Imprnger t* iu critical container and seai.
A funnel may make It easier to pour the silira gel without
«pllllat. A rubber poUrana* m*r be uaed at an aM In
removing tbe silica i«l from tb* impinger. It to not
iMteawry/1* reowT* U* mall amount •! duat partMea-
that may adhere to tbe impinger wall and are difficult
t* iMi^£V4. dine* the gws tn weight to to be toed for
moisture calculations, do not UM any water or other
liqmh •» livaala th* srt*r» get. U a balance » errailaMa-
ia the field, follow the procedure for container" No. 3
in Bertlon * 8.
Imptnfrr Wtla. Treat the impingen u follows: Mak*
a notation of any color or film In the liquid catch. Measura
tbe liquid which is in tbe first three imptngera to within
* 1 ml by using a graduated cylinder or by weighing It
to within *0.3 g by using a balance ' If one is available).
Record th* vorarn* or wricnt W liquid at mot. Tml»
inionnaclon i» requirvd t* rtZrnift* tha moutun oootwat
of the WTroent as.
Dtjrard the liquid afarr neamrlnf and reeordrnt ta*
v»Unn* or weiglit, oukni analyck of It* i
u required
-------
*UUS AND tlGULATtOMS
Alternatively, the aampJe may be oran dried at 106* O
B«/ f) to J u> t noun cooled to tb* > ooMtant wal*b.t, anl**i otharwiae apeclAed
wToe Administrator. Tb« tealer may alao opt lo oven
E, the aamplf el 106 ' COM' F) (w »to » boon, wat«b
•>• aunplt. and oae thlt waif bt at t final w«l«bl.
Ontika No I. Note tbe level ofllquld In tbe container
•ideacflnn on the analytli aheet whether or Dot haakiij
picamd durtnf transport. U t noticeable amoont of
r-t-f hw occurred either rold tb« (ample or OK
•jflhodi. anb)«ct to the approval of the Adminlstr»tor.
to correct tb« flnaJ raaulu. Meajrure Uie liquid In this
, •agtalDer either volumetrleaDy to ±1 ml or jr»r1-
•atrically to ±0.4 I Tranifer the contents to t tared
•Jf>mJ beaker and evaporate to drynen at ambient
afinparaiure and pressure. Daalccate tor M bourt arid
wel(b to t oondanl welf bt. Report the ratulu u> the
Marat 0.1 m|.
CMatorr M>. J. Welfh the nwnt allloa fel for ilHoa • el
aim Implnt er) to the nearMt 0.5 • ualnf l balance. TblJ
'•Up may b« conducted in tbe field.
•Otoionj BUmt" Qmiehwr. Mearare acetone In thli
aontalner either volumetrioally or vravtmetrioally.
franker the acetone to a tared SSO-ml beak or aad arap-
arate to dryneai at ambient Umperature and prearore.
Dailocate (or M boon and welch to a oontaant w«l«ht
Beport tbe result* to tbe nearest 0.1 m(.
NOTE —At the option of tbe tester, tbe oonUntt o*
CooUlner No. 3 as well a» the acetone blanl oontainer
my be eraporated at temperaturee bt(her than ambi-
aot. U eTaporatlon lj done at an aierated temperature,
the temperature must be below the boiling point of the
Blrent, alao, to prerent "bumping," the evaporation
prooen must be oloaely raperrlAed, and the oontents of
the beaker must be twirled oocaalonalty to maJntarn &n
•Ten temperature. 0M extreme oare, afi acetone If bLfbly
ftunmabb and hat a low flaah point.
LChlfcrarkm
y.Inf.In t laboratorr lot of an calibration!.
6.1 Probe Noule. Probe oouloi aball bt callbratod
More tbeir Initial oae In tbe field. Uaing a mlcroroct«r,
Btuure the Inside diameter of the notile to tbe aoareflt
(.OK mm (O.OD1 In. ). HI|I|-I ttirni rapiiratii inaamiirnimili
••lai dlflerent dlam*ten s*ch Uxne, and obtain tbe arer-
•ceolthemMnirmmacU The diflerenoe twtweeo the hifb
•Dd low Dumben ahall not rroxiil 0.1 mm (O.OM Ic.).
when ooulw twoome tUotwJ daeted, oc oorrodad. they
at»li b« rathapod. atavpeoad, and rmllbruad bafcn
»•«. Kach ooui* ihall b* ptnuMcUf and oaiaotij
.
U Pilot Tub* Tin Typ* 8 pttot tnb« najimlli ihaH
W oalibrated ajcoardiaf tc UM prooadart *QlIiQ«d la
•action t ol MeLhoO 3.
a-S MeUrtaj 8yttem Be/or» lu (nitUJ OK ID tbe a«ld,
tbe meterlnj iriUm aball b« caJIbrated according to the
prooedure outlined In APTD-0578 Ln»t«a
t*m. H It aocfMted that a leak-check be conducted
For metering sy»t*m» harinf diaphragm pump«. the
ftormal l«ak-checll prooedure will not detect l«a^a(ea
within Ibe pump. For tbeae oaMe tbe loUowinj l«ai -
»b«tt proc*dore U satseated make a 10- minute calibra-
tion mn al O.OOOS? m Vmin (a 02 CTJB), at the and of tbe
ran, takp the difference of tbe measured wet leal meter
and dry t>? melxr yoiumei dlrlde the diflerenoe by 10
to eet tbe loak rate The teak raU ahoald not aoo«6d
0.00057 m 'Anin (0.02 oto).
After each field UK, the calibration of the m«terlnf
vyvtein khall b« checked br perlonnlnc three calibration
roaft at a tingle, tntcrmeaiate orlfkie aettlnf (baaed on
tbe prerlouj Qeld t«ct). wUb th« Tacoum aet at tbe
muJjiiuxil T&iue roakcb«d durinf UM te*t aw^«i. To
•jdjust tbt Tacaam, Inaert a TalTe between the wet teat
meter and tbe Inlet of tbe mtitertof tyitexn Calculate
ti>e aTera^e value of the oallbratlon factor I/ tb* oallbra-
tlon hw chanjKrd by more than t> percent raoollbrate
tbe meter over tbe roll mn£r of orlAoe aetOAfa, u ocrt-
Un«d In APTD-0676.
ARernatl re procedure, e.g . oalnjE the orifice meter
ooeffidenu, may be oaed, aubject to the approval ol the
A dminl stra-tor .
—If UK dry fti matar oraAatent nhxe oKaloed
••ore and afwr a t«»t aerlea dJSw »y more thic Jperceni
tke Mat aerlai ahall eltber be voided, or oalculauonj Ir.i
Oe ten aarlai ahalJ b* parlcnDed laloc whlcbeTer metrr
•vafBdecl raiue 0 «.. Mm-r or afur; firm 1^4 tow,
OhM of total ample rainm'
»-4 Probe Raau* OailbnUoo TU probe kwUrur
atell b* a«llbr*t«l b^ore ru Initial oae in tb-
I aooordlnf to the prmedort ootllned In APTD-Ot'e
b« ooeutrootad aeoordlni to APTCMWI need nm
aaJibrmud U tt» aallbtaUon ecrrai In APTD-067*
anond
».S TaoptntDTe Oxifea. Cat U» praxdure ID
fiactloc CJ of Method I to oaHbrate In-tlack umperaturr
ttaft Dial tbwTEcmieKn, neb ki an D*>d tor the dry
fu meter acd aoodeujer ootlet, ahall ba «atibraud
ajmlofi maraory-ia-(lM) UkermomeUn.
l.e Leal Check of MeurLnc •yrtein Sbxrwo In Urun
M. Thai portion of the aamfkjni tralD from the pomp
totbeorlnot meter ibooid be Mak obeoked prior u> initial
oae and after each ihjpmect Lamkace after the pomp will
ravult ki law rolume balni raoorded Uian U aeuiallr
•kmpled Tbe foUowlof prooadore If IDClened i»r»
Flfure H) Cloae the main ralr« oo Uu m«Ur boi
Imen a one-bole rabtxr r>opp«r with robber tntHoj
vOacbM] Into the orlfloe •* ha/1** plpa. Dtaooonect and
want the bw aide ot tb* orlftoe manometer Otoae ofl the
low aide ortn£« t*p Praarortu tbe fyn«n U> 11 to U cm
(t to 7 m.) water oolomn by blowtnf lnu> tbe rubber
tabinj Pinch oB the mbinf and otMrre the manomeler
to on' mloaU A koai of praajon on th* nuuiometar
tedioaUi a UaJt In tb« BUMr box, taakj, U praaant, molt
•a oorrected
a.7 B«romeUr Oatfbrate •falost a nvoary bvrom-
Carry ocl oakailaaoTU. retaining at Uajrt one artra
•aTHlmil Ofnre berood that cf the aoqolrad dala Round
•B flfurea afler the final oairuiMJcm Other tornu of the
•quatloai may b« oaad u kxif u they plv* aqulralftot
fwulu. *
ftUIBER
TUBING
RUBBER
ITOWER
ORIFICE
VACUUM
SAUCE '
•LOW INTO TUBING
VNTIL MANOMETER
HEADS 6 TO 7 INCHES
WATER COLUMN
ORIFICE
MANOMETER
Figure 5-4. Leak check of meter box.
11
i:
c.
Nomendatnre '
— Croaa-aecuooal araa of ooctlt, m' (ftri
• Water vapor In tb* pa atraam. proportion
l>7 vohiine,
—Aoatone blaok raaldoe coooauSPMiBta.
• Ooooentration of paniculate mattar In
f M, dry basu, corrected to otandjtrd eoodi-
tionj, |M*cm (k/dtcf).
• Percent of laokloetle ««TTipiint
•Mai Imtim acceptable Icalace ntt tor aithar a
Stan k*k check or lor a Wk ebaok loUow-
a aomponent ebanfe, aqual M 0^0067
mln (0.02 dm) or 4peroent at DM »vw»f»
rate, whitbeVar It law.
V.
V. .
L, • Indfvlduaf l«aka|e rate obaervad dnrtnc tb»
aaak check conducted prior to tb* I1*"
•omponent ofaavoc* (1-1, J, 1 . *>),
aoVmin (cfm).
I* ^LaaltafT rate obaernd «urlnj tk*
taak check, m'/min (etm).
•. •Total amount of pankulau mattar
tog
*V. -Moiecnlar «tant »f War, If4>
fU.Olb/lb-mole).
•• •Uaa» of raaidu* of ac*ton» altar *v»poratkin,
A« •Barom*trk traamrt at tb* ««rnpH»; « •Ab*olni»«»ci r»> pnaaare.Kin H« fln_ Hil.
fmt •Bundard ab«olou riraHinun. KO »*^ £4
0*^310. EX).
.
r
AH
1 rts ex«»tant, 8.0S2W mm '
raote (21-&5 In Hj-hTR-lb-mole)
«Ab«olut« avrj~af« dry rat matar tazaparatar*
-fsee Firore S-2), 'K CK).
> VU.jlul* avarafe ttkck ga* aKsparWora (aw
•gULDuird kbwrat* ttmparatnre, aW E
J&28° K).
v>volume of aoaiooe blad, ml
•Volume of acetone tued in wash, ml.
K« Total volume of liquid coUaetad lo Impinctn
•od tillcft |el CRae Flffure fr-8), SO
.- Volume of (M ample M mMKirwl by *7 pJ
B«t«r, dcm (dcf)
t) ^Voiums &' fM ^mpld m4fit^aj by toe dry
eat £D«t«r, comctad to AandArd oocditlotu,
^cm (d*c/r
1-Volume of niee v»p«f to ti» S*> tta'f^
^eirrwted to standard co&dlliocii, acm UKJ)
',*>§t9cJi jw valoclry oJculaud by Method S,
SquauoD ^-6, oainf daXa gHmtrrH from
Method S, m>K (fl&ec)
• Weight of rwidoe In aoaunc vxii, mg.
•Dry gw meter calibration a%ctot.
• A?ar»«e pre»jur» dlflcnuttai acro« tb« orlfloa
5Mt«r (a&i Drura 4-»), mm HrO On. H«O)
i— tampUnc ttme mtanrtl, Irom tbe baflnnlnf
tt a run Kntil tb* ftrat nr«nrior>ant-at«j §00
oaflalva oocipoDent obac4*%f, I»ag1 nTilrn with
to* mtkrral barwaan to* fint and aaoocd
•,-Bamplim dm* mtarraX trom tb* final («u!
•amptmant ebanre until tb* and */ tb*
ammpUnf TUTL, xnin
H.6-Bpecinc tranty a/ marom-y
•0-Bec/mln
WJ-Convwilori to parcent
«J l.mce dry (U m*t«r Umparaturt and avmtr
arliot praavum drop Bae data lhaet 'Tifum 6-ii
U Dry OM Vokoo* Correct uw aample vorom*
• ijtiiin 1 by the dry raj matar to atandard ooodlUonj
WO mm B| «r «T F, • B In. E|) by uainf
r
r.w\
-yr- H
bottle)
Ib/nJ)
*~ TooJ •°"r*Hf ttma, wtiri
p
^.+ C Ag/13 6)
r.
•*»«SAI
VOL «, wo
, Aiwun i*, i»rr
D-
-------
4178*
RUUS AM* REGULATION*
_ H'KtesHgiormiMgimrst
™> I7.fte * &jm. Hg far ffngtlnh cmtti
Wwi»—K II
" r «• 4, runes A* Equation *-l mutt b* modified M
_ X* WO OMBpOMtn CTtCRfM ITTftCH oWTISff
urn, la Uttt CMS, raplao* V. In Equation M
(a)
stack ga> th*" b* mada* on* from tb* tmpmger analyilf
(BonaooB »-31, and a second (ma th* assumption «f
aatonud condition*. Tb* lower «*a»S" »***•» *
fl_ .K.U t,« oonsldarwl oorrwt. Th* prooedur* to det*»>
minmc th* molstur* content baaed upon assumption of
i*tajat«d oondlttons Is fjTen In th* Not* at Section U
(rf Method 4. F« th* porpo.«t^ thJ* metood,t^ aT*raf»
stack m temDeratur* from Flguta VJ may b* oaaa i*j
maka thii^etermlnaUon, proridad that tha accnne* at
^^.^ ^^ _«..„ H J/»WT.«—» .« j-tit^ m\
th* Irntack tfflnperaturs asnsor I* * I* C W FV
6.* Acetone Blank Co
(b) Caa» n, OBB «r man eompoaarit
durtng tb* aunplljig nxn. In this ~"tr. replac* K(
XojtMka 4-1 by th« aipresstow
KqatUenS-t
r.-c.v..^.
M Total ParttenlBt* Wtdglit. ^^_i
b Cram tb* ram of UM weight* obtain**!
1 and 3 las* the acetone blank «.mm atfrt te DMtrtc aoite
-0.04707 Wml tar Ea(Uab u
«J MiiAstaso Comiet
e.u.1 Calculation 7rom_Ba* Datsv.
100r.[JT.y,.-KVJ7'.)i
Jd-4.0D3tM mm Bg-nVml-'K lor metric antta,
-O.OCa6«* In. Hg-rV/rnl-'R far Bngllah unrt»
4.11-J CalcnltHos rrora Intaonai"
«. Voltero, R. F. A Bantj at Commarcl^ ArailaU*
IiutnDn«aUtlon For tie Meunnm«at o( Low-EU^»
OM Vsloeitie*. U.S. EnTironmenUl Protection Agency,
Emlartoa MccoonnMUt Branch. R«m«reh Trianu
Puk, N.C. Norembar. 1978 (uopobUitMd ptptr).
9. Anntul Book of A8TM Stiuidvds. Put 26. OMMB»
Fuel*; Coal ud Cok*; Atmoipberla AnalTtl*. Amerlc*a
Society for T«tm« «n4 Matvulft. f blUd*lpki% F*v
JW4. pp. 917-W3.
METBOB «— DcmuciHATioit or Spircm DIOXIDI
£Hiano«* FBOH BTATIO.XJLAT Sovuru
Eqoatim 1-4 L Ptintflt tmd
vhertc
K,-«.X» for mrtrie unite
«O.OMoO lor Eliwluti ootts.
113 AoxpUbl* fi«nIM. II M permit e Ud Annual Mwtlnj of the Air PoBn,
tioa Cantni Anodatloo, St. Loula, Uo. Jen*
1JTO.
t. Smith, W. 0 et aL Stack Oa> SampUnj
and Blmpdnad Wrib N*v Eqolpmwt. APCA Papar
No. «7-H9.1«7.
*, apeclflcatka kr Indnenttr Tafttnc at Fedanl
Pactbtle*. PHfl, NCAPO. !««.
7. Sbliebara. B. T. A^ttutmanti In th« EPA Norao
rreob lor Dlfferont Pilot Tub* CoeOeinti and Dn
Wnmte Weight*. Stack SampBm Nen t:4-lL
Oetcbs, 1«4, ' •
1.1 Principle, A rat anrph 13 eitracted from th*
aampilnf point In toe slack. To* imUuh* aoid mlat
iincludraj oolfar Lnoikie) and th* mlfor dlotrde an
Mparated. Th* nilror dloxid* traction I* measured by
the bariam-thortn dtradoa method.
1.9 Applicability. Tbla method ll applicable for tb*
determination of sulfur dioxide *Tni«»ian« from stationary
source*. Tbe minimum detectable limit at tbe method
has been determined to b« 3.4 milligrame (mg) of SOt/m*
(2.12X10-1 ib/tt'). Althoufb no upper limit bai been
Mtablished, test* have shown that concentration* a*
h%a aa 80,000 mg/B' at SOi can be collected efficiently
in tvo midget Lmplncera, each containing 15 miloliten
of 3 percent hydrogen peroxide, at a rata of 1.0 Ipm for
20 mlnntM. Based on theoretical calculations, tb« nppar
concentration limit in a 20-liter sample \t about 93,300
Pcoslbl* Intarfennta are free «TnTnnni»
cailona, and fluorides. Tbe cations ana fluoride*
reauxrea b; |U*a wool niters and an laopropanol bubblac.
and Denoe do not affect tbe 3Oi analysli. when nmtU
an being taken (rom a gas stream with blgh concentnr
tiona of very flu* metaiilo fumes (such at In Inlet* (•
control detlce*), a high-elBcieocy glut fiber nltat mat
be used m plaoa oi tbe glas* wool plug U.*., tb* on* tm
the probe) to remore the cation inlerlenuU.
Free ammonia Interfen* by reacting with 8Oi to fora
partlculaU nilnta and by reacting with th* Indicator.
If free «jnmnnt% is preaent (thl* oan b* determined by
knowledge at tbe procea* and "^'"'"g white parckul»t»
matui In tbe probe and laopropanol bnbbler), altaro*>
UTC mathoda, subjert to the tpfntal of UM Adramiattfe
t«, DJ. EnTirwimtntal Protection Agency, art
rattolrtd.
uouia. VOL 43. MO. i*«— THUISOAJ,
D-36
it, 1*17
-------
tUUS AND REGULATIONS
41783
THERMOMETER
(END PACKED
WITH QUARTZ Oft
fVREXVOOL)
•ILICA QEL
OftYING TUBE
Figure 6-1. BC>2 sampling train.
•WIGETANK
11
component
tetter hai the option of wnDititQtlnf eampllnf equip-
ment deecrlbed In Method 8 ID place o( the mldfrt 1m-
Mniw equipment of Method ft. Howvrer, the Method I
. hilDnumbeittxlined to Inelixta a heeWttlter between
tM probe and laopropanol impintw, sad the operation
4 ue aunpUnt train and aunpie analytic man be at
Ite flow ratee and eolation Totamee defined In Method t.
Tbt tarter alao ha« the option of determining SO,
•mple and to protect the mater and pomp. B the afliac
' ' ' ' ' ily, dry aUTS* C (WO" P) tor
r be need at reoelred- Aiterna-
fal hai baan oaed prertooaly, dry at.
with partlctiJale matter ud
AatarmlnaUoni by (1) nplactnf the water In a Method 4
toplnro lyitem with I percent partoiide eotaUon, er
2L"? &***!>* .th« H*** » «w« taptafw
with i Method I taopranaol-aiUr-fMraliie intern. The
MtMi lor BO, mvt U MraMiril with the proedm
ll.l trH rnrn»Hln«ti fha in ilelnlea rtnl (rfiw
••Mali of eonftracUon m*r be wed, *ab)eet to the
JPWuTil of the Admlnlitntor), •pproxlmuelT »-mm
Mlde diameter, with > he»ttn« fjitem to prarent w»ter
•ODdetmUon ind » (UUr (eltber ln- • mSt*Ktorr fllMr.
iU Bobbler ud toptncwl. One nddfet bobbter,
Ttlb medhuD«o>ne |ku§ bit u>d boroillloMe er quvu
•»• wool packed to top dee Flfure »-l) to pr»Tem
MUuric teld mlit evrrorer, tnd three W-ml mldnt
•ViDfcn. The bubbler tad mJdjrt Inplnf en mult be
WD&Kled In nrlei with talk-tree (tes oonnecton. 8111-
*•• Dwut mey be need. If neeetmry, to prrtcnt leiJun.
At the option of the te*tar, e mldj et Imptofv BUT be
4M to {0*oe of the mldtet bubbler.
Othw ooUKttoD tbeorben ud flow rate* m»T be and,
Mt in labrKt to the tppnrnl of the Admintotrmtor.
*»», «BD»rttan •fflclmcr man be ihown to be el le*tt
" * " "
«•»! aouaraoD emcMncy mun
Jl Pana t tor each tert run and :
••report. If the efficiency li fauj
• Mai of three U*U, rortber
li lound to be caoetiUble kfler
---- , rtber docmnmuilon li not
To eondart the affldencT tot, in ertn eb-
B penent.
«allbratad at the aalerml *ff* rate and eaadldooi
•ctoallr anooontered dnrtnt irmir^'T and equipped
wttb a tamparaton faafe (dial thermomater, or eqolv
•lant) aajpable of XHaanxinff tanpanfcore to within
U.ll Barametar. Maroury, aaerold, or other barom-
•av eapeble of meajnrtflj atmoaphvlc prearon to within
11 mm H: (01 In H«). In nacy oa»»». th« barometric
leeillni m»7 be obtained from e nearby national weather
awrrloe »ltUin, In which oan the nation Tatae (which
b the abaoku baromealc pneKire) I hill be reqnected
god an adjutment far tteratlaii dUlarenca between
(be weather (taUoo and aunpllrv point anall b* appUed
at«raUafmlna»J-5mm HJ (0.1 In. Hi) par atlm 000ft)
•Jarmdcm Uineaai or vtee raraa far ebratloii decreaac.
S I 13 Vacuum Oaoje At lead TtB mm B« (M In.
Hi) (ai«e, to be oaad tor laak eback af Ue aunpUnf
& V^SS^P-y-tryi- m *-. ~ ml.
*\°U Monet BoMet. Peiyethylana, MO a»L w. awn
r aunpiee (ooa per aunpie).
apeclnoatJou DllM-74. Tn» t. At the aptton af the
•awlrtt. the EMnO, teat far artlliaMe ortack Batter
«UT be amttud wben hkh eooatanOoa af arfauk
••net are not arrnrud to be preaent.
U 3 laopropaiwl. K paraenl hUi H ml af kvpra-wol
with Kmlofoetoniied dlettUed wmter. Check eaehlotor
•opropanol far peraide to perl On a* fallowi. ab«ke 10
•1 of laopropanol with 10 ml of kwihly prepared 10
•araent poleannm todldi aotatioo Prepare a blank by
ateiUarlr tnaOoi 10 ml of dlrtlltad erater. After ImliaU,
read the aheorbaoce al IU naaom*4en on a (paetro-
photometer. If abecrbanee awaadt OO. rejeoj alnohol tar
w*>
ay be iwmnwl wen laruwnramfii by Mdto-
or by tuawer ttoraub a eohzmn of aetintad
»; howmr. natant fnde kopropanol with
avlubly low prroddt levab may be obtaJDed fnm eom-
•erctal aoanee Rejection of —
Ma nmy,
Ibanfan, bt a more efficient nrooednre.
I.1J B>dror» Panolde, I Panant. DUntaKnanaBt
afitlUed
don.
jant-I
peroilde l:t (T^) with datonlied, ,
water 90 ml li rwed«d per aampie). Prnan fnah daily.
<,!.« PotaMtam Iodide BoloUon, 10 Pareant. DlaanlTe
10.0 frami El In *»fa-»i«»«i. distilled water and dthUe to
HO ml Prepare whan needed
(.1 iampk Baeorery
1.11 Water Dfioolaed, OattUad. at u 11.1.
I.S.I laopropanol. 10 Pareant Mil at)ml efk
with » ml of faitnii^ «etiu^ «u>
U.I Waur. DeionhMd. 4MUM. •
aVIJ laopropanol. KB pareant.
QlH* Wool BoratftaiU or qn«rt»
•fblecQloime (reaae may be oa*d. V
. IU Temperature OWfe. Dial
•tnt, to maaiure Umparatore ef ne laartat t»-
traln to within 1 • C CT P.)
Tube. Tube packed with «• ta llaiarh
alUea (al, at aqnlTalem, *a dry tka (*•
i Borattai. b- aad »>ml alaai.
I Krlenmeyw rauki. MO BKalaa Una tor aaefe
* blank, and atandard). .,
Dropplnf Bottle. 116-mJ aUe, to add tamewtar.
«jj Oriduaud Cylmdar. 100-ml ifte. _____
11.7 jpeorophntnmalar. To aaiHiii ab«*b«u«» at
«_14 •errom ParofeloraJe tatottoc. *xm« N Dbr
_ .
jotre l.tSjof barium eerehlonu trthrdraU [»«(CIO«h
•BiO] In fco ml dKdUad water and dilute to 1 bur with
.•opropaool Alteradnly
aool Alteradnly. 1 J3 | af [BaCb-lHiOl auy
Inatearf of Ue parahknte. wainrWlai « to
VOL 41, MO. t«C—VNMSOAT, AUHKT II,
D-37
-------
41784
RULES AND RfOULATIONS
1A8 JhUftsria Add Standard, O.OM9 N. Parent* or
rtuutonflai to <*KJ.OOOJ N agslnS 0.0108 N NeOH which
^ PraTlOT5?l? bwn stftnderdljed against pntmrimn
4.1 SempUsg.
UJPnparitJoa of enflertSeu train. Meaton U ml of
» pereaat tiopropanol Into UM midget bubbler tod U
ml at * psreent hydrofeB peroxid* Into each o( to* flnl
y» midget Impinges. Lean UM final midget Implnger
dry. Asetmble UM train u ihown In Finn 9-1. Adjust
prob« heater to a temperature sufficient To prevent water
conduuuka. Flam crusted la and water around tat
Impugns,
4. IS Leak-ebKk pRncdta*. A Ink ctxrk prte to tta
ssmpU&s ran Is optional; bowsvw. a leek chock after tat
sampling ran U mandatory. To* laak-efeeck procedure I*
fe) tolIOWK
With th* DroC» dtaeonnacted. plaa t veeasm t»u«e a*
tb» Inlet to the bubbler and pull > vacuum of HO mm
(10 In.) Hr pluf or pinch off to* outlet of to* flow meter,
and then torn off the pump. Th* vacuum shall remaia
stable lot at leatt 36 seconds. Carefully release to*
vacuum gaoge babre relMstng UM do* m*ttr end to
prevent bark flow of the implnger Hold.
Other laak cb«cte procedures may b» used, subject to
tits approval at UM Adnunijtratar, U B. Environment*!
ProtactloB Agency. The proosdur* QMd In H*Unxl 5 t*
oat suitable fi» dl&phr^m pump*.
4.1.J Sample collection. Record the Initial dry gsfl
m«*ef reeding and barometric praam. To begin ma-
plint, podtloo ta«Upofth«prob«atth«a«mpUnt point,
oonneci U» prob* to UM bubbiw, and start to* pump.
Adjust th« «%mpl« Sow to 8 constant ret* of ap-
proiimat«ly 10 ut«r/raln as Indicated by UM roUractar.
Malnteln thto oonitaat ml* (*10 percent) dnrtnf UM
enUn nmpllna ran. Take reading (dry f*t metar.
tamptrature* «i dry ipw meUf and at Implnnr outM
and rets maUr) at V«k «wy 9 mlnat**. Add mora to*
during UM ran to kmp UM taDptntun of UM ia*M
Issrlnf UM lut Implnfor at 30" C («• F) or l«x. Attte
conclusion of «£h run, turn off UM pump, ramor* prob*
trom UM staek, tnd reoord tbt final nttdlnfi. Conduct *
le*k chark ta In Soctkm 4.1.1 (Thl> U»k chwk U manda-
tory.) U a Iwfe U ferand. Told tba t»t ran. Drain th« lea
fafttb, and puin UM rnnmining part of UM train by drap-
ing cWc unbWt ate through to* ryston lor U minnt» '
at to* wmpllnt rate.
Cl«an ambtaet air c*a b» prerldad by pualnt air
thraoga a charcoal altar or Uuomh an extra midget
Implngv with U ml of t parctnt HiOt. Th« t»t«r m*r
opt to itmpty u» ambtcnt 4r, wlthont purtOcatloii.
4JS Svnplc RaaoTwy. Dlaoonnwt the Imptngan afUr
purging. DtaanS th* oratenti at UM mldftt bubbur. Poor
UM content! of UM mldgvt Implnran Into a laak^ra*
poljcthylan* bctU» for shTpm&nt. Buu* the thrae mldgc*
&nd to* oomuctlns toixe with •1filirnltT\
(Now.-Pratart UM 0.01W N
peraalon$B
toOewK pern t naam geoge it the Ink* to UM drytnf
tub* and pan a vacuum ofz» aim (10 In.) Hg; plug or
pinch oS the outlet or toe How meter, and thai torn OB
UM pomp. The vacuum shall remain table for at least
. Carefullr relaaa* the vacuum gauge beta*
nleaitng the flow meter end.
Next, calibrate the metering fyftam (at the avnnllnf
flow rate specified by the method) at follow* conneo*
an appropriately dud wet Uet meter («-f., 1 liter par
rerolutlon) to the Inlet of th* drying tub*. Make three
Independent calibration runs, oilng at leeat AT* rerote-
tloni of the dry tat meter per run. Calculate the calibra-
tion factor, Y (wet tan meter calibration roluma dlTided
by the dry rai meter Tolome, both Totumee adjnited te>
the same reference temperature and procure), lor eeom
ran, and average the renlta. If any r vaha* deTleue by
more than 3 percent from the arerag*, the meterlal
ryMem lJ unacotpubw for us*. Otherwue, OM the arer-
ag* u th* callbraUon outor tor sutmqoent Utt ran*.
5.1J Poet-Test Calibration Cheek. After each field
teet tariea, conduct e calibration check a* In Section 5.1.1
above, except for the foUowtnf variation*: (a) the leak
check If not to be conducted, (D) three, or more revomv
tionj of th* dry gai meter may b* used, and (c) onlr two
Independent rune need be mad*. If the calibration factor
doe* not deviate by more than I percent trom the Initial
calibration factor (determined In Section 5.1.1), then the
dry gat metar volume* obtained daring the Urt aerial
an acceptable. If the calibration factor deviate* by nun
than 9 percent, recalibrate the metering system a* la
Section i.1.1, and for the calculation*, us* the calibration
factor (initial or recallbntlon) that yield* the lower gatt
volume for each test ran.
3J Thermometers. Calibrate agajnat merenry-iB-
glaao thermometer!.
J.J Rotameter. The rotameter need not be calibrated
bat should be cleaned and maintained according to tte
manumctnnr'i Instruction.
5.4 Barometer. Calibrate againat t mercury befw*-
•tar.
54 Barlma Perenfente Sohrtoo. 8tandardl*a Us*
barium perchlorat* solution acalnit » ml o< standard
snlfurlo add to which 100 ml of 100 panent Uopropanal
ha* been added.
dlitillad water, and add UM wadilEn ta tb« lam* nora*
container. Mart tt» floM tsnL M and Identify th*
(ample oontxlaar.
4-» 3cmptoAnatyd(.Not«lmlo(UcmldlnoontafaiaTf
and eonflrm wbather any aample wat not during shto>-
meat: oot* thla oa analytkai data tbeet. If a notlcaeMa
smcaat of leakage hn oocurmt, elUMr void UM aampto
or me methods, rabjaet to UM tpymval el UM Admlnk*'
troisr, to correct the 9na4 molts.
Tnisgbg the contenta at UM ftorage eontatoer to •
100-ml TolomeGrlc ftMk and dltat» to exactly 100 ml
wlta detonlxed, dl*ttUed water. Pipette a 20-ml aliquot at
thU KptattoB Into a 240- ml BrtenmeTer flaik, add SO ml
of 100 percent laapropanol and two to toni dropa of tborta
Indicator, and titrate u> e pink endpolnt cuing 0 0100 N
barmm perchJarstB. Rep«et and arerage the tltratloa
Tohmua- Ron a blank with each atrlei of aunple*. Reptl-
case OtrattoiB most »grsa wlUmi 1 percent or 0 J mi,
wfekherar It tergw.
d-d. MM 'Vmm Hg tor sMrte unto.
- I7.S4 • R/ln. Hg tor BngUsa unlta,
«J Sulfur dtaddeooooantmfc.0.
JTi-B-Oi mg/mea. tor metrto anttB.
-7.M1X10-* Ib^neq. tor Kngtbh nnttm>
Carry ont ralmilationa, retaining at lea*t one extra
decimal figure beyond that of the acquired data. Round
off figures after final cekinlasion.
8.1 Nomenelatxir*.
C--Concentration cf sulfur dtoilrta, dry Das**
corrected to stsfldard OQSMlitlonB, mg/daem
. (Ib/dsef).
.V-Normality of barium perchlorate tltrant,
mllllequivalentj/ml.
J\w— Barometric pressure at th* exit orifte* cf the
dry ca* meter, mm Hg (In. Hg).
J>,u-8tandard abeotnte [imamr*. 7*1 mm H|
(3.93 In. Hg).
T.- Average dry gas meter abaesot* tempemtara,
rM-Standard abeotate temperature, JBsJ* K
(52*' E).
V.-Voloroe of sample aBqoot Utrated. mL
V.-Dry ga* rohnne u meaanred by the dry ga*
meter, dcm (def).
f»GM)-Dry ga* vorum* measured by the dry fa*
meter, corrected to standard conditions,
dsem (dscf).
V^,-Total volume o( solution In which the sulfnr
dioxide sample U contained, 100 ml
Vi-Volum* of barium perchlorat* titrant and
for the samps*, ml (average of replloata
tltrationa).
V,.-Volume of barium perehlonte Utiant used
for th* blank, mL
Y- Dry (a* meter calibration factor.
H.BJ- Equivalent weight of sulfur dkaddk
«J Dry sample ga* voUnao, oometed U standard
CODdltlOCS).
T.
t. Atmo*pherta emission* from Snlfurie Add Msjia
(actnrlng Proeeeaai. U.S. DHBW, PH8, DlvUlon of Ahr
PoUntlon. Publle Health Service PubUcatlem Na\
wa-AP-U. Cincinnati, Ohio. llMt.
J. Corbett. P. T. Th* Determination of 8Oi and BO,
In Fin* Oaeea. /oomal of the Inatltnte of ItuL «*V JW-
2tt, 1M1.
3. Mattr. B. B. and B. C. DlefaJL Meanrlng rtne-Oa*
BOi and SOv Power. 101: M-9T. Novwmber 1C67.
4. Patton, W. r. and J. A. Brink, Jr. New Equipment
and Technique* tor Sampling Chemical Proeeai Oaass.
I. Air Pollution Control Asaoeiatlon. 15.- 182. let*.
5. Rom, ]. 1. Maintenance. Calibration, and OperaOoa
of Uosdnetie Souree-SampUng Equipment. Offle* of
Air Program*, Environmental Protection Ageneyv
Reaterch Tiiangl* Park, N.C. APTD-OfTS. March \m.
4. Hamil, H. r. and D. B. Cemann. Collaborative
Study of Method for the Determination of Sulfur Dioxlda
Emlaxtoni trom Stationary Source* ( FoaaU-Puel Fired
Steejn Oeneraton). Bnvlronmental Protection AI
Reeearen Triangle Park; N.C. EPA-WV4-;
December 197SL
7. Annual Book of A8T1I Standard*. Part n; Water.
Atmospheric Analyda. American Society lor Testing
and "•*— <•"« PMi^.iph'-, Pa. 1974. pp. 40-tt
8. Knoll, /. B. and II. R. Mldgett. The Application of
EPA Method • to High Sulfur Dioxide Concentration*.
Environmental Protection Agency. R^eeanb Triangle
Park. N.C. KPA-«00/4-7»-Oa>. July an.
afsrano 7— Dnrucounow or NrnoosOf OnDss
Btcaesoir* FBOM 8TAOOir&BT Sotrmcisi
1.1 Prlndpla. A grab aunple Is collected In an e
ated flaak containing a dilute mlfurte add-hydrogem
peroxide abeorblng soluUoa, and the nitrogen oxlaea.
except nitron* oxide, are measured eolorimeterlcatty
ojing the pliflnnMlsnlfrirfllo add (PD8) procedure.
1 J Applicability. This method I* appllcabU to the
measurement of nitrogen oxide* emitted from stationary
source*. Th* range of the method ha* been determined
to be 1 to tfO mllllgrain* NO. (a* NOi) per dry standard
cable meter, without having to dilute the sampav
ri HsuBplrng (at* figure 7-1). Other grab sampUaf
system* or equipment, capable of measuring samps*
volume to within ±2.0 percent and collecting a inlHiliait
sampl* volume to allow analytical reprodadbUrt* to
within ±6 percent, will be considered acceptable altar-
native*, subject to approval at UM Administrator, U J.
Environmental Protection Ageney. The following
eqoipment 1* naed In ••Tip^r'y
11.1 Probe. BoroaUlcete glassi tnbUsg, snnVtentry
heated to prevent water condensation and eqalppaa
with an uvctaek or ooVeteek filter to remove partlcuiBt*
matter (a plug of glees wool la satisfactory tor thai
pnrposa). SUlnlees steel or Tenon * tubing may also be
used far th* probe. Heating I* not n«iMs*ry Uta* prob*
remain* dry doling the purging pavML
&l MetertM .
8.LI InlttaTCallbratiBB. Before It* Initial me In taa
flald. ftnt teak cheek UM metering lyitom (drying tub*.
estate vetTa, ^me, rotHneter, and dry gM meter) as
ttoime,
49, NO. i«o~Txut»AY. AUOUH
D-38
1*77
-------
'tULES AND IIGULAT10NS
41785
fetTER
•WOUND-GLASS SOCKET
|Np. 1278
WO mn
MAT STOPCOCK
T40K. i FVREX.
2«m BORE. t-iNn OO
WOUND-GLASS
SOCKET. § NO
nrrex
OHOUN
STANDARD TAPER.
| SLEEVE NO. 24/40
ENCASEMENT
ING FLASK-
S-LITER. KXMo-Krrrou. SHOKT NECK.
WITH SLEEVE NO. 24/40
7-1. Sampling t/aln. fla»k valv*. and flat*.
1U OoOeettoo Ftaak. Two-liter bondncata, rotmd
•otteffl flatk, with abort neck and 44/40 cjandard taper
aprclni, jgrotected asainat Impledon or braakaf e.
IIJ Flatk Valve. T-bon etopooek connected te a
MMOetandard taper Joint.
11.4 Tunpcrature Oaofc Dial-type tbermotneter, or
•tber temperature faof.e, capable of ncMurlnf 1* C
B*F) Interrali from -ttatVC OS to 135* P).
1U Vacuum Line. Tnblnf capable of witbatandlJBi
rjaoonm of ?t mm Hi (> In. Hf) abeoinu ujaauii, with
•T" oonnecUon and T-bore atopooek.
IX) Vacnnm Oauir C-tnbe manometer, I nat«r
CK ID.), with 1-mm (0.1-ln.) dlvWoni, or outer faac e
WahU gmeajuilnt pnejm* to within *U mm HI
11.7 Pump. Capable of >e»mieHnj tbe oanentkm
•at te a preajun equal to or leej tban 7» BUD Hi (I In.
Hi) abaolou.
tlJ Bqueue Bulb. One-eray.
fl.9 Volumetrio Pipette.» ml.
Jtl-10 Itopcock and Oronnd Joint Omce. A m»b-
5?".um' blfb-umperatort chloronuorocarboo freaw It
imired. Halocarbon 2MB hat been (oood to beeffectlTe.
W.ll Baromtte. Mercury, aneroid, or otber baram-
PV capable of meaenrlnt almotpherlc prtwure to within
U mm HI (0.1 In. HI). ID many caeca, the barometric
••dlni may be obtained from a nearby national weather
•rnniteUon, ID which eaee the elation value (which to
. "••nwlnu barometric praarun) thai] be raqueeUd and
U edjuttmtnt far ateratlon dlflerenoea between tbe
^•uar elation and eampUni point thai) be applied at a
•U of mum U mm HI (0.1 In. H<) per K m (100 ft)
•rnttonjneraaac, or Tiot vena for deration (leiieaei
_V. Jample fteoorery. Tbe tollowlnf aqmpmejpt b
"l*»a (or tempi* reeoeeiy:
••I Oradaaied CyUndrr. M> B) wnb l-Bl dlTMoni.
Leak tree ' ' '
Wp«tu. Two 1 ml, two J »L
MM] MM » Hi te •
10J rereeteln Knpondaf DWuL 1T>- te
«ar»dty wltb lip tor poartni. oo« far each Mmpl* ud
•ch tuadard. The Coon No 4M06 (ihkllow-torm. 1M
ml) hu been toond to b* otlitartory AJUm»aT«ly,
pofrmettiyl pent»nt boken (Ntl|e No. UOa, UOml). or
(ku§ bmken (WO ml) may be DMd Wb« (law (Makers
•n DMil M£hlD| of the beaken may oaim tolld matter
to be praent In the analytical CUD. UM •olldi eboold be
rtmoTad byftltntlon (•«« Section 1.1).
Ul 5 8tmiD Bath. Low-ternpentun orem or tberoo-
etaUcelly controlled bot ptatei kept beik>w TV C (MO* T)
iff eeoeptablo aJteraatiTee.
U 4 Dropping Pipette or Dropper. Tone nqmral
U 5 Polyethyleor PoUoeman. On* tar each eamrO*
end each iUndard
U.I Graduated CyUndir. 100ml wtth 1-mldlTWoDi.
LJ 7 V-tomecrlc Flaeki Mml (one tor each eamplr).
100 ml loo* (or each lainpli and earb etaodard. and one
•jrUMwcrt'nceUDdanTENOi aalaUon). end MOO ml
(OIK)
««« aDeetropbotaseter. Te njeteini abecrbanee «t
eflOnm.
U.e Ondmted Plpetu U ml wtth O.I-nl dlTWcni.
14.10 Ten Paper far ladtoatln* pH. To otmr UM
•E raofe ot 7 U14.
UL11 eVmlrtkml BeJaooe. T* uieeeai «• wttMn OJ
'
UUMei otberwlie Indleated. It k) Intended that aH
reaienu oooJorm te tb* ipedfloatloni aMabUabed by tbe
CommJtlet on AnalytloeJ BeajralJ of the American
Clxmlca! Sodety. wbert tocb tpeclocatlont an avail
•cle otberwlM, oar the beet tvallable |rad>.
a.1 Sampllni To pnpan tbe *beorblnt "Inllon.
eaodcnuly add 2J ml oooctntntrf H^O, fo 1 Ut* of
tWonlud dUUDed water, kill well and add ) ml of I
paroent hydro|Bn peroildf. treahly prepared from 10
percent hydrofen peroUde aoluUon The ibaDrblnf
Julian thoaldbe ated within 1 week of la preparatlan-
" feunple Recovery. Two ree«eca en •^J.—] tor
"JodlS HyonaJde (IN). BltKtn «I NaOH
dlttlUed water and dUote to 1 Bter
DIJW-H.
At the epOoc
eejalyet. tbe EKNO, te«t tor — «••*— >^>
•ay be emitted wbeo kteti eemmoiaUone of «canfc
•Batter en not expected to Be preerot
a .tat ike
U AnalyDa .
enngnlred
at ike tmaty^ji, tbe Mkvwkw ne«e
- -^ —§ paVDIDt OT ^rlaWllt
eree enlfur tnuloe. HANDLX WITH CAUTION.
»JJ Phenol. While aotld.
aJJ •otturtc Add. Oeocentreted, w3 peraeart
~ WITH CAtmohT
.
HANDLK WITH
«J 4 Poteailam Nitnu. Dried at 106 to 11O> C (t»
to W7* r) tor a minimum of 1 kem loet prtor te prepara-
tkm of euodard ntaitian. «--^-
iOJ (taodard KNO, •obnton- Dtooln enetly
tJMt I of dried poteeHom altme (ZKOi) In 4eto«li«l.
•&U1M water and dltau to 1 (her with eWnnliarl.
ettetlUed water In a UBO-ml nlametrte flaik
M-6 WortlDi Btaadard ENOi lototled. DOoU 10
•U of the •undard eolution to 100 ml with 4etooled
••tilled water. One mllllllter of the wnrtflnf etaodard
•atotlan le equlraknl te WO « nrmno dtodd* fKOi)
AJ-7 Water. DaloolMd. dleUUed ee to fcctloo 1A1.
aJJ-TbeooldlinltinJe Acid Dolutioc Dtaeoln H |
et pm wblte phenol In 1*0 ml tmeeoOUed euHurtc
•otd «• a eteam bath Ont, add 7» ml (umloc euMurlc
••eX, and beat at 100- C&TT) tor I boon. Mm In
fjaak. ratainlac a •amdeat qmn9ty far nee In prepanof
the callbraUon (tandardi loaert tbe fiaak valve etopper
teto tbe fiatk with tbe vain tn tbe "porn" ponUon
AaaembW tbe eampUnt bain ae aho*u In Flejun T-l
and place tbe probe at tbe eunpUni point taaka eon
thai all Btttn«i an tl(ht and Wak-fria, and thai all
{round fjaai lolntt bave bean properly fianert with a
Bib-vacuum, bkfh-tamperatun ebxrvfluoraoarbon-
freiefl Kopcock peaei Tom tbe laak vain and tbe
•nmc val»e te tbetr "•vaeuate" poalUont BvaenBU
tbe Batk to Ti mm HI 9 tn. HI) abtolute praaaun. er
kea KvacaaOon te a pi •mi approaching tbe vapor
praarure o< water at tbe exlitlni temperature le eVaalrable
Turn tb* pump vain le ttt rivent poaluoc and Cum
pump Obeck tor
tor any
anm voc 4», wo. I*O-WO«»AY, AOOWT i§. itrr
D- 39
-------
urn
RUlfi AND lEGULATIONft
tntfa
I nunn
Man W mm Hs (D.« IB. Eg) o*» t period at
, ti aot acceptable, end the flau: 1* not to to
until UM leakage probta 1* corrected. Prawn
In tfej flu& I* oo« to exceed 79 nun Hg (J In. Hgl absolute
at UM ami) sampling \a commenced.) Record the volume
of UM Oteis en
mo*po«ro until UM Sitk prenm* It almo* cquel t*
Wroospiurle pranta*.
4-2 Sample H«»Twy. Lst UM flaak set fcr« mlnlnram
oS l« boon and tbon shtto UM contenti t» 2 minute*.
Connect the flitk to a mercury filled U-tub* nuLnnmirlinf
Open UM rain tram UM 9aik to tbe maoometar and
record tbe fiaik temperaton (T/), tbe barometric
prawn, tnd UM dln*»r«nca bocwssn the marcurj I*T*|§ "
n UM manomatar. Tb« absolute Internal praowr* In
tba UMk (Pi) ta UM barometric preanre \tm tb« m»a-
omeUr reading. Tranate tbe conunt* of tbe ftaak ta «
DMk-dw pol7«thylan» bottle. Rlnn tne Oaik twice
with i-ial porUono of dclonlied, dlitllled watar and add
UM rtnM mtar ta tbe bottte. Adhut tb« pH to botww»
» and 13 by adding ndlum bydroilde (I N), dropirlaB
(aborat SS to «8 drops). Check tbe pH by dipping a
jtintnc rod lute Uw solution and tban touching the rod
to tb* pH tan paper. Hamoira as Unle m»t»rtal u pooribM
during liiit, sup. Mark UM bftlgbt of tbe liquid Vrel ae
that UM contamar era to cnackad for leakage attar
tramport. Tehftl Uw container to clearly IdvUi^ Its
imtanti Seal tbe container tor shlpplnj.
«J Analyal*. Note UM 1«T«1 of the liquid In container
and confirm whether or not any temple mi \ost during.
shipment; note Uui on the analytical data abeet. If a
noticeable amount of leakage hai occurred, either Told
UM nmpie or on nutbodX 5ab)ect to tbe approval at
tne Artmlnlitratar, to correct the Anal result*. Immedi-
ately prte to analyda, trani&r tbe contents of UM
snipping container to a 30-ml volumetric Ouk, and
rinae tbe oontaioar twice wltb S-ml portloni of delonlxed.
dlAUlad w&tar. Add the rinat water to the nuk and
dilute to tbe mark with deloolfed, dlJtlllad water; mix
tboroQgbly. Pipette a 2&*ml euqaot Into tbe procelato
eraporatlns di*. Return any oniaed portion of tb*
aample to tbe polyethylene (torage bottla. ETaponta
Uu 25-ml aUqoot to drynew on a steam batb and alktw
to oooL Add 2 ml phenoldifulfoolc add solution to tbe
dried retidne uid triturate thorougbly wltb a poyletbfi-
ene p^ii^^rMm Make sun the solution contact* all tne
ratidiw. Add 1 ml delonlted, custiUed water and (oar
drop* of oaacentrated niifmio add. Heat the solution
on a *taKn bith Cor 3 mlnotei wltb occasional stlrrlnf,
Allow tba solution to cool, add 3D ml delonlud, duttllla*
watar, mix well by itirrtng, and add concentrated MS-
monlon tiydrorld*, dropwut, with conotant stlrrinf>
until tbe pH 1« 10 (M determined by pH paper). If UM
sample contalnt ooildo, tbeai moat to remoTed by
llJtretSoo (centrlfugadon I* an acceptable alUmatlT*,
subject to tbe spproT*! of tbe Administrator), a* foUowc
flltar tbrooch wbotmaa No. 41 alter paper into a 100-ml
Tolumetrle flaik: rtna> tb« eTaporatlng dl*o wltb thraa
5-ml portiooa of dalonitsd. dljtllled water niter tbem
tone rtajas. Waa& ti>« Bltar wttb sf, laeat three U-fflS
portion! at delooJiad. cUnill«d water. Add tbe Bltar
waahlncs to the coatamU of the Tolumetrle fU*k ana
dilute £o tbe murk wltb deloniied, distilled water. U
solldi are abeant. th@ aalution can be tranfiferred dtreotrff
to in* lOO-mi Tolumetrk Oatk and diluted to tbe mark
wltb deioal&sd. di*tUl*d wat«. Mix tba content* of to*.
daik thoroughly, and meaoura tbe abavbano* at Uk9
optimum wsTueDgtb ussd tor tbe standard* (Section
3 J-l). using tbe blank wlutlon u a tero ntmaat. DlloU
tbe sample and the blank wltb equal Tolumei of deioa-
lud, dlitliled w&ta If UM abrarbanea txceada A* UM
abanrbsae* of tb* «M as NOi xaadard (•• geotiaa 4JJ».
water, to the stopcock. Muaauii the votem* of water t*
±10 ml. Record this volume on tbe aaafc.
9.2 SpecCropbotometer Calibration. ._
9.11 Optimum Wavelength Detarmlnarlnn. For botk
fixed and variable wavelength spectre-photometer*.
calibrate against standard certified wavelength of «1B
nm, every « months. Alternatively, for variable w*v»
length spectropholometM*. scan the spectrum totwea*
400 and 419 nm using a 200 i*j NOi standard solution (la*
Section 9.2.2). If a peak doe* not occur, tbe spectropbo-
tometer Is protobly malfunctioning, and should to re-
paired. When a peak Is obtained within the 400 to 419 na
range, the wavelength at which this peak occurs snail to
the optimum waTelength for the measurement of eo-
sortonoe for both the standards and sample*.
9.2.2 Determination of Sprctrophotometar Calibra-
tion Factor K.. Add 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. and 4.0 ml of too
END, working standard solution (1 ml-100 * NOO to
a series of five porcelain evaporating dishes. To each, add
21 ml of absorbing solution, 10 ml deloniied, distilled
water, and sodium hydroxide (IN), dropwtse, until UK)
pH Is between 9 and 12 (about 25 to 98 drops each).
Beginning with the evaporation step, follow the analy-
sis procedure of Section 4.*. until the solution ha* bean
transferred to the 100 ml volumetric flask and diluted to
tto mark. Measure the atoorbance of each solution, at UM
optimum wavelength, as determined In Section 9.XI.
This calibration procedure must to repeated on each day
that samples are analyted. Calculate tb* ipectropbotota-
eter calibration factor as follows;
ft.4 Bainple
.-100
Equation 7-1
whan:
tf.-Ceaoration factor
Xi-Absorbance of the 10(H4 NOi standard
A,- Abeorbanee of the 200-« NOi standard
/ti-Abaorbanoe of the 30O*« NOi standard
At- Absorbent* of tbe UXh* NOi standard
9.* Barometer. Calibrate agaln*t a mercury baraB-
eter.
9.4 Temperature Oange. Calibrate dial thermameten
agalnat mercnry4n^iHi thermometen.
5J Vacuum Gauge- Calibrate mechanical taoge*, U
ueed, agalnat a mercory manometer such a* that spod-
nedlnTTA
9.« Analytteal Balanea. Calibrate agaiiut standard
weigbta.
*. CUtilttttm
Carry oat the calculatton*, retaining at leait one atra>
decimal Ogon beyond that of the acquired data. Bound
off figures after final calculation*.
4.1 Nomenclature.
A-Absorbanc* of sample.
C-Concentration o( NO, a* HOi, dry beahi, cor-
rected to standard oondUiooa, mg/dasni
Ob/dad).
J?-Dilution factor (I e., 2S/9, 2»AO, etc, required
only If sample dilution was needed to rednea
the ebaorbanc* Into the range o( calibration).
jT.-Spertrophotometer calibration factor.
m-HBM of NO, M NOi In gas sample, «r.
PI- Final absolute pmsure of flask, mm Hg (In. Hg).
Pi-Initial abeolute preawn of flMk. mm Hg (In.
Hg).
Pnj- Standard abaomte pKuauia, TtOmm Hg (29.92 In.
Hi).
T/- Final absolute temperature of flask ,°K ("R).
T,-- Initial abeolute temperature offlaak. °K (°R).
Tat- Standard absolute temperature, TSOf K (528* B)
V,.- Sample volum* at standard condition* (dry
baiii), ml.
V/- Volume of fiaak and valv*. ml.
V.- Volume of absorbing solution, It mf-
2-80/24. the aliquot (actor. (If other than a 2a-ol
allnnot wa* used for analyslf, the correspond-
ing factor must to substituted).
6.2 Sample vorama, dry bad*, corrected to standard
condition*.
'--ft <"-'•> K-ft]
whan:'
JT,=-0.3858
mm Hg
Equation 7-2 '
for metric unit*
•17.64
for English unit*)
t.l TTflrit VoNiaM- The Tohim* of UM esUeetka
fl&ak nj7< combLnarkn moat bt known prior to »sar
pLLDj. Ammbl* tto UtaU: Mtd Sw& ralTe and flO wl»
in. Hg
S-i Total <« NOi par lamnto.
Equation 7-3
Nora.— If other tha* a 25-ml aliquot I* uaad tor analy
il(, tbe facto* t mast b* replaced by' a oomepondlnf
Equation 7-4
for metiio unit*
6.243X 10-*
for EngUt* unite
1. Standard Method* of Chemical Analy*BX ttk aft,
New York. D. Voa Noitnad Co., In*. IMaV. Vat, t,
2. Standard Method of Teat tor Oride* *f Nttrogio to
Oaseou* Combustion Product* (Phenoldlnlimk Add
Procedure). In: IMS Book of A8TM Standard*, Part 2a,
Philadelphia, Pa. 1M(. AflTM Deaignatlon D-UDMaV
p. 725-7J*,
a. Jacob, U. B. Tb* Chemical Analysl* of Air PoDnt-
*nt». New York. Intandanea PubUaban, Ina. IM*.
Vol. 10, p. 3S1-36*.
4. Beerty, B. L., L. B. Bargar, and H. H. Schrenk.
Determination of Oilda* of Nitrogen by UM PhenoldlsoV
fonic Acid Method. Bunao of Mine*, U.S. Dept. of
Interior. B. I. 38*7. February lUi.
9. Hamll, H. T. and D. E. Camann. CoUaboratlva
Study of Method tor tbe Determination of Nltrogaa
Oxide Bmiarion* from Stationary Source* (Foaall roaV
Fired Steam Generators). Soutbweet Beatarch Instltnt*
report for Environmental Protection Agency. Beaaarck
Triangle Park, N.C. October 9, 197*.
8. Hamll, H. T. and B. E. Tnomam. CouabontlT*
Study of Method tor tba Drtermlnatlon of Nttrogea
Oilde Emiadon* from Stationary Source* (Nitric Add
Plant*). South weet Beeearch Initttnt* report for En-
vironmental Protection Agency. Beeearch Triangle
Park. N.C. May 8, 1974.
Mmoo t—DrmnnLatau or Buinme Acrn Mar
ii»i> SuLnnt Dnxn>B EmiBiaiai )*IOH STATIOIIAXT
Souacn •
1. PrtndpU n* XppUeaMatr
1.1 Principle. A gas sample U extracted boklnetfcaBy
from the stack. The sulfnrlc acid mlit n'10~> pounds/cubic foot) for sulfur trioddt
and 1.2 mg/m> (0.74 10-' lb/ft') for sulfur dioxide. No
upper limit* have been established. Baaed on theoretical
calculation* for 200 milllliten of 3 percent hydrogen
peroxide solution, tbe upper concentration limit far
sulfur dioxide In a 1.0 m> (39J ft') ra* sample ll abort
12.600 mg/m> (7.7X10-1 lb/n>). The upper limit can to
extended by Increasing tbe quantity of peroxide sointlOB
in the impingan.
Possible Interfering agent! of this method are ftaorldea,
free ammonia, and dimethyl aniline. If any of that*
Interfering agent* are prernnt (this can to determined by
knowledge of the procee*), alternative method*, subject
to the approval of the Administrator, are required.
Filterable paniculate matter may to determined aloof
with SOi and SOt (subject to the approval of the Ad-
ministrator); however, the procedure used for partlculat*
matter must to consistent with tb* speclncatioD* and
procedure* given In Method a.
3. Xpperara*
2.1 Sampling. A r-»Miinatf
•traction detail* an described In APTD-06S1. Change*
from tba APTD-OSU document and allowable moot
ficadoo* to Figure t-1 an dlaroased In UM taUowla*
subeecoooa,
The operadng and maintenance procedural tor taw
am plug train an dens! tod In APT D-flST*. Sine* oomat
usage li Important In obtaining valid remit*, an uaaw.
should read tha APTD-057S <<~-iimjj—TMUUOAY, AUOUJT !•,
D-40
-------
417»
KUlll AND t&OULATlON*
SoUOrt* Add Standard (0.0100 Nl PMrehaaa a*
laa » ±00aai N afalnjt 0.0100 N NeOH that
Tfcneiy boa (tandardliad ecatnat primary
potaealojHi eald phthalasa.
(1.1 Pret aft PrwparaUoav Follow the procedure ovt-
yoed IB Method ». Section 4.1.1; filten ihould be uv
nerted, bat need not be dedocated, w«i|had, or Identl-
Gi U the effluent rat can be oonaldered dry La., mote,
tort tree, the ilUoa ral need not be welfhed.
41 j Preliminary Delermlnaltooa. Follow Uw pfw*
ado* outlined In Method 5, Section 4.1.1.
i u Preparation of Collection Train. Follow the pro-
arfun outlined In Method J, Section 4.1.1 (eicept tar
111 anond paragraph and other obnoualy Inapplicable
re/tl) and oat nror» e-1 Inrlaad at Flron 5-1 Replaoa
X anond pancraoh with: Place 100 ml at SO percent
iBoropaoai In the am Implnrer, 100 ml of 1 percent
tydnifaa paroied* In both the anond and third (at-
P*"**™ retala a ponton at eaah n««en» tor am m a
blank eomtlon. Place abom 3001 of aUica eel In UM ban*
Unplncar.
Norm.—I/ moljtor* coo tent U to be detarained'by
Implnjer analyjia, weljh eetch of the ftnt three LmpLnrer*
Iploa abeorblnfialatlon) to the o«ar«*t 0.3 < and reoord
theee wtlrita. The welf ht of the Ullca eel (or Ullca rai
fiat container) moat alao be determined U> the nan eat
0-5 | and recorded.
4.1.4 Prate** Leak-Check Procedure. Follow Uw
baate procedure outlined In Method 5, Section 4.1 4-1,
noting that the probe heater ihall be adjusted to the)
minimum Umperatun required to preTent coodenaa*
Uoo, and tJao that vorbece tuch aa. * * pluct^nx the)
InM to the filter holder • • V" ihall be replaced by,'
"• • • pltiMlnt the Inlet to the ftrat Impinfer • • V*
The pnteat leal-check U optional.
4.1J Train OperarJon. Follow UM baato proeadoni
outlined In Method 6, Section 4.1 J,, In conjunction with
UM toUowlnt fpacMJ Inatmctlona. DaU ahall b* retorted
on a (beet atmOar to the one In Ftenre *-«. The i _
rate ihall no« exceed 0.030 m'/mln (1.0 rfm) dnrlnj
ran. PertodlcaTly durtn< the tee*, obeerre the connect
line between the probe and firat Lmpinfar lor ilfot
ccndenaatlon. U It doe* occur, adjujt the probe beat*
to prrrant coodacjatkn. U compoaentchanfai beccnaa
ornearr during a ran. a leak-check shall be done (m-
mediately befcn each ehanre, aooordlnf to the procedtar*
ootllned In Section 4.1.4J of Method i (with approprua*
mnrtlflrallocii u manttoned In Section 4.1.4 at that
method); record aD leaet rata*. U the laraci rate
eioaad the epedfiad rate, the teeter ahall either roid UM)
ran or ihall plan to correct the aunpl* rolume at oeaV
lined In Section ej at Method 9. Ti"mrtl«ter)- after coaa.
poneot thaarea, leak-cheek* an opoooai. U Uvaaa
leak an don*\ the procedure outlined In Seedea
i.1.4.1 at Method. * (with appropriate
inaUbai
rXA»t_
IOCATIOI -
OKRATOH _
OATI _
RUIM. -
SAM1EIOXM..
MCTUUXIML.
CFACTOH
rTTOT TUlf COEFFICIENT. Cf.
mm Hf da. «•>.
AMJIEITT TEMfERATUBt
SAROMCTRIC PfltSJUHl
ASSUMED MOUTURE, %
PROIE LER8TH. • (ft)
SCHEMATIC Of STACK CROSS SECTION
NOZZLE IDENTIFICATION NO
AVERAflE CALIIRATED NOZZLE DIAMETER,
PROIE HEATER SETTINt
LEAK RAT!, m3tm*,(ttm)
PROBE LINER MATERIAL
FUTtHNw.
TMVI Wl MHNT
NUMHK
TOTAL
SAMFtUM
TMfl
(«),a*.
Avuuua
VACOOat
oTrt}
HACK
TEMKIUniRI
fTl*.
•tfn-
vHocrrr
MEAN
.
PRE0UM
DIFFEREimAL
ACROSI
ORIFICI
METER,
mm Hj9
(ia. HjOJ
-
GASSAMPtl
VOLUMI.
ar3(hJ»
8AI SAMPtE TEMftRATURf
AT DRY 6Af METER
INIET.
•ci»n
Ayfl
OUTLET,
•€(•«
Av«
A«f
TtMFtRATUM
OFQAI
LEAVmt
CONDENSER OR
LAST IMrMNeER,
»C(»F)
itar tornlnf otT UM pomp and ^•••K«JJJ Us* 9am\
l^liiff at to* oonrlniioo of each ran. remor» tha probe
no lh< rtack. Coodoet a (Mat-teat (mandatory) leak-
™t*ai la Section 4.1.44 o( Method 5 (with approprlat*
annotation) iod record Uu leak rat*. U UM poat-taat
'»U(i rtu riceedi the tpeclnad ecceptabU raU, UM
•W" Hull (Ithar correct the aunpU rolonM, M outlined
*%*U°o «-> of Method 5. or ihall rold UM ram.
"nta th* lo> baih and, w-tth UM probe dlanxuMoUaV
mrri the nmalolni part ot the train, by drawln* clean
uMant air throofh UM rritam lor U mlnot*) a* taw
"«d Bow rate ua>d to aunplln*.
J*on.—Clean nnblent air can be prorlded br pi
»throaa*, charcoal Oltar. At the option at the I
""blent ilr (vlthoot cleaolnr) mar be ua»d-
UJ CtlculatloD of Peroant IioklnetM. FoDrar tft*
»»ednr. outlined In Method J. Section 4.1 A
u 9ample Reoorary.
U4 Cooulaer Me. 1. U • moiatare oontamt anatyatt
Flgur* 8-2. Fltld dataV
U to be done, w«lcb tha ftnt Impinfar pin* oaatentt (•
Uie neanet OJ ( and record Uilj weight.
Tranitar the coatcaU of the Orrt Imptnter to a 190-ml
rraduated cylinder. Rlnje the probe, flrat Unplnfar. a&
corui^rtlrn lUarware t»(ore the filter, and the front half
of the alter holder with 90 percent Laoproconol. Add UM
do*) »luUoo to the cyllnaer. Dilute to 2M ml with M
percent iKpropanoL Add the filter to the »lution, "^
and a^ntltf to the rtoraf e cootalnar. Protect the loiuUaa
a«alnat ermporadoo. Mark the lenl at llqoM cm t»|
container and Identify the aunple oontalrjar.
4.U Container No. B. U a molitun contant analyvJv
U to be done, •«lth the eeeood and third lmpln«an
ipluj contenU) to the aeanat OJ ( and noord tbea*
wel«hta. AUo. welfh the tpent illloa ral (or illlea ral
ptujtmplniar) to the QearectO^|.
Trantfar the Kludonj tram UM leoood aad '>•>"<
lmpln«^rt to a I000-ml rraduated cylinder. Rlnai aQ
ocxmectlnl flaareran (Includini back hal/of Alter bokME)
between toe filter and illlea faTlrnpln(ar with lilrnlteef
dlittDad water, and add thlt rlnja water to the
Dilute to a roloma of 1000 ml with d«^ni-r1.
water. Tranifar the solution to a ttoraf* oootalnar.
the leral of Uquld on the >~.t»i~> a«al aod IdeoOty tee)
sajuple ccouloer.
44 Analrale,
Note the UTB! at Uqold In container* 1 aad I and
firm whether or oo< any aunple wu loat dnrln( e
ment; note thii on the analytical data ibeel It a noUoa-
abte amoont ol leakan hat occurred, either rold
mmple or ua» method*, tub feet to the apti
Administrator, to correet the final raauttav •
4.»,1 Container No. 1. Shake the container *>^*«-a
the l»propaaol solcrOoo and the filter. U the flrtar '
brtarj up, allow the rrafmenU to »nle tor a hw mlniriaa
b«lon remcrlm > ample. Pipette a 100-tnl allqao* at
thll lolutlon Into a 110-mJ Erlenjneyar fleet, add 1 U 4
dropa of thorin Indicator, and titrate to a pink endpoinl
ulln4 0.0100 N barium perchlorate. Repeat the Utrattoil
with > atoond allqaot of aunpk and 11 aiaeje the Ut '
MOIfTa*. VO*. el, NO. 1 •«—THUISOAT. AUOUST It, IfTT
D-41
-------
tULES AND •EOULAT10NS
1VMK NATURE SEKSOR
4178
^HERMOMCTER
rrroT TOIE
tCMTC MATURE KMSOR
•VACUUM
«AU6E
MAIN VALVE
TEST METER
figurt 8-1. SuMuftc acid mitt campling train.
14.4
VUter Eoldor. Bercaflloat* ria», wttb a UM
felt filter auupal and a aUicont robber (aaket. Other
•ekat material*, M . Tenon or VI ton, may b* and *ob-
fccl to tb* approval of the AdmlalnraUr. The holder
•nilpi aball prorld* a poUQT* eetl afalnfl taakaf e tmm
tb* ontrfde or aroond the filter. Tb* filter bolder aball
we placed between the ant and tee and Imgtafan. Note:
Do not beat the filter bolder.
1.1.8 Imptnfert—Vow, a* ehowB la Tlnre 1-1. Tb»
flnt and third (ball b* at th* Or»eobori*mlUi daalrn
with naodaril tip*. The anood and (rarth aball be of
to* Oreaabarf-Smllb dedcn, modified by repkdiic the
I men wlub aa approHaately U millimeter (OJ ln.1 ID
ftea tobe, haTliu an tmoonttrleted tip located 11 mm
JBJ In.) from UM bottom i
o) UM fluk.
llw
wfttama, which bar* boas «ppror»d by UM Admlato-
-^— ay baoMd.
J.L10
S, hcttm 11.10.
T«D(Mntan Otai*.
UM
' Buianr tnln to wtUdn I
ump«tnr» of UM |u
dnI*0 (T F).
1X4 TripBtta
t&tixr""*""
U
OndoaUd Cyttnd*. MO nl
Trip BataacB. HO |
otbtnrta. Indicated. aD nafno an to «onfcrm
to U» (ptdfiaiUow ««lihinh«d by UM CommlttM on
AaalrtJcal Ktaftnu of UM AHMruan Cbonkml BoOMtj,
vbv< nub ipKlficaaoni an anUabk. OUMrwte. MI
,,„ U.- hl*± UltfUlh) Mid ~*^ iMMBWMet. Vl
UM tollowtaf teet tor detects* paroxidei In each tot I
bnpropanol: Shtka 10 ml of the leopropano) with 10 •
•Ifrcahly pnpared 10 percent imlaerlnni loJM* tontBot
Fnpan a blank by almlkrly traado* 10 ml of dletfll*
•ater. After 1 mJooU, read the abaorbanee on a epaetn
- •• ptometei at «U nanomoten. U the aheorbaaei *n*d
the taopropanol aball not be oaed. Paradda may b
toved from leopropano] br ndlitilllnf. or by pa«a»
t&OKflib a f^"*^" of actiTated alojnloa, Bowever, n
ajut-crvU l»opropanol with Biltably low panddeleral
• nadUy aTaUable from eommerdbl aooreei, thenew
nAectioD of T^"1irnlnetti1 lot* •**»T he nor* et^
mllowlni the peroxide ramoTaTprMadan.
t BydrafeQ Parozlde, I PenaoU Dlrot* !
percent hrdrofan pwodd* to I Mar wHb **
M wau». Prapan frawj dally.
Oraahadle*.
&J4
U
«J-1 W
pM
aW
.
laBM M U J.
~
_-
ftvo).
4U tampUoc.
U.I Ttivm. teoM M Melted I, tatfan U O.
•J J Hlka (M. iam« M MAbod I, lanUoa U J.
(.U WaUr. rMoolud, dliUUad to oonJnrm M AITM
j^arlftnailon Dllva-74, Typ» «. At UM opOoo of UM
•oajjitf Uu KUflOi t«t far wtfltiiHt ar(aiilo mtUM
laay b* onltud whan hkb oonontraUont rf
«Mitt€r an not axpaoMd to b* pi ••lit.
M Fraot. Kb
U Analrilt
•J.I WaUr.
U.1 bDpropanol. MO PanaM.
iO.1 Tbortn lodicatar. H
.OradoMed -Oyttadan. m mi, t I
•--• ly alao b* wad.)
Hon.—
KzparMnee hai ebown that only A.CJ. (rade
>1 u eatlebvyry. Teats have ahown that
from erffnTiMiclal
wfll
1 J6
to
with
.
t-dunllonk add, dtoodinB nit, or
O.K | la 100 ml of datonlMd, dtalUad
A« Bartnin Pmhlonu (0.0100 Normal). Dto*
6 1 of bartom panhuraU trUiydnt* (Ba(C10iMB«
m ml d«lonlud, dinllwd watar. aad dllnw «o 1UM
UDDTO panel, i J3 | of partom ohkrld; dlhydrml
lrjS^5)m.T b* ovd tanuad at tb* todnm *•
u. tundardlu wNh mlftirt* add a> In i*«U|"l U
mfaUon m»at b* pulaaail mtnat iiayaiillai I
ebwrai
ThlJi
•0
VOl. 41, NO. «
D-42
, *MU*T It, IfTT
-------
tULIS AND IIOULAHONS
41789
•hm afepUeate tttntkni maet a«ni *1Uilii 1 percent
OJ ml vhioiMTw to freaux
44J OocUliMi No J. Tboroofhly mil UM mlntJoc
~l UM oooUlnjr boWlnj Uw gooUoU of Ui« Mood aad
-1rd Implujwi. Plpetu* 10-ml aliquot of awnpl* Into i
>-mJ Krlenmeyv Beak. Add ml of leopropaooL 1 to
4 drop* of tharin Indicator , and titrate to » pi ok md point
feint aaiOO N barium perohloraU. Bepeal UM Utratlon
With • leoood aliqaot of eunpk and mrwi the Utratton
« btonka la toe eun* meaner M UM Ti
NoUU»l
b« ooMKiMxJ d/7,
mdtetun oacUot and Dot t» ««>r«H»1«r1
•alfartc «old mM CUatodH* §O»)
4.1 Oallbrvt* equipment ariaf tb* procedure! epeet-
nTofWbod 4: BecttooSJ
-
fv) to UM fcUovtaf
•yvtaxn); Beottop 4.2 (texDperatint §aoc«e)
Motion {.7 rbaromrter) Not* that lie rtoommended
leak-obter. of Uie metering tnum. deacrlbed U> BecQon
44 of Method 5. aleo applie* io thlj method
a_> Btandardlu the bartam nerohjoraU nlutkn with
• ml of ttandard eolrark *old, to which 100 ml of 100
: enpropanol bee been added.
8-2
JTt-aoejot i/mOUeiTatTaent far metrfc
-LOElXlo-ilb/nMCi tar Bo
44 Bolttu dkoide eeneei
Nett.— OVTT eat
.
•ptn of noule, m> (Tt1).
B»— W»t«r rmpor In UM (>• Anam,
by rohime
,-»u)hu-k: Kid (tootodli* BOO
tMloin Ob/djcf)
OBOi-Balfiu dicaid* MDentratioc,
dKf).
/-P«ro«nt of l»okln«tic «mplltn.
N— Normality of twrlom pvchkntc tttnnt, f
•qolT»leotj/Ul«r
rU t«i«iiiiii d UM f-~rtnt rtu,
MUuH* (In. Hf).
,— Ab»olat« Mack (M t»i»mi, BUD Hi On
d-BUndard
Kqu&tion 8-8
JTt— (tOOO! (MMQ tor metric anru
• 7JKlX10--ilb?nMq tor
4.7 baklootlc Variation.
4.7.1 OalfmbfVm from rav data.
f •— A
abeolnU
abeomte dry •
B).
tv ta
mtn
Kqu*Uon 8-4
JCi-OJDMM mm Hf-rnVml-T tor metric nntu.
-0,OCOeT6 In. Hi-rV/ml-'B tor Knfll«fa onru.
4.7 J Oakroktiacihan tnarmtdlaU
Fl«nr«»-a),' K f* B).
TKd-BUruUrd abiolatc tamfMntim,
air B).
M* K
T.Vm
V«<»bD
.
V.-VoJam* of Mmpfe kUooot tttntel, WO ml
tor Hi6O, and 10 ml tor 8Oi.
« of Uanld ealkotad IB tnptncOT
md mioaitl. ml.
F.-VolmiM of nj mmpl* a« inaa»n1 ¥7 dry
•EM nrtiflT, don} (dcO-
-Vol£ime o/(M mm pie nmilnml by tb* dry
•M BMttr oometod to
•nm
to iUcdard ootidrtlooi.
7-
JTi-4JX> tor M^rki miu.
-4UM60 far *n»li»b nnlu.
ftack iw ntoettr. —'—'-•-' br
Method J, Kgoa&on t-0 Qfln» data obtaltMd
from M«tnod 8, m/tee (ft/we).
Katn-Total roJome of nlotlon in wltich UM
•oltarlr add or fnlfui dioxide Mmpl« to
«ontain«d. VO ml or 1,000 ml, rMpteUTarr.
- Vr~ Volume of bartom penhioraU tftnnt g«>d
tor UM lam pi*, ml
Vu-VolpnM of baiUun pvshknU tttrmnt «a*d
tor UM bbuxk, ml.
Y"Drj gu m*Ur eaUbratioTJ tootor.
AB-Anrue uiMmit drop
arm (In.) HrO.
• ••Total mmplmf tim», mln.
.
44 AowpUbl* RMOTU. If «0 nvant . CalibraOon, and qDeratton
pllDf Eoolpment. Ofon *f
menlal Protectloc Afeney.
>-K AH/13.8)
-
8-1
Xi-flJ4M 'I/nu» HI tor nutrlc tmto
• 1744 'BAo. Effar ro«ll*h nsiu.
Won -U UM teak raU ebMrrwl durtnj any maoda-
ajry Uak-olMek> arowl< Ui« n«cHWrt anetptabU rau,
4h* un«r thall *lth«r oornet UM rmlo* M V. In Eo
-1 AY, pUWOTt It, 1*77
D-43
-------
APPENDIX E
E-l
-------
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
MEMORANDUM
TO= Project File DATE: August 8, 1977
SUBJECT: Trip Report - Visit to Magma Copper FROM'- V. Katari
Company, San Manuel, Arizona on
7/22/77
FILE: 3287-B cc: L. Yerino
T. Devitt
R. Gerstle
After visiting the Phelps-Dodge Copper Company at Ajo,
Arizona, on July 21, 1977, Larry Yerino and I drove to
Tucson, Arizona, with Larry Bowerman and Bill Thurston of
EPA Region IX. The following day, we were joined by Steve
Schwartz of BAQC, and all of us visited the Magma Copper
Company at San Manuel, Arizona.
Larry Bowerman explained the purpose of our visit during a
brief meeting attended by the following people:
Bill Wood - Magma Copper Company
J. D. McCaine - Magma Copper Company
Art Verdugo - Magma Copper Company
F. C. Davis - Magma Copper Company
D. C. Ridinger - Magma Copper Company
Mike McCarthy - Magma Copper Company
Dale E. Zabel - Magma Copper Company
Ralph Sievwright - Attorney for Magma Copper Company
Larry Bowerman - EPA, Region IX
Bill Thurston - EPA, Region IX
Steve Schwartz - BAQC
Larry Yerino - PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
Vishnu Katari - PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
As stated during the meeting, the purpose of the visit was
to inspect reverberatory furnace operations at the smelter,
including charging practices and the flue gas handling and
control system, and also to survey the available space for
an add-on emission control system in the vicinity of the
current system.
Art Verdugo and Mike McCarthy of Magma showed us the re-
verberatory furnace and its emission control system. All
three reverberatory furnaces were in operation during our
E-2
-------
-2-
inspection. Furnace No. 1 was being charged with concen-
trate delivered by a conveyor belt system. An operator
manually opened the furnace doors on the side (three at a
time) to allow the concentrate to drop into the furnace. As
each charge dropped into the furnace, it produced a big
cloud of dust.
The three reverberatory furnaces are located in parallel,
from south to north. After the concentrate is mixed with
precipitator dust, limerock, and flux, it is stored in
gravity-type feeders. It is transported from storage to the
furnaces by conveyor system. The addition of converter slag
to the concentrate is necessary because it aids in the
formation of a bottom bed in the furnace. Matte, the
furnace product, is tapped near the center of the furnace,
is gravity-fed into laddies, and then is moved to the
converter area. The slag formed in the furnace is tapped
near one end of the furnace and flows into slag pots, which
are hauled by rail car to the slag dump.
Exhaust gases from each furnace pass through a set of two
waste-heat boilers into a common balloon flue, then through
an electrostatic precipitator header to three independent
electrostatic precipitator units. The treated gases pass
into a common header and then are vented through a natural
draft stack operating at a negative pressure of from 2.0 to
2.5 inches water. A manually controlled header installed
underneath the gas header collects any dust carryover. A
bypass duct connects the balloon flue to the common header
for the treated gases. A duct system is installed to take a
bleed stream of treated gases to an SCRA* pilot plant, which
is not operating at present.
Each electrostatic precipitator consists of three fields,
and two hoppers, is equipped with inlet and outlet dampers,
and each ESP can perform independently. According to Magma
personnel, each precipitator inlet is installed with one
diffusion plate. They do not know, however, whether the
transformer-rectifier (TR) units are working efficiently, or
whether any air infiltration sources are present in the
entire gas handling and treatment system.
Heavy material collected in the waste-heat boilers is
charged to the converter, and fine dust is charged to the
reverberatory furnace. The ducts are periodically cleaned
to remove settled dust. The matte and slag areas are
hooded, and the collected gases are exhausted directly to
* Smelter Control Research Association.
E-3
-------
-3-
individual stacks. Magma personnel believe that particulate
emissions from matte tapping are negligible; therefore, they
have never conducted particulate testing under the hood
system. Some sulfur dioxide may be emitted from the tapping
hood area.
Magma personnel indicated they have never tried to pelletize
the converter slag before adding it to the reverberatory
furnace.
Usually five converters are operated and one is held as a
spare during the operation of all three reverberatory
furnaces.
Magma is planning to convert their reverberatory furnaces
from oil and gas firing to coal firing. They predict that
they may have to improve the waste-heat boiler system and
flue gas handling system. They are also prepared to install
any required add-on control system. The EPA Region IX
informed Magma that the facility will be subject to NSPS
regulations. EPA is planning to conduct particulate sam-
pling on the reverberatory furnaces before and after con-
version to coal. The Arizona EPA in planning to conduct
particulate sampling on September 12 and 13, 1977.
Our inspection revealed that enough space is available in
the vicinity of the current control system and stack to
install any necessary add-on equipment. The following
figure (not in scale) depicts the location of the current
control system and indicates the space available for add-on
equipment.
Magma will make available to PEDCo (through EPA Region IX)
general drawings of the current particulate control system
and different material stream analyses.
E-4
-------
\/e
f o t
Loc
t>
__ cf-
f j r
E-5
-------
PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
MEMORANDUM
TO= Project File DATE: August 3, 1977
SUBJECT: Trip Report - Phelps-Dodge Copper FROM'- V. Katari
Company, Ajo on 7/21/77
FILE' 3287-B «: L. Yerino
T. Devitt
R. Gerstle
On July 21, 1977, Larry Yerino and I visited the Phelps-
Dodge Copper Company at Ajo, Arizona. Messrs. Larry Bower-
man and Bill Thurston of EPA Region IX accompanied us to the
plant and Mr. Steve Schwartz of BAQC joined us there. The
purpose of the visit was to acquire data on the reverbera-
tory furnace operating procedures and the air pollution
control equipment operation, and to survey the available
space for an add-on control system in the vicinity of the
current control equipment.
Mr. F. R. Rickard, the smelter manager, briefly described
the reverberatory furnace operation and later showed us the
furnace and its control system.
The reverberatory furnace burners are designed for burning
natural gas, or diesel oil, or No. 6 oil. The plant has not
been operating because of a strike, but the reverberatory
furnace has been kept hot by firing natural gas, a necessary
step to keep the silica arc support inside the furnace from
falling down; rebuilding the arc would require 4 to 5 weeks.
Phelps-Dodge Copper Company maintains a smelter repair team
at the plant.
Phelps-Dodge Copper Company at Ajo, usually smelts con-
centrate prepared from its own mined ore; however, custom
concentrates are sometimes smelted on an optional basis,
depending upon the furnace availability (production never
exceeds design capacity).
The concentrate is brought to the plant, stored in cans, and
taken through a double arc gate to the hopper. Its typical
moisture content is 6 1/2 to 7.0 percent. The concentrate
is charged onto a variable-speed belt conveyor and is
dropped into a small feed hopper of a slinger machine. Lime
rock addition to the furnace is continuous. The flue dust
E-6
-------
-2-
collected in the reverberatory furnace electrostatic pre-
cipitator is recycled back to the furnace. The usual
material charging rate to the furnace is 1-1/2 to 2 tons/min
when the slinger machine is in operation. About 700 tons of
charge (of which about 94 percent is concentrate) is fed to
the reverberatory furnace per day. Table 1 presents a
typical material charge. The elapsed time between charging
the furnace to tapping the matte is usually 4 hours.
Approximately 30 to 36 taps are made per cycle. The furnace
has three matte tapping holes (two operate at a time), and
one slag tapping hole. The matte is tapped into laddies,
picked up by overhead cranes and are charged to one of three
converters. Usually two converters are kept hot (one
operates at a time). The converter cycle time is roughly 6
hours. The number of converter chargings corresponds to the
number of tappings.
Exhaust gases from the reverberatory furnace pass through a
pair of waste-heat boilers, then enter a balloon flue and a
common plenum chamber for the two independent, parallel,
electrostatic precipitator units. A heavy load of dust is
accumulated on the waste-heat boiler walls. The dust is
removed from the walls every 2 hours by the use of soot
blowers. The waste-heat boilers do not contain radiant
cooling sections, these are required to recover heat from
flue gas generated by smelters using coal as fuel. The gas
collection system was designed orignally so that 50 percent
of the gas stream from the electrostatic precipitator could
be directed through the DMA SC>2 absorption plant, and the
remaining 50 percent could be exhausted to the stack.
However, at present the duct arrangement for the gas stream
going to the DMA plant is completely cut off, so the entire
gas stream from the precipitator is exhausted through the
stack. An ID fan installed downstream of the precipitator
moves the gases through the stack. A flip-flop damper is
installed in the duct system so that the gases can be guided
either through the balloon flue or the duct work.
The reverberatory furnace matte and slag tap areas are
hooded, and the collected gases containing particulate
matter are exhausted directly to the smelter main stack.
The acid plant is not operating, but it is being kept in
operating condition by continuously checking for leaks and
material corrosion.
Any heavy particulate material dropped out in the waste-heat
boiler is recycled back to the converter; and the fine dust,
E-7
-------
Table 1. MATERIAL CHARGE TO THE REVERBERATORY
FURNACE ON JUNE 15, 1977
Material* Amount
Concentrate 636
Precipitates 9
Lime rock 31
Flue dust from reverberatory furnace 7
Reverts 7
Flue dust from converter precipitator 6
* In addition, 341 tons per day of converted slag is added.
Metallurgical Department of Phelps-Dodge Copper Company has
analyses of individual material changed. The data can be
obtained on request.
E-8
-------
-3-
depending on the quality, is recycled back to the reverbera-
tory furnace or the concentrator. Dust collection in the
waste-heat boilers is up to 6 tons per day on vertical
tubes; the amount collected on water wall sections is not
known. Analysis of the dust collected in the waste-heat
boiler hopper is available on a monthly composite basis.
According to Mr. Rickard, the furnace design is not suitable
for using pelletized converter slag as is the practice at
Kennecott Copper Company. In his opinion, converter slag is
used in the reverberatory furnace primarily for charge
recovery purposes and may not improve environmental conditions
Because the converter operation is exothermic, it is es-
sential to burn all the silica in the converter. For this
reason the heavy particulate from waste-heat boilers is
charged to the converters.
Mr. Rickard expressed that the flip-flop damper, the man-
holes on the ESP, and the access doors to the hoppers are
possible sources of air infiltration. The expansion joint
on the downstream side of the ID fan failed this year and
was a source of air infiltration. The reason for the
difference in measured velocity through the two ducts could
be due to size differences in the hanging dampers installed
in each duct.
Corrosion problems are being experienced from the electro-
static precipitator on the converter, usually when the flue
gas temperature is lower than 465°F, because of formation of
sulfuric acid.
Mr. Rickard does not know if the two new mist precipitators
installed can be utilized as add-on equipment to treat
reverberatory furance gases.
E-9
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA 909/9-78-001
3. Recipicnt'c Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle
Evaluation of Particulate Matter Control Equipment for
Copper Smelters
5. Report Date
February 1978 (issue)
6.
7. Author(s) Vishnu S. Katari, L. Yerino,
Edmund S. Schindler. and T. W. Devitt
8. Performing Organization Rept.
No- 3270-1-X
9, Performing Organization Name and Address
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
Task 24
11. Contract/Grant No.
No. 68-01-4147
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX
Enforcement Division (Task Manager-Larry Bowerman)
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
Final (1977)
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
5. supplementary Notes
EPA Region IX Project Officer for this report was Larry Bowerman
fo._A;b>tracts In 1977 at the request of EPA, Region IX, Enforcement Division, PEDCo En-
vironmental, Inc. conducted an investigation of particulate matter control equipment
which could be installed at two copper smelters located in Arizona. The two smelters
investigated were the New Cornelia Branch copper smelter of the Phelps Dodge Corpora-
tion located in Ajo, Arizona and the Magma Copper Company copper smelter located in San
Manuel, Arizona. The purpose of the investigation was to determine the technical fea-
sibility of compliance and the cost of control equipment necessary to comply with the
particulate matter control regulation. Fabric filters, scrubbers, dry and wet electro-
static precipitators were investigated with the assistance of Industrial Gas Cleaning
Institute member companies (through Task 2 of EPA Contract No. 68-02-7532, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Strategies and Air Standards Division). This re-
port includes a description of each smelter; an analysis of available emission data for
each smelter; and a summary of capital costs, annual costs and technical control equip-
ment data for 9 control options for each smelter.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17a. Descriptors
Copper Smelter
Particulate Matter
Instack Filter
Control Equipment
Description and Cost
Scrubber
'7b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Air Pollution Control
Operating Data
Control Equipment Costs
Emission Measurement
Sulfur Dioxide
EPA Methods 5 and 8
Dry Electrostatic
Precipitator
Air Pollution
Stationary Source
Emission Results
Emission Control
Sulfur Trioxide
Fabric Filter
Wet Electrostatic Precipitator
Sampling Methods
'7c. COSATI l-ield Or
oup
13B, 14A, 14D, 11F
'8. Availability Statement
Release Unlimited
19. Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
256
22. Price
FORM NTis-33 (REV. 10-731 ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO.
THIS FORM MAY BH REPRODUCED
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM NTIS-35 (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for the Federal Government,
PB-180 600).
1. Report Number. Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation selected by the performing
organization or provided by the sponsoring organization. Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only. Examples
FASEB-NS-73-87 and FAA-RD-73-09.
2. Leave blank.
3. Recipient's Accession Number. Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. Title and Subtitle. Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, subordinate subtitle to the
main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number and include
subtitle for the specific volume.
5- Report Date. !• ach report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected
(e.g., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation, date published).
6- Performing Organization Code. Leave blank.
7. Aothor(s). Give name(s) in conventional order (e.g., John R. Doe, or J.Robert Doe). List author's affiliation if it differs
from the performing organization.
8. Performing Organization Report Number. Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. Performing Organization Name and Mailing Address. Give name, street, city, state, and zip code. List no more than two
levels of an organizational hierarchy. Display the name of the organization exactly as it should appear in Government in-
dexes such as Government Reports Index (GRI).
10. Project/Tosk/Work Unit Number. Use the project, task and work unit numbers under which the report was prepared.
11. Contract/Grant Number. Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12- Sponsoring Agency Name and Mailing Address. Include zip code. Cite main sponsors.
13- Type of Report and Period Covered. State interim, final, etc., and, if applicable, inclusive dates.
14. Sponsoring Agency Code. Leave blank.
15. Supplementory Notes. Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with . . .
Translation of Presented at conference of . To be published in . Supersedes . . . Supplements
Cite availability of related parts, volumes, phases, etc. with report number.
16. Abstract. Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report.
II the report contains a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis, (a). Descriptors. Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the
proper authorized terms that identify the major concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
as index entries for cataloging.
(b). Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms. Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use
open-ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c). COSATI Field/Group. Field and Group assignments are to be taken from the 1964 COSATI Subject Category List.
Since ihc majority of documents are multid isciplinary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignments) will be the specific
discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object. The applicat ion(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary
Fie-Id/Group assignments that will follow the primary posting(s).
18. Distribution Statement. I /enote public releasability, for example "Release unlimited", or limitation for reasons other
than security. Cite any availability to the public, other than NTIS, with address, order number and price, if known.
19 & SO. Security Classification. Do not submit classified reports to the National Technical Information Service.
21. Number of Pages. Insert the total number of pages, including introductory pages, but excluding distribution list, if any.
22. NTIS Price. Leave blank.
FORM NTIS-35 (REV 10-73) USCOMM-DC 8263-P74
------- |