Aerotherm Project 7211
STACK TESTS AT
KENNECOTT COPPER CORP.
HAYDEN, ARIZONA SMELTER
R. Larkin, J. Steiner
Acurex Corporation/Aerotherm Division
485 Clyde Avenue
Mountain View, California 94042
May 1977
AEROTHERM FINAL REPORT 77-244
Prepared for
EPA Project Officer — J. Busik
EPA Task Officer — L. Bowerman
Environmental Protection Agency
Enforcement Division
EPA Region IX
100 California Street
San Francisco, California 94111
Contract 68-02-3158
Task 12
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2 RESULTS 2-1
2.1 Emission Test Results 2-1
2.2 Process Feedrate Determination 2-8
2.2.1 Process Weight and Allowable Emission Rates for
the Main Stack 2-8
2.2.2 Process Weight and Allowable Emission Rates for
the Acid Plant 2-9
3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 3-1
3.1 Main Stack 3-1
3.2 Acid Plant 3-9
4 EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION AND PREPARATION 4-1
4.1 Methods 5 and 8 Train 4-1
4.1.1 Nozzles 4-1
4.1.2 Probes 4-1
4.1.3 Filter/Cyclone Ovens 4-1
4.1.4 Umbilicals 4-5
4.1.5 Pumps 4-5
4.1.6 Control Modules 4-5
4.1.7 Impinger Train 4-5
4.1.8 Glass Fiber Filters 4-5
4.2 Calibration Procedures 4-6
4.2.1 Nozzles 4-6
4.2.2 Thermocouples and Digital Temperature Indicators 4-6
4.2.3 Dry Gas Meter and Orifice Meter 4-6
4.2.4 S-Type Pi tot Tube 4-10
4.2.5 Differential Pressure Gauges 4-17
4.2.6 Isopropanol 4-18
4.2.7 Mettler Analytical Balance 4-18
4.3 Moisture Train 4-18
4.4 Gas Sampling Train 4-18
5 PROCEDURES 5-1
5.1 Sampling 5-1
5.1.1 Preliminary Measurements and Calculations .... 5-1
U.S. EPA-NEIC LIBRARY
Denver Federal Center
1 n ] Building 25, Ent. E-3
P.O. Box 25227
Denver, CO 80225-0227
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)
Section Pa£e_
5.1.2 Methods 5 and 8 Testing Procedures 5-15
5.1.3 Methods 3 and 4 Testing Procedures 5-17
5.2 Sample Recovery, Handling, and Chain of Custody . . 5-18
5.2.1 Sample Recovery Procedures for Methods 5 and 8
Trains 5-18
5.2.2 Sample Recovery Procedures for Methods 3 and 5
Trains 5-20
5.2.3 Sample Handling and Chain of Custody Procedures . 5-21
5.3 Analytical Procedures 5-21
5.3.1 Particulate Heights 5-21
5.3.2 Impinger Solution Analysis 5-23
5.3.3 Orsat Analysis 5-25
APPENDIX A - DAILY ACTIVITIES A-l
APPENDIX B - CALCULATIONS AND DATA SHEETS B-l
APPENDIX C - PROCESS DATA C-l
APPENDIX D - CALIBRATION D-1
APPENDIX E - LABORATORY PARTICULATE WEIGHT DATA -
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK E-l
IV
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
3-1 Electrostatic precipitator reverberatory furnace .... 3-7
4-1 In-stack filter holder assembly 4-3
4-2 Rockwell model 415 gas meter calibration standard . . . 4-7
4-3 Aerotherm calibration wind tunnel 4-11
4-4 United Sensor hemispherical nose standard probe tube . . 4-13
4-5 Dwyer inclined manometer 4-15
4-6 Weight traceability certificate 4-19
4-7 Combined EPA Method 3 and 4 sampling train 4-21
5-1 Process diagrams 5-3
5-2 Sampling location acid plant tail gas stack 5-5
5-3 Sampling location — reverberatory furnace main stack . . 5-7
5-4 Main stack ports A and B 5-9
5-5 Main stack ports C and D 5-11
5-6 Reverberatory furnace Tests 3, 4 and 5 velocity profile 5-13
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
2-1 Main Stack Flue Gas Data 2-2
2-2 Main Stack Emissions Results 2-3
2-3 Acid P.I ant Tail Gas Stack Gas Data 2-4
2-4 Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack Emissions Results 2-5
2-5 Process Feed and Allowable Particulate Emissions Main
Stack - Reverberatory Furnace 2-6
2-6 Process Feed and Allowable Particulate Emissions Acid
Plant - Reactor and Converters 2-7
2-7 Test Schedule 2-11
3-1 Valid Main Stack Emission Rate Data 3-2
3-2 Comparison of Instack/Outstack Sampling Techniques
Reverberatory Furnace Main Stack 3-4
3-3 Statistical Analysis Particulate and Gaseous Emissions -
Main Stack 3-6
3-4 Reverberatory Furnace Electrostatic Precipitator Read-
ings for the Valid Tests 3-8
3-5 Summary of Sampling Times — Reverberatory Furnace Main
Stack 3-10
3-6 Summary of Sample Color Observations Reverberatory Fur-
nace Main Stack 3-11
3-7 Statistical Analysis Particulate and Gaseous Emissions -
Acid Plant 3-13
3-8 Particulate Weights (milligrams) for Method 5 Tests at
the Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack 3-14
5-1 Sample Point Distances from Stack Wall (inches) .... 5-2
VI
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
At the request of EPA Region IX, the Aerotherm Division of Acurex
Corporation undertook a series of stack tests at the Kennecott Copper Corpora-
tion's Hayden, Arizona primary copper smelter. The purposes of the test pro-
gram were:
1. To determine ,if the smelter's particulate emissions complied with
regulations for existing sources
2. To measure quantities of SO-/H-SO. and SO^ being emitted to the
atmosphere from point sources within the smelter
Tests were conducted at the following point sources:
1. The acid plant tail gas stack
2. The main stack venting emissions from the reverberatory furnace
The main stack was sampled during the period August 5, 1976 to August 11,
1976 and the acid plant tail gas stack was sampled on December 15 and 16,
1976.
This report documents the results obtained and preparations and pro-
cedures used by Aerotherm at the Kennecott Smelter. Section 2 presents
summaries of all results obtained and some general conclusions. A discussion
of the results is found in Section 3. Section 4 and 5 contain descriptions
of all preparations and procedures regarding sampling equipment, analytical
methods, and sample handling. The Appendices contain supplemental data such
as raw data sheets, process operating data, a daily activities summary, cali-
bration data, calculations, and laboratory data.
-------
SECTION 2
RESULTS
Included in this section is a summary of all particulate and gaseous
emissions results and process feedrate calculations for the two separate
sampling trips. Tests on the Kennecott Copper Smelter reverberatory fur-
nace stack were conducted from 8/5/76 to 8/11/76. Acid plant testing was
performed on 12/15/76 and 12/16/76. The allowable particulate emission
rates from the acid plant and the main stack are calculated using the for-
mula in the process weight regulation (40 CFR 52.126(b)) and the solid feed-
rates to the three individual processes (roaster, reverberatory furnace
and converters) that produce and vent effluent to the two point sources
sampled.
2.1 EMISSION TEST RESULTS
Results of the emission tests are most conveniently displayed in tab-
ular form. Two tables are presented for each point source sampled. They
are:
Table 2-1 — Main stack general test data, gas conditions and constituents
Table 2-2 — Main stack particulate and gaseous emissions, isokinetic
percentages, and allowable emissions
Table 2-3 — Acid plant tail gas stack general test data, gas conditions
and constituents
Table 2-4 —Acid plant tail gas stack particulate and gaseous emissions,
isokinetic percentages, and allowable emissions
Also included in this section is a discussion of the procedure for
calculating process rates - Subsection 2.2.
2-1
-------
TABLE 2-1. MAIN STACK FLUE GAS DATA
Hayden Reverb
Stack
Run #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Date
8-5-76
8-5-76
8-6-76
8-9-76
8-9-76
8-10-76
8-11-76
% Moisture
(BWQ x 100)
8.3
7.3
10.5
8.5
8.8
8.2
9.6
Volume Gas
Sampled
(Vmstd-scfd)
68.4
98.4
48.0
61.5
44.6
49.4
48.1
C02
(*)
4.2
4.2
3.7
4.3
4.2
4.3
4.2
02
(*)
13.5
13.5
13.8
13.6
13.5
13.9
13.6
Molecular Wt.
Dry Gas
(Md-lb/lb mole)
29.21
29.21
29.15
29.23
29.22
29.24
29.22
Molecular Wt.
Wet Gas
(Ms-lb mole)
28.28
28.39
28.98
28.28
28.23
28.32
28.14
Velocity
(Vs-fps)
4.6
7.7
3.0
3.8
3.2
3.6
3.0
Gas Flowrate
(Qs-scfh x 106)
6.2
10.3
3.9
5.1
4.2
4.9
4.1
IXD
I
-------
TABLE 2-2. MAIN STACK EMISSIONS RESULTS
Location
Hayden Reverb
Stack
Run I
1
1°
3'
4
5
6ci
r-"
Dace
8-5-76
8-5-75
8-6-76
8-9-76
8-9-76
8-10-76
8-11-76
Participate Concentration (gr/scfd)
Extrapolated
Weight
0.040
0.039
0.04!
0.021
0.021
0.027
0.068
First
featured
Height
0.041
0.039
0.043
0.021
0.021
0.029
0.069
Equll Ibrlun
Height
0.055
0.050
0.064
0.022
0.022
0.032
0.074
Particul
(lb/
Extrapolated
Height
5.7
i.(
6 0
3.0
J.O
3.9
9.7
First
Measured
Height
5.8
5.6
6 1
3.0
3.0
4 1
9.8
Equl 1 Ibrluffl
Height
7.8
7.1
9.1
3.2
3.1
4.6
10.5
Extrapolated
Height
35.2
57.7
23.2
15. Z
12.7
18.9
39.4
First
Measured
Height
36.3
58.2
23.7
15.3
12.8
19.8
40.0
Equilibrium
Height
48.4
73.2
35 2
K.I
13.2
22.!
4!. 8
Percent
Isoklnetlc
(I)
110.1
94.0
130.4
109.1
97.7
106.6
127.0
Allowable
Fjnlsslon Hate
(Ib/hr)
31.17
31.17
31 40
31 48
31.48
30.50
20.28
SO;
Concentration
(pp"i)
45%
3507
3084
3265
3810
4475
4S35
502
Concentration
(Ib/ft' x 10")
7.6
5.8
5.1
f 4
6.3
7 4
7.5
502
Emission Kate
(Ib/hr x 10')
4.7
5.9
2.0
2.8
2 6
3.6
3.0
S03/HjS04°
Concentration
(pp.,)
15
19
0.0
17
16
18
7
S03/H2S040
Concentration
(Ib/ft x 10-')
2.4
3.1
0.0
2.8
2 7
3.0
1 .)
50]/H!SO
Emission Hate
(Ib/Url
15 4
31 9
0.0
14.2
11.4
14.4
4.6
no
i
IntUd
clnttick fllter/outsUck filter tMplIng tr*1n
*Wtlculate Includes IrtsUck filter. ooUUcl filter, probe and nozzle latth
-------
TABLE .2-3. ACID PLANT TAIL GAS STACK GAS DATA
Run #
1
2
3
Date
12-15-77
12-15-77
12-16-77
% Moisture
(BWD x 100)
0.0
0.0
0.0
Volume gas
Sampled
(Vmstd-scfd)
50.97
54.77
52.32
S02
(X)
0.2
0.2
0.2
°2
(X)
8.3
8.3
8.3
Mole Fraction
Dry Gas
(Md-lb/lb mole)
28.40
28.40
28.40
Mole Fraction
Wet Gas
Ms-lb/lb mole
28.40
28.40
28.40
Velocity
(Vs-fps)
31.26
32.55
31.59
Gas Flowrate
(Qs-scfh x 106)
4.3
4.6
4.4
ro
i
-------
IX)
I
°As
TABLE 2-4. ACID PLANT TAIL GAS STACK EMISSIONS RESULTS
Run I
1
2
3
Date
12-15-76
12-15-76
12-16-76
Partlculate
Concentration
(gr/scfd)
0.043
0.023
0.018
Paniculate
Concentration
Ob/ft' » 10-')
6.2
3.3
2.6
Participate
Emission Rate
(Ib/hr)
27.0
15.4
11.7
Percent
Isoklnetlc
108.0
108.7
95.9
Allowable
Enlsslon Rate
(Ib/hr)
66.28
66.28
64.84
S02
Concentration
-------
TABLE 2-5. PROCESS FEED AND ALLOWABLE PARTICULATE EMISSIONS MAIN STACK - REVERBERATORY FURNACE
r-o
i
01
Tons concentrate to reactor
Percent sulfur in concentrate
Tons to reverb from reactor
Tons lime
Tons fettling
Total tons to reverb
Reverb feedrate — tons per hour
Allowable emission rate - pounds
per hour
August 5
1029
30.9
870
39
39
948
39.50
31.17
August 6
1102
32.5
923
41
29
993
41.38
31.40
August 9
1079
29.8
918
37
54
1009
42.04
31.48
August 10
834
27.3
720
27
81
828
34.50
30.50
August 11
413
30. Oa
351
16
25
392
16.33
20.28
Actual value not available - 30% is an approximation
bAppendix C - Kennecott April 13, 1977 letter
cAppendix C entitled "Data for Environmental Control
-------
TABLE 2-6. PROCESS FEED AND ALLOWABLE PARTICULATE EMISSIONS ACID PLANT
REACTOR AND CONVERTERS
Tons to reactor
Reactor operating hours
Reactor feedrate — tons per hour
Allowable reactor emission rate -
pounds per hour
Tons matte to converter
Tons flux to converter
Total tons to converter
Converter blowing hours
Converter feedrate — tons per hour
Allowable converter emission rate —
pounds per hour
Allowable acid plant emission rate —
pounds per hour
December 15
1528
22.25
68.67
34.05
720
330
1050
21.58
44.86
32.23
66.28
December 16
1415
23.50
60.21
33.35
738
58
796
18.92
42.07
31.49
64.84
Appendix C - Kennecott, April 13, 1977 letter
^Appendix C — Circular charts
2-7
-------
2.2 PROCESS FEEDRATE DETERMINATION
In order to determine the allowable particulate emission rates for
the acid plant tail gas stack and the main stack, process feedrates for each
source had to be determined. The allowable emission rate for the main stack
is a function of solids fed to the reverberatory furnace. The allowable
emission rate for the acid plant is a function of solids fed to the fluidized
bed reactor and the converters. A description of the procedures used to
compute these process feedrates follows.
2.2.1 Process Height and Allowable Emission Rates for the Main Stack
Allowable emissions from the main stack are a function of solids fed
to the reverberatory furnace. Since no direct means exists to measure this
feedrate, an estimate must be made based on the reactor feed. Briefly, the
calculation method suggested by Kennecott states that all the reactor feed
goes to the reverberatory furnace as calcine except 50 percent of the feed's
sulfur content. This percentage is Kennecott's estimate of the sulfur lost
as oxides in the reactor vessel. The sulfur content of the reactor concen-
trate is analyzed daily and these values for the test days can be found in
Appendix C. Lime and felting (for furnace wall protection) are additionally
charged to the reverberatory furnace. These values are also found in Table
2-5.
It would be possible to verify the 50-percent loss approximation by
analyzing the calcine sulfur content or by doing sulfur oxide emissions tests
upstream of the venturi scrubber in the reactor flue. However, this testing
is beyond the scope of work for the program.
The formulas used to calculate the allowable particulate emission
rates for processes of this type are taken from CFR Title 40 Subsection
52.126. These formulas are:
1. E = 3.59 p°'62 where P £ 30 tons/hour
2. E = 17.31 p°-16 where P > 30 tons/hour
where
E = emissions in pounds/hour
P = process weight in tons/hour
2-8
-------
Total feedrates to the reverberatory furnace on the test days were all greater
than 30 tons/hour except August 11. Therefore Equation (1) was applied to
this day's test while Equation (2) was applied to the data from August 5, 6,
9, and 10. Results of these calculations can be found in Table 2-5.
It should be noted that although reactor feedrate data appears in
the main stack daily activities section, it has no direct bearing on emissions
to the main stack. This is a function of feedrate to the reverberatory
furnace. However, reverberatory furnace operation is dependent on feed from
the reactor. For this reason — to indicate steady feed to the reverb — this
data has been included. Units are in tons for the time period sampled in
each port (30 minutes).
2.2.2 Process Weight and Allowable Emission Rates for the Acid Plant
Allowable emissions form the acid plant are a function of solids fed
to the reactor and converters. Effluent from these two smelter processes are
vented to the acid plant after primary cleaning in the venturi scrubber (re-
actor off-gases) and the Peabody scrubber (converter off-gases). The reactor
feedrate is measured by a weightometer located before the reactor concentrate
storage bin. Reactor operating times have been taken from the reactor feed-
rate circular charts found in Appendix C. Converter total feed weights,
which include reverb matte and converter flux, have been provided by Kennecott
in their April 13, 1977 letter — also found in Appendix C. Separate emission
limits are calculated for each process (roaster and converters). The allow-
able particulate emission rate from the sulfuric acid plant is determined
by summing the two individual process emission rates for the roaster and
converter processes.
The formulas used to calculate the allowable particulate emission rates
for processes of this type are taken from CFR Title 40 Subsection 52.126.
These formulas are:
1. E = 3.59 p°'62 where P £ 30 tons/hour
2. E = 17.31 p°-16 where P > 30 tons/hour
where
E = emissions in pounds/hour
P = process weight in tons/hour
2-9
-------
Total process feedrates for December 15 and 16, 1976 are greater than 30 tons/
hour therefore Equation (2) is used. Allowable particulate emission rates
were then calculated to be 66.28 and 64.84 pounds per hour respectively. The
figures used for these calculations can be found in Table 2-6.
There are two weightometers located just before the reactor concentrate
storage bin. One of these is not accessible and therefore not calibrated often.
The data from this weightometer can be found on circular charts in Appendix C.
The figures used in our calculations are from the more accurate weightometer
and can be found in Kennecott's April 13, 1977 letter. Reactor operating
times were, however, taken from the circular charts.
The hourly converter feedrates were calculated based on examination
of the converter blowing charts in Appendix C (Converter number 1 was not
operational during the acid plant test series). For a given 24-hour period
the total number of hours during which at least one converter was blowing
was determined. The total converter feed during the same 24-hour period
was then divided by the numbers of hours in which at least one converter
was blowing. The resultant figures were the hourly converter feedrates for
December 15 and 16, 1976 as shown in Table 2-6.
Table 2-7 presents the sampling schedule and how it coincided with
the reactor and converter operating times. The process times have been
taken from the circular charts in Appendix C. Time intervals of 10 minutes
or less when the process was down have been considered as part of continuous
operation.
2-10
-------
TABLE 2-7. TEST SCHEDULE
12/14/77 12/15/77
Midnight A.M. P.M.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 34 56/789 10 11 12
Run 1 1 < 1
Run 2 - |
Run 3
Reactor operating — •• • | III II ||
Converters operating
(blowing times)
#9 1 1 1 1 II
#9 1 1 1 1 1 J i 1 1 II 1 1 II 1 1 1
If J 1 1 M I 1 I 1 I II I I II 1 1 1
12/16/77
A.M. P.M.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
| 1
1 1
II
II
\ 1 1 H 1 — 1 1— I HHMI IHh— 1
HIII 1 1 1 1 i
-------
SECTION 3
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
3.1 MAIN STACK
Table 2-1 summarizes some general test conditions and various flue
gas parameters. Table 2-2 summarizes all emissions data and the isokinetic
percentages for the main stack tests. Particulate results from tests 2, 3,
and 7 have been invalidated for the following reasons:
1. Tests 1, 3, and 7 exceeded the isokinetic sampling guideline re-
quired by EPA Method 5 in that they did not fall within the range
90 <_ percent I _< 110. The isokinetic percentages for these tests
are 110.1, 130.4 and 127.0 percent respectively. However we
believe Test 1 to be acceptable and the results representative.
Test 7 has a suspiciously high instack filter weight - indicating
the possibility of port scale contamination. Since this is spec-
ulation only, it does not constitute a basis for rejection of
this test. The high isokinetic percentage, however, is cause
for rejection.
2. Test 2 has been discarded because a faulty umbilical cord (kinked
pi tot tube hoses) produced inaccurate velocity pressure readings
yielding results over 100 percent greater than the average veloci-
ties of the remaining tests.
Table 3-1 presents a summary of all valid main stack emission rate
data. Using data from the three valid filter outstack tests, average par-
ticulate emission values have been calculated. They are:
Particulate concentration - 0.027 gr/scfd
Particulate concentration - 3.9 x 10~6 lb/ft3
Particulate emission rate —21.0 Ib/hour
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1. VALID MAIN STACK EMISSION RATE DATA
Run #
1
2
3
4
5
6a
7a
Particulate
(Ib/hr)
35.2
r
r
15.2
12.7
18.9
r
S02
(Ib/hr x 103)
4.7
r
2.0
2.8
2.6
3.6
3.0
S03/H2S04
(Ib/hr)
15.4
r
0.0
14.2
11.4
14.4
4.6
r - rejected
a - instack/outstack filter used
3-2
-------
Particulate emission values for the valid instack/outstack filter test
is:
Particulate concentration — 0.027 gr/scfd
Particulate concentration - 3.9 x 10~6 lb/ft3
Particulate emission rate — 18.9 Ibs/hour
Table 3-2 shows these emission values separated into their filter instack and
filter outstack fractions. These figures are not totally accurate because the
probe wash and the front half of the outstack filterholder wash was inadver-
tently included in the nozzle and instack filterholder wash. However we can
see that almost 30 percent of the total catch is particulate matter that
passed through the instack filter but was caught on the outstack filter and
also matter that condensed below stack temperature and above 250°F.
All S0? and SO-JHLSO. emission data is valid with the exception of
Test Number 2. Gaseous results are unaffected by nonisokinetic sampling.
Although the 50.,/hLSO. results obtained are valid within the constraints of
the specified EPA combined Method 5 and 8 procedures, the actual SO^/^SO,
concentration is probably significantly higher. This is a result of quantities
of sulfuric acid mist being caught on the filter and not in the impinger train.
This is evidenced by the hygroscopic nature of the filters. The total quan-
tity of SO-/HLSO. can be determined by sulfate analysis of the filters.
Using data from the six valid gaseous tests, average S0? and SO,,/H?SO,
emission values have been calculated. They are:
S02 concentration (by volume) - 3961 ppm
S02 concentration - 6.55 x 10~v Ib/ft
S02 emission rate - 3.12 x 1Q3 Ib/hour
S03/H2SO. concentration (by volume) - 12 ppm
S03/H2S04 concentration -2.0 x 10"6 lb/ft3
S0/HS0 emission rate - 10.0 Ib/hour
The results in Table 2-2 for particulate emission rates clearly show
the main stack to be within the allowable particulate emission rate based on
3-3
-------
TABLE 3-2. COMPARISON OF INSTACK/OUTSTACK SAMPLING TECHNIQUES
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
Particulate Concentration
(lb/ft3 x 10-6) Extrapolated Weight
Test
6
Instack9
Filter
2.89
Outstackb
Filter
1.01
Particulate Emission Rate (Ib/hr)
Extrapolated Weight
Instack9
Filter
13.99
Outstackb
Filter
4.91
Includes instack filter, instack filter holder wash, front half of outstack
filter holder wash, nozzle and probe wash residue.
Includes outstack filter only
NOTE: Test No. 7 invalid
3-4
-------
the results for the three valid tests. There are no emission regulations for
SCL or SCL/hLSO. from primary copper smelters.
A brief statistical analysis on particulate and gaseous emission rates
for the three valid tests is presented in Table 3-3.
Particulate concentration and emission rates have been calculated
based on "extrapolated weights." Referring to Table 2-2 it can be seen that
particulate data has been calculated based on three different filter weights.
These weights are a function of the hygroscopic nature of the particulate —
laden filters, the relative humidity in the analytical balance room, and the
time spent in weighing the filter after removal from the desiccator. Actual
weights can be found in Appendix E. The three weights are defined as follows:
Extrapolated weight — filter weight extrapolated to time zero (before
any gain in weight due to moisture adsorption)
First measured weight — filter weight measured as soon as possible
after removal from the desiccator, usually 15 seconds
Equilibrium weight - filter weight after no more water could be ad-
sorbed from ambient air
The reverberatory furnace electrostatic precipitator (shown schemati-
cally in Figure 3-1) was periodically monitored during the main stack test
series. Table 3-4 is a summary of the ESP data obtained for the valid stack
tests. Data is available for Test 1 - traverse C and tests - traverse D.
Four parameters were monitored, they are; primary AC volts, primary AC amps,
secondary DC milliamps and spark rate in sparks per minute. Secondary
voltage was not metered. This value could be calculated, if desired, although
only if a value for transformer efficiency was obtained.
There are a number of items that can be mentioned about the precipita-
tor performance during the testing period. The overall impression of the
precipitator was one of a poorly maintained unit. It is desirable to main-
tain corona voltage high enough to cause some sparking, although not exces-
sive amounts. Approximately 100 sparks per minute is the generally accepted
value for the optimum spark rate where the gains from increased voltage are
just offset by the losses from sparkover. A number of factors bear on the
3-5
-------
TABLE 3-3. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PARTICULATE AND GASEOUS EMISSIONS - MAIN STACK
LO
O1
Mean - X
Standard deviation — a
90-percent confidence interval — CI
Lower confidence limit — LCL
Upper confidence limit — UCL
Participate (lb/hr)a
21.0
12.3
19.9
1.1
40.9
S02 (lb/hr x 103)b
3.1
0.9
0.8
2.3_
3.9
S03/H2S04 (lb/hr) b
10.0
6.3
5.2
4.8
15.2
Based on valid outstack filter Tests 1, 4 and 5
3Based on valid Method 8 Tests 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
-------
Flow
to 600-foot stack
V
V
V
Outside
fields
Middle
fields
Inside
fields
1
, „
n
_ — — — —
r7
— — — — _
_ ,
_ _.,
_ _i
2 ""
— — — j
1
1
1
1
L_
r3
1
1
1
1
[~3
i
1
1
— 1
4
i
4 ^
l
1
1
1
_ — — — — 1
~1
'
1
1
1
1
A
A
A
Flow
from reverb
I
Note: |
I denotes TR sets
Figure 3-1. Electrostatic precipitator
reverberatory furnace.
3-7
-------
TABLE 3-4. REVERBERATORY FURNACE ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR READINGS
FOR THE VALID TESTS
Test-traverse
TR set \
Outside 1 and 2
Inside 1 and 2
Middle 1 and 2
Middle 3 and 4
Inside 3 and 4
Outside 3 and 4
AC Volts
1-C 4 5-D 6
310 NA 320 NA
200 NA 320 NA
270 NA 260 NA
280 NA 240 NA
270 NA 260 NA
100 NA 100 NA
AC Amps
1-C 4 5-D 6
62 NA 62 NA
28 NA 48 NA
64 NA 60 NA
60 NA NA NA
64 NA 46 NA
62 NA 63 NA
DC mamps
1-C 4 5-D 6
240 NA 240 NA
90 NA 160 NA
240 NA 240 NA
240 NA 150 NA
260 NA 190 NA
240 NA 140 NA
Sparks/min
1-C 4 5-D 6
0 NA 0 NA
150 NA 150 NA
0 NA 100 NA
0 NA 0 NA
0 NA 50 NA
0 NA 0 NA
CO
OD
NA — not available
-------
spark rate, not the least of which is regular maintenance and fine tuning of
the electronics. Kennecott's reverb precipitator typically had zero spark
rate in most sections. A possible cause for this is grounded electrodes
for which there are numerous causes. TR set inside 1 and 2 typically was
at a rate of 150 sparks/minute. This is probably higher than desired
resulting in a lowered collection efficiency. High spark rate is usually
the result of excessive corona voltage.
It should be stressed that, given the available data on the reverb
precipitator, causes for the above mentioned problems are speculative in
nature. Only detailed testing and visual internal inspection could deter-
mine the actual causes. More information on the Kennecott reverb electro-
static precipitator can be obtained from an upcoming report for EPA by
Southern Research Institute.
Tables 3-5 and 3-6 provide additional information on the reverber-
atory furnace main stack tests. Table 3-5 is a summary of sampling times
by test and sample port. Table 3-6 is a summary of visual observations of
the color of samples.
3.2 ACID PLANT
Table 2-3 summarizes some general test conditions and various flue
gas parameters. Table 2-4 summarizes all emissions data and the isokinetic
percentages for the acid plant particulate compliance and sulfur oxides tests,
As indicated by the data, all three tests conducted on the acid plant efflu-
ent were within the ilO-percent isokinetic sampling guideline required by
EPA Method 5. As a result, no inaccuracies in emission data were introduced
by a failure to meet these guidelines.
Using data from the three valid tests, average emission values have
been calculated. They are:
Average emissions — acid plant
Particulate concentration — 0.028 gr/scfd
Particulate concentration — 4.0 x 10" Ib/ft
Particulate emission rate - 18.0 Ib/hour
3-9
-------
TABLE 3-5. SUMMARY OF SAMPLING TIMES - REVERBERATORY
FURNACE MAIN STACK
Test
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Date
8-5-76
8-5-76
8-6-76
8-9-76
8-9-76
8-10-76
8-11-76
•
Port
B
A
D
C
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
Time
Start Finish
0951
1055
1158
1301
1636
1740
1839
1951
1147
1245
1402
1510
1057
1157
1240
1322
1540
1635
1744
1835
1325
1425
1544
1640
1045
1145
1302
1400
1021
1125
1128
1331
1706
1810
1909
2021
1217
1315
1432
1540
1127
1227
1310
1352
1610
1705
1814
1905
1355
1455
1613
1710
1115
1215
1332
1430
3-in
-------
TABLE 3-6. SUMMARY OF SAMPLE COLOR OBSERVATIONS
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
Test
1 1st train
2nd train
2 1st train
2nd train
3
4 1st train
2nd train
5 1st train
2nd train
6 1st train
2nd train
7 1st train
2nd train
142-mm
Filter
dark green
NA
NA
NA
brown
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
IPA impingers
#1 #2
pale brown
pale yellow
pale yellow
pale milky white
murky
slight colored
dirty yellow
clear
clear
si ightly milky
light brown
light white
white
clear
pale milky white
pale yellow
pale yellow
clear
clear
clear
grey
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
HLOp impingers
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
clear
50 -mm
Filter
white
white
light yellow
wh i te
white
white
white
dark grey
white
white
white
white
wh i te
00
I
NOTE: NA - not available
-------
S02 concentration (by volume) -887 ppm
_4 3
S0? concentration - 1.5 x 10 Ib/ft
SCL emission rate - 630 Ib/hour
S03/H2S04 ~ °
The results in Table 2-4 for particulate emissions rates clearly show
the acid plant tail gas stack to be within the allowable particulate emission
rate of approximately 65 pounds/hour. There are no emissions regulations for
S02 and SO,/H2SO. from the acid plant.
A brief statistical analysis on particulate and S02 emission rates for
the three tests is presented in Table 3-7. A sample statistical calculation
for acid plant particulate emission rate is included in Appendix B.
A breakdown of particulate weights can be found in Table 3-8. Included
are residue weights for the front half acetone wash and for the filter.
The only anomaly in the acid plant emissions results is the SOp emis-
sion concentration during Test No. 3. The average value in Test No. 1 and
No. 2 is approximately 700 ppm while Test No. 3 increased to 1270 ppm. There
are two possible explanations for this. The first is the brief upset during
Test No. 3 of one of the acid plant blowers. Although we were able to shut
down the test very soon after the upset occurred, there probably were a few
minutes overlap between the testing time and the upset. What seems to be a
more likely cause for the high tail gas S02 is the low and very erratic S02
gas strength received at the acid plant. Referring to the charts in Appendix
C, the inlet S02 concentration for Tests No. 1 and 2 held relatively constant
at 6 and 8 percent while in Test No. 3 this value varied greatly between 1
and 6 percent. We suspect that drastic changes in S02 feed strength is a
cause of erratic acid production and variable and high S02 tail gas concentration,
Test No. 3 aside, the acid plant operation appeared to be representa-
tive of normal operation, as was the reactor and converter operation.
3-12
-------
TABLE 3-7. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PARTICIPATE AND GASEOUS EMISSIONS - ACID PLANT
Mean - X
Standard deviation — a
90-percent interval - CI
Lower confidence limit — LCL
Upper confidence limit - UCL
Participate (Ib/hr) .
18.0
8.1
13.0
5.0
31.0
S02 (Ib/hr x 102)
6.3
2.3
3.7
2.6
10.0
3-13
-------
TABLE 3-8. PARTICULATE WEIGHTS (MILLIGRAMS) FOR METHOD 5 TESTS AT
THE ACID PLANT TAIL GAS STACK
Test #1 Test #2 Test #3
Front half washings*
Filter
Total
86.9
56.8
143.7
38.8
23.7
62.5
60.4
22.1
82.5
alncludes nozzle, probe and front half of filterholder
3-14
-------
SECTION 4
EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION AND PREPARATION
4.1 METHODS 5 and 8 TRAIN
This section describes the major components of the Methods 5 and 8
train and the procedures used to prepare the components for calibration and
testing.
4.1.1 Nozzles
All sampling nozzles were constructed of 316 stainless steel and had
a sharpened edge. They were prepared for field use by thorough cleaning and
grinding any damaged edges to restore the specified diameter.
4.1.2 Probes
The sampling probe used on the acid plant was a 5-foot heated 316
stainless steel probe with a replaceable pyrex glass liner. The sampling
probe used on the reverberatory furnace stack was a 10-foot heated 316
stainless steel probe with a replaceable 316 stainless steel liner. In
addition, it has provisions for an instack filter holder (Gelman type —
47 mm). Figure 4-1 shows the instack filter holder assembly. The front
end of both probes are equipped with a thermocouple and an S-type pi tot
tube. The probes were prepared by thoroughly cleaning and inspecting the
liners for cracks, inspecting the pitot tube tips for damage, and electri-
cally checking the heaters and thermocouples.
4.1.3 Filter/Cyclone Ovens
Both ovens are equipped with an electric heating element and a thermo-
couple. The cyclone oven has a circulation fan and a rack for storage of
a filter housing. The ovens were prepared by checking out all electrical
components (heaters, thermocouples, fans). Heater controllers were checked
for their ability to maintain oven and probe temperatures of 250°F.
4-1
-------
Figure 4-1. In-stack filter holder assembly.
-------
4.1.4 Umbilicals
A common umbilical line is used to make all electrical and pi tot tube
connections between the control module and the oven and probe. It was tested
in the system before use.
4.1.5 Pumps
A 10-cfm carbon vane vacuum pump is used in each system. The pumps
were leak checked at maximum vacuum before use.
4.1.6 Control Modules
The control module contains all of the instrumentation necessary to
measure the temperatures and flowrates in the sampling system. It it also
equipped with closed-loop temperature controllers for precise regulation of
the probe and oven heaters. All gauges and controls were checked for proper
operation before testing.
4.1.7 Impinger Train
A 1-cfm Greenburg-Smith glass impinger train was used for the EPA
Methods 5 and 8 sampling. The first two impingers were filled with 80-percent
isopropanol to absorb sulfuric acid mist. A glass fiber filter was placed
between the second and third impingers to capture any entrained mist. The
third and fourth impingers contained 3-percent hydrogen peroxide to absorb
sulfur dioxide. The fifth impinger was dry and the sixth impinger contained
silica gel to remove any remaining moisture. A thermocouple in the last im-
pinger was used to monitor outlet gas temperature.
4.1.8 Glass Fiber Filters
All glass fiber filters to be used for the stack test were obtained
from Schleicher and Schuell and fully meet EPA Method 5 specifications. The
filters were placed in an oven at 300°F for 3 hours, then placed into individ-
ual plastic petri dishes and put in a desiccator for conditioning over silica
gel for at least 24 hours. The filters were then taken to the balance room
and weighed to the nearest 0.01 milligram on a Mettler Model H20 analytical
balance. After weighing, each filter was returned to the plastic pertri
dish, which was sealed with masking tape and labeled with the filter number
and tare weight. This information was also recorded in the filter record book
4-R
-------
4.2 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES
After the sampling equipment was prepared and inspected, certain com-
ponents of the sampling trains were calibrated. The procedures used are pre-
sented in this section.
4.2.1 Nozzles
Nozzle size selection is a field operation and therefore so is nozzle
calibration. After the proper nozzles were selected, they were measured to
the nearest thousandth inch on three diameters. The average value was used
for calculation purposes.
4.2.2 Thermocouples and Digital Temperature Indicators
All thermocouples are connected to a digital temperature indicator on
the control module. The indicator has a specified accuracy of ±4°F over a
range from 0°F to 1500°F-
Each of the six thermocouples was calibrated in two ways. They are:
1. Comparison of the thermocouple readout to a 32°F ice bath
2. Comparison of each thermocouple to a Fluke Model 2100A digital
thermometer calibrated twice a year against an NBS traceable
standard
Comparison readings were made in a 250°F oven.
4.2.3 Dry Gas Meter and Orifice Meter
A Rockwell Model 415 gas meter (illustrated in Figure 4-2) is used to
simultaneously calibrate the dry gas meter and orifice meter in each control
module. This calibration standard is the same type of meter that is used in
the control module of each sampling train. The accuracy of the Rockwell
meter has been verified against a National Bureau of Standards traceable bell
prover maintained by the Pacific Gas & Electric Company. In addition, the
Rockwell meter never leaves Aerotherm's Source Evaluation Laboratory.
Calibration is accomplished by passing a known volume of gas through
the test and calibration meter at certain flowrates. Flowrates are indi-
cated by the orifice meter. A number of flowrates are tested in the useful
-------
Figure 4-2.
Rockwell model 415 gas meter calibration
standard.
4-7
-------
range of the orifice meter. The appropriate temperature, pressure, and vol-
ume data is recorded-and used to calculate calibration constants for the dry
gas meter and orifice meter in each control module.
At the completion of a calibration run, the final dry gas meter read-
ings and the final inlet and outlet dry gas meter temperatures were recorded.
The same procedure was reported at four different flowrates to calibrate the
orifice meter over its entire useful range. The data from these calibrations
were then used to calculate the calibration constants for the dry gas meter
and the orifice meter in each control module.
The formula used to calculate the calibration constant for the dry gas
meter is as follows:
VpPbar
where
a = calibration constant for dry gas meter in the control module
V . = total volume of gas passing through the dry gas meter in the
control module, ft3
V = total volume of gas passing through the calibration standard
meter, ft3
P. = barometric pressure, inches Hg
AH = pressure drop across the orifice meter in the control module,
inches H20
13.6 = conversion factor, inches K^O/inches Hg
Tdi = inlet temperature of dry gas meter in the control module, °F
Tj = outlet temperature of dry gas meter in the control module, °F
T • = inlet temperature of calibration standard meter, °F
T = outlet temperature of calibration standard meter, °F
460 = conversion factor, °F to °R
4-9
-------
The meter readings obtained during the field tests were divided by a to obtain
the true volume.
where
K = calibration constant for the orifice meter in the control
o
module
V = total volume of gas passing through the calibration standard
meter, ft3
Tu = outlet temperature of dry gas meter in the control module, °F
do
t = calibration time, minutes
AH = pressure drop across the orifice meter in the control module,
inches H20
P. = barometric pressure, inches Hg
oar
M = molecular weight of the air, 28.96 Ib/lb-mole
An average calibration constant was determined for the dry gas meter and
orifice meter in each control module by averaging the individual test results.
The calibration data for each control module used during the field tests are
presented in Appendix D.
4.2.4 S-Type Pi tot Tube
All S-type pi tot tubes are calibrated in the Aerotherm wind tunnel
illustrated in Figure 4-3. A united sensor hemispherical nose standard pi tot
tube (Figure 4-4), with a 0.99 coefficient, is the calibration standard.
Velocity pressure from the S-type pi tot tube and standard pi tot tube is read
on a Dwyer inclined manometer shown in Figure 4-5. The S-type pi tot tube is
calibrated in the same configuration that it will be in during actual use -
that is, mounted on the probe with a nozzle and thermocouple. Comparison
readings are made over a wide range of velocities with both legs of the pitot
tube alternately measuring impact pressure.
4-10
-------
Figure 4-3. Aerotherm calibration wind tunnel
-------
Figure 4-4. United Sensor hemispherical nose standard probe tube.
-------
I
01
Figure 4-5. Dwyer inclined manometer.
-------
The formula used to calculate the coefficient for the S-type pi tot
tube for each sampling probe is as follows:
where
Cps_. = coefficient of the S-type pi tot tube
AP$t(j = velocity pressure measured by the standard pitot tube,
inches H-O
APS_. = velocity pressure measured by the S-type pitot tube, inches
H20
0.99 = coefficient of the standard pitot tube
The average coefficients for the upper and lower legs of the S-type tube
were calculated by averaging the individual coefficients of each calibration
run. These average values were recorded on the calibration data sheet.
Tables that summarize all the calibration data for the S-type pitot and sam-
pling probes that were used during the field test program can be found in
Appendix D.
4.2.5 Differential Pressure Gauges
Differential pressure gauges were connected to an orifice flow meter
and compared against the Dwyer inclined manometer discussed in Section 4.2.4.
The calibration procedure was repeated at several different flowrates. If
readings differed between the gauges and manometer, the gauge was adjusted
and the calibration was repeated until the readings agreed.
A Validyne differential pressure transducer was used in place of the
conventional pressure gauges on the reverberatory furnace main stack. Con-
ventional gauges are unable to sense velocities of approximately 5 fps. The
Validyne transducer was calibrated against an NBS traceable inclined mano-
meter. Calibration data is located in Appendix D.
4-17
-------
4.2.6 Isopropanol
It has been found that errors in acid mist values can be caused by
peroxide impurities in the isopropanol impinger solutions. To prevent this
error, Aerotherm analyzed the isopropyl alcohol prior to shipping it into
the field, in accordance with an EPA method, to determine if it contained
any peroxides. Ten mis of isopropyl alcohol were shaken with 10 mis of
freshly prepared 10-percent potassium iodide solution. A blank was prepared
by similarly treating 10 mis of distilled water, and the absorbance of each
solution was read at 362 nanometers. The absorbance of the solution was
less than 0.1, demonstrating that the alcohol was uncontaminated by peroxides.
Since the same isopropanol source was used for both test series, this quality
control check was run only before the first test series.
4.2.7 Mettler Analytical Balance
A Mettler Model H20 balance, which can be read to 0.01 mg, was used
to weigh the glass fiber filters and the chemicals used to prepare solutions.
This balance is checked twice a year by the Mettler Instrument Corporation
against National Bureau of Standard weights to insure its accuracy. Figure
4-6 illustrates the certificate issued by Mettler for the most recent calibra-
tion on the balance.
4.3 MOISTURE TRAIN
A separate train is necessary to measure moisture when Methods 5 and
8 are combined in a common train because the evaporation of isopropanol in
the Method 8 impinger train interferes with a volumetric measurement of water.
A standard heated probe with a pi tot tube was placed at a single point in
the stack. The gas was drawn through two water-fitted impingers, a dry im-
pinger and an impinger containing silica gel. A standard control module and
pump were used for monitoring and controlling flow. The sampling rate was
varied in proportion to changes in the stack gas velocity.
4.4 GAS SAMPLING TRAIN
A gas sample was drawn from a tee in the first impinger inlet of the
moisture train and fed to a 30-liter Tedlar bag. A separate pump, flow
4-IP.
-------
WEIGHT TRACEABILITY
CERTIFICATE
TO'. Acurex Corp.
485 Clyde Ave.
Mtn. View, CA 94042
ATTN: Mr. Jim Steiner
Afro Therm. Div. , Bldg. 2
The Mettler balances listed Lolo'.v hcve beer, serviced
by our representative on August 25, 1975
This is to certify that the test weights used are traceable
to the National Bureau of Standards.
Mettler identification number of test weights used: 62
Mettler ca'ibrati jn date cf test wights used: _
National Bureau of Standards test number: 232.09/0570-35
National Bureau of Standards test date: _ November n, i97.4_
Type and serial number of balances serviced:
H20 397453
Joesph R. Shoplock
Mettler Service Representative Mettler Instrument Corporation
Box 100. Princeton, NJ 08540
(609) 448-3000
Figure 4-6. Weight traceability certificate.
4-19
-------
meter, and valve were used in this train. The flowrate of gas into the bag
was also varied in proportion to changes in the stack gas velocity. The gas
collected in the bag was later sampled with an Orsat analyzer. Figure 4-7
illustrates the combined EPA Method 3 and 4 sampling train*
4-20
-------
o
CM
Figure 4-7. Combined EPA Method 3 and 4 sampling train.
4-21
-------
SECTION 5
PROCEDURES
This section describes the procedures used for sampling, sample
recovery, and sample analysis at both test locations.
5.1 SAMPLING
5.1.1 Preliminary Measurements and Calculations
The test crew at each location - the acid plant and reverberatory
furnace —made preliminary stack measurements and obtained the following
information.
Acid Plant Reverb
Inside diameter (feet) 8.0 28.36
Nearest upstream disturbance (dia.) 1.6 6
Nearest downstream disturbance (dia.) 1.1 >2
The number of sample points and their location were determined from this
information using EPA Method 1 and are shown in Table 5-1. The crew at the
acid plant sampled 24 points in each of two ports, 90 degrees apart. The
main stack crew sampled six points in each of four ports, 90 degrees apart.
Figure 5-1 presents diagrams of the three major processes in the
smelter which generate gaseous and particulate pollutants. Off-gases from
the roaster and converters are vented to the acid plant after treatment by
various combinations of cyclones, scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators.
The December 15 and 16 tests were conducted on the acid plant tail gas stack,
Off-gases from the reverberatory furnace pass through a ballon flue and on
electrostatic precipitator before being emitted via the main stack -where
the August tests were conducted.
5-1
-------
TABLE 5-1. SAMPLE POINT DISTANCES FROM STACK WALL (INCHES)
Point Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Tail Gas Stack
(2 ports, 48 points total)
1.0
3.1
5.3
7.6
10.1
12.7
15.5
18.6
22.1
26.1
31.0
38.2
57.8
65.0
69.9
73.9
77.4
80.5
83.3
85.9
88.4
90.7
92.9
95.0
Main Stack
(4 ports, 24 points total)
7.1
22.8
40.2
60.2
85.1
120. 8a
This point could not be reached, so Point No. 5 was sampled twice (see
Daily Activities Report).
5-2
-------
Cyclones
en
u>
Roaster Off-
Concentrate x--——^x. gases
Converter
Venturi Peabody
scrubber scrubber
V V
Western
precipitation
electrostatic
precipitator
Peabody
scrubber
Tail gas stack
Double
absorption
acid plant
93.5% strength
sulfurlc acid
Reverberatory furnace
Calcine
Off-gases
Ballon flue
Koppers
electrostatic
precipitator
wvw
Figure 5-1. Process diagrams.
-------
To further clarify the sampling locations, the following diagrams
and photographs have been included:
Figure 5-2 Sampling location -and plant tail gas stack
Figure 5-3 Sampling location - reverberatory furnace main stack
Figure 5-4 Main stacks ports A and B
Figure 5-5 Main stack ports C and D
As shown in Figure 5-1, point No. 6 on the reverberatory furnace stack
(main stack) could not be sampled. This was due to restrictions imposed
by the sample probe support system. It was decided to sample point No. 5
twice to compensate. A velocity profile of the reverberatory furnace tests
3, 4 and 5 shows that this had a negligible effect on the test outcome. It
can be seen in Figure 5-6 that from the trend of the velocity profile for
points 1 through 5, the actual velocity for point No. 6 would, in all
probability, be very close to that of point No. 5. If there is any effect
on the test outcome, it would show up as a very slight underestimate of gas
flowrate and mass emission rate.
A preliminary traverse was made to determine the velocity and tempera-
ture at the sample points (EPA Method 2), the stack gas molecular weight
(EPA Method 3), and the moisture content of the gas (EPA Method 4). These
measurements were made simultaneously with the moisture and gas sampling
trains.
A series of calculations was performed for each test location to de-
termine the following:
• Dry molecular weight (Md) of the stack gases using Equation (3-2)
of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 60
• Wet molecular weight (Mg) of the stack gases using M = M.
" - Bwo> + 18
• Moisture content of the stack gases (B ) using Equations (4-1),
WO
(4-2), and (4-3) of Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 60
These terms (Md, MS> BWQ) are assumed to remain constant during a
given test run. Although variations in Md and M have an insignificant effect
on isokinetic sampling, variations in B will have a significant effect.
-------
Plan View
Ladder
Platform
South sample port
West sample port
Elevation View
West sample
port
Platform
Ladder
South sample
port
Figure 5-2.
Sampling location acid
plant tail gas stack.
5-5
-------
C\J
Figure 5-3.
Sampling location
main stack.
5-7
— reverberatory furnace
-------
Port A
Port B
Figure 5-4. Main stack ports A and B.
5-9
-------
Port C
Figure 5-5. Main stack ports C and D.
5-11
Port D
-------
Port A
Port C
Inches w.g.
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
1234561654321
Sample Point No.
Inches w.g.
0.000
Port B
Port D
23456,654321
Sample Point No.
Note: Point 6 is actually point 5 repeated.
Numbers with arrows refer to test numbers.
Test 3, although invalid, has valid velocity data.
Figure 5-6. Reverberatory furnace Tests 3, 4 and 5
velocity profile.
5-13
-------
An examination of the following equation, used to calculate the flowrates re-
quired for isokinetic sampling, will illustrate this:
602n2N*K2C2(l - B )2PCM. T
AH = _
-------
• Measured values (M , M,, B , T , P ) determined during the pre-
s d wo m m
liminary measurements using Methods 3 and 4
• Calibration constants (C , K ) determined in the laboratory
t Measured values (P , T , AP) determined using Method 2
• Various values of nozzle diameter (Nd)
This calculation also determines the size of sampling nozzle needed
to sample isokinetically over the entire range of AP in a particular duct,
at a rate which will satisfy criteria of 60 scf total volume of gas sampled
in the 60 minutes available for sampling.
After a number of these calculations are completed, the equation is
reduced to the following form:
AH = K AP
where K is a numerical constant. Having determined K, the operator of the
control module prepares a table of values of AP versus AH for use during the
actual stack test. Then, during a test the operator reads the AP measured
by the S-type pi tot tube, finds the corresponding value of AH required for
isokinetic sampling from the table, and adjusts the sampling rate to provide
the required AH across the orifice meter.
Once the preliminary measurements and calculations have been completed,
the actual stack tests can be conducted. Sampling procedures used during the
actual test periods are described below.
5.1.2 Methods 5 and 8 Testing Procedures
The sampling train preparation was done in a clean laboratory provided
by Kennecott to minimize contamination during preparation and recovery.
The train was prepared by washing all components exposed to the sample
in Alconox and water, then rinsing with reagent grade acetone. The components
were allowed to air dry before changing and assembly. The impingers were
charged with measured volumes of reagent grade chemicals as described in
Section 4.1.7. The silica gel was weighed before charging. Chemicals were
prepared fresh dally to ensure complete absorption of gas species. The
Method 5 and Method 8 filter holders were charged with their respective pre-
5-15
-------
weighted filters. The impinger train was assembled with the Method 8 filter
holder between the second and third impingers, and the impinger train inlet
and outlet were sealed with parafilm. The ends of the nozzle, probe, Method
5 filter, and sample-bearing hoses and extensions were sealed with parafilm.
All test equipment was transported to the test site for final assembly and
checkout.
Preliminary checks and measurements were made as follows. While the
particulate sampling train was used in one sample port, the combined gas com-
position and moisture train was used in another sample port, so that measure-
ments were made simultaneously. The particulate sampling trains traversed
the stacks, while the gas composition and moisture trains remained at a fixed
sampling point.
In addition, the sampling crews leak checked the sampling trains be-
fore each test by fastening a blank swagelok to the end of the probe, drawing
a 15-inch Hg vacuum on the system, and recording the movement of the dry gas
meter needle for 1 minute. If the leak rate was greater than 0.02 cfm, the
source of the leak was found, corrected, and another leak check was performed.
The magnehelic gages and pressure transducer for AP and AH were then
zeroed and levelled and all data specified by EPA Methods 5 and 8 were recorded
on standard data sheets.
After the equipment was readied, the supervisor notified the crew
leader of the status of the process. Since EPA Region IX specified that all
tests must take place during the copper blow portion of the converter cycle,
the supervisor was stationed at the acid plant control room at the beginning
of each test to inform the crew leader of the start of copper blow. The test
crew leader then began sampling. Normally, the sampling train was started
within approximately 5 minutes after copper blow.
During the test, the supervisor toured the smelter to observe various
parts of the operation to insure that normal operating conditions prevailed.
He also observed the sampling practices of the test crew to insure the tests
were being conducted in accordance with Methods 5 and 8.
During each test, the sampling crew observed the following procedures:
• Allow the sampling train to heat up to 250°F
5-16
-------
• Position the pi tot tube and nozzle to face directly into the gas
streamline lines in the duct or stack
t Seal the sampling probe in the sample port
• Measure the AP at the sampling point, calculate AH required for
isokinetic sampling, and set this value on the orifice magnehelic
gage (proportional sampling was used for gas moisture)
• Record all the required data on the pertinent data sheet
• Maintain isokinetic conditions throughout the traverse
After a traverse was completed, the sampling train was moved to the
exit sample port. In the case of instack/outstack filter testing on the
reverb main stack, the instack 47-mm filter plugged rapidly and had to be
changed after each port was sampled. If the sampling train was disassembled
during the transfer, a leak check was made before starting the next traverse.
The procedure described above was repeated for all tests.
At the conclusion of a test, the sampling train was removed from the
duct or stack and was allowed to cool down. The impinger train was discon-
nected and purged for 10 minutes with ambient air to transfer any SCL re-
tained in the 80-percent IPA into the O- solution. When the components
were cool enough to handle, the sampling train was disassembled at the test
site. As soon as a component was removed, its inlet and outlet were sealed
by stretching parafilm over the openings to prevent contamination of the sam-
ple by fugitive dust at the sampling site or during transit to the lab. The
various components (nozzle, probe, filter holder, impinger train from Methods
5 and 8, and Tedlar bag and impinger train samples from Methods 3 and 4)
were then transported to the laboratory for sample recovery and analysis.
5.1.3 Methods 3 and 4 Testing Procedure
The composition and moisture content of the stack gases were measured
using the combined EPA Method 3 and 4 sampling train. The combined sampling
train, consists of a sampling nozzle, a 5-foot heated probe (300°F to 325°F)
with a stainless steel liner and an S-type pitot tube, a 142-mm filter holder
(unheated) attached to the end of the probe, and other components. Prior
to this test, a measured volume of distilled water and a known weight of
silica gel had been put into the impinger train in the laboratory. At the
5-17
-------
sampling site, the sampling train was assembled and the moisture portion of
the train was checked for leaks at 15 inches Hg vacuum by plugging the probe
inlet (using a blank swagelok) and the tee connection to the Tedlar bag.
The Tedlar bag was then leak checked separately, evacuated, and connected
to the tee in the impinger train.
To make a run, the sampling probe was positioned at a point of average
velocity, and appropriate data were recorded on data sheets. At the comple-
tion of the run, the equipment was disassembled and the impinger train,
Tedlar bag, and 142-mm filter holder were taken to the laboratory for sample
recovery.
5.2 SAMPLE RECOVERY, HANDLING, AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY
The following procedures were used to recover the samples from the
Methods 5 and 8 trains and the Methods 3 and 4 trains, process the samples,
and ship them to Aerotherm as necessary for chemical or gravimetric analysis.
5.2.1 Sample Recovery Procedures for Methods 5 and 8 Trains
Particulate matter was recovered from the sampling nozzle, sampling
probe, and filter holders of the Methods 5 and 8 sampling train. After
removing the parafilm cover from the inlet and outlet openings of the sampling
nozzle and probe, both components were rinsed with reagent grade acetone,
brushed with a nylon brush and rinsed again with acetone. This procedure
was repeated at least twice until the rinse solution appeared clean to the
naked eye. These acetone washings were put into a polyethylene bottle
labeled with the following information: date of test, the test number, the
type of sample, and the test location.
After particulate samples had been recovered from the sampling nozzle
and probe, the filter holder was opened with the inlet side facing upwards.
The 142-mm filter (47-mm instack filter) was then removed from the holder
with a pair of tweezers and returned to the original labelled petri dish
from which it had been taken. In some instances, fibers from the filter
adhering to the surface of the filter holder had to be scraped off with the
tweezers. In doing this, care was taken not to remove the teflon coating on
the filter holder. The petri dish containing the used 142-mm filter was
5-18
-------
sealed with tape and labelled a second time with the date of the test, the
test location, and the test number.
After the filter had been removed, the internal surfaces of the filter
holder were rinsed with reagent grade acetone and brushed with a nylon brush.
These acetone washings were added to the polyethylene bottle containing the
probe and nozzle washings. Washings of the nozzle, instack filter holder,
probe and the front half of the outstack filter holder were inadvertently
combined into one sample for reverb Tests No. 6 and No. 7. Sample bottle
caps were screwed on tightly and tape was wound around the cap to insure
that the bottle did not leak. Labelled sample bottles and petri dishes
were then set aside in numbered shipment boxes and the numbers recorded to
identify which samples were shipped in which boxes.
After recovering the particulate sample from the front half of the
sampling train, the test crew proceeded to recover the SO^/H?SO. and SO^
samples from the back half of the train. The contents of Impingers No. 1
and No. 2 were transferred to a polyethylene sample bottle. These impingers
were then thoroughly rinsed with an 80-percent IPA solution and the washings
put into the polyethylene bottle. The backup filter holder which contained
the 50-mm glass-fiber filter was disassembled and the filter added directly
to the polyethylene sample bottle. The front half of this glass filter holder
was then rinsed with 80-percent IPA solution and these washings also added
to the sample bottle. The top for this bottle was screwed on tightly and
tape was wound around the cap.
The same basic procedures were used to recover the H,^ sample solu-
tions in Impingers No. 3, No. 4, and No. 5. The solutions from Impingers
No. 3 and No. 4 were transferred to a labelled polyethylene sample bottle
along with any condensed liquid from Impinger No. 5. The back half of the
backup filter holder and the internal surfaces of Impingers No. 3, Mo. 4,
and No. 5 were then thoroughly washed with distilled water, and the washings
were added to the sample bottle. As before, the cap to the sample bottle
was screwed on tightly and taped. The date of the test, the test number,
the type of sample and the test location were all recorded on the label.
Both the IPA and H_0_ sample bottles were then set aside in a numbered ship-
ment box, and the information on the labels of these two bottles - as well
as the shipment box number — recorded.
5-19
-------
5.2.2 Sample Recovery Procedures for Methods 3 and 4 Trains
The integrated sample of the stack gas collected in the tedlar bag was
taken to the laboratory for analysis with the Orsat analyzer. The tedlar bag
was connected directly to the Orsat analyzer and the gases pumped into the
burette. The burette and the glass tubing of the Orsat were then purged
three times with the gases in the tedlar bag to condition the internal sur-
faces of the Orsat. A measured volume (100 ml) of the gases was then drawn
into the burette and sequentially passed through three fresh absorption
solutions which removed (XL, Q^, and CO in that order. Several passes were
made through each solution to insure quantitative capture of each gaseous
species. The results of this analysis were recorded on the appropriate field
data sheet, and the tedlar bags were pumped out and made ready for use on the
next test.
Since no chemical analysis of the moisture train samples was required,
recovery of the moisture from the combined Methods 3 and 4 sampling trains
took place in the field. At the completion of a test, the moisture sampling
train was disassembled. The flexible teflon hose which connected the probe
and filter to the impinger train (immersed in the ice bath) was then drained
into a labelled polyethylene sample bottle to insure that no condensed water
remained in the hose. Each of the impingers containing condensed water was
also emptied into the same sample bottle. The cap for the bottle was screwed
on tightly and the bottle was set aside for transportation to the lab. Sepa-
rate sample bottles - the same ones that were used to transport distilled
water and fresh silica gel to the sample site prior to the test -were used
to store the used distilled water and the spent silica gel.
After the sealed sample bottles had been transported to the labora-
tory, the volume of water in the first sample bottle was measured with a
graduated cylinder and recorded on the stack gas moisture data sheet. The
weight of the spent silica gel in the second sample bottle was measured on a
triple beam balance and also recorded on the data sheet. The water and
silica gel were then discarded. The sample bottles were cleaned out, dried,
and charged with measured amounts of distilled water and silica gel for the
next test.
5-20
-------
5.2.3 Sample Handling and Chain of Custody Procedures
After the samples had been recovered in the laboratory, they were
placed in sealed, labeled containers. Once a shipment box had been filled
with samples, it was sealed and labeled, then stored in a locked area (labor-
atory or motel room) until the end of the test series. The sample shipment
boxes were then shipped by truck to Aerotherm in Mountain View, California.
All sample shipments were received in good order by Aerotherm's
shipping and receiving department and transferred to the Source Evaluation
Laboratory. The samples were stored in this locked laboratory for chemical
analysis. When inspected by the analyst, none of the boxes appeared damaged
and all were still sealed. Examination of the contents of each box showed
that all sample bottles were still sealed with tape and were undamaged.
Throughout the analysis program, all samples were kept in their sample
containers and stored in the analytical balance room or the Source Evaluation
Laboratory. Both of these facilities are locked, and admittance is restricted
to authorized personnel.
Since the completion of the analysis program, all samples are now be-
ing stored in sealed sample containers in Aerotherm's Source Evaluation
Laboratory. These samples can be retained for evidence and analyzed at a
later date to determine their chemical composition. In addition, used filters
from the combined Methods 3 and 4 sampling trains are also being stored and
can be analyzed immediately, if desired, since they are not required for
evidence.
5.3 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The following procedures were used to weigh the filters, dry and weigh
the acetone washings, and analyze the impinger solutions for sulfuric acid
and sulfur dioxide.
5.3.1 Particulate Weights
After the completion of each test, all the filters used in the combined
Methods 5 and 8 sampling trains were sealed in petri dishes for shipment to
Aerotherm. During this shipment, some of the particulate on the surface of
5-21
-------
the glass fiber filters was dislodged into the petri dish. To recover the
loose participate in the petri dish, the lid of the dish was first rinsed
with a small amount of distilled water to remove any particulate adhering
to the surface and then wiped dry. Next, the glass filter was removed from
the petri dish, and the dish rinsed with distilled water and wiped clean.
The washings from the petri dish were added to the polyethylene sample
bottle containing the acetone washings from the probe, nozzle, and filter
holder for that particular test.
After the loose particulate in the petri dish had been recovered, the
glass fiber filter was transferred to the bottom half of the petri dish.
The dish was then put into a desiccator containing silica gel and desiccated
for at least 24 hours. After desiccation was complete, the filter and petri
dish were transferred to a small, portable desiccator. They were then taken
to the balance room to be weighed on a Mettler Model H20 analytical balance
which had been levelled and zeroed. The 142-mm filter paper was removed from
the desiccator with tweezers and folded in half twice so that it would fit
on the balance pan.
The filters from the acid plant tests did not pick up moisture and
could be readily weighed. However, the filters from the reverb furnace
tests had collected some hygroscopic material and were gaining weight very
rapidly by absorbing water vapor from the air. As a result, no attempt was
made to determine the exact weight of the filters at that point. Instead,
an approximate weight was determined as rapidly as possible, and each filter
was returned to its petri dish and was desiccated for another 24 hours.
After being desiccated a second time, the filter was ready to be
weighed accurately. When the approximate weight of the filter had been set
on the balance, the filter was placed on the balance pan. The analyst
immediately started a stopwatch, and the weight of the filter was measured
and recorded 10 to 20 seconds after the filter was placed on the pan. As
each filter gained weight by absorbing water vapor, the analyst continued
to take readings until the filter reached equilibrium - up to 24 hours for
some filters.
After completing the weight versus time curve, the analyst returned
the filter to its petri dish, labelled the dish with a gross weight, and
5-22
-------
returned the sample to the Source Evaluation Lab for storage pending further
instructions from EPA Region IX.
The polyethylene sample bottle containing the acetone washings from
the sampling nozzle, the sampling probe, and the filter holder (including
the instack filter holder and front half of the outstack filter holder for
Tests 6 and 7 on the reverb) — as well as the distilled water washings from
the petri dish —was open and placed in the fume hood. The sliding window
of the hood was partially closed and the fume hood fan turned on to circulate
laboratory air through the hood. After the acetone in the sample bottle had
evaporated until approximately 5 ml of acetone remained in the bottle, the
slurry was transferred to a tared beaker (usually 10- to 30-ml beaker with a
small tare weight) and evaporated to dryness in the fume hood. Because of
the presence of water in the original sample (petri dish washings), many of
the samples did not evaporate to total dryness. In these cases, the beakers
were placed on a steam bath and evaporated to dryness.
After evaporation, each beaker was transferred to the desiccator for
24 hours. The tared beaker was then transferred to the portable desiccator
and taken to the balance room. Unlike the particulates on some of the glass
fiber filters, the residues were not hygroscopic and could be weighed directly.
After the weight of each sample was recorded in the filter record book, the
samples were stored in the Source Evaluation Laboratory pending further
instructions from EPA Region IX.
5.3.2 Impinger Solution Analysis
Before titrating the isopropanol solutions containing SCL/hLSO., cer-
tain standardizations were carried out in the laboratory. The analyst (Atkins)
used a 1 N NaOH Acculute Standard volumetric solution from Anachemia Chemicals
Limited to prepare a 0.01 N NaOH standardization solution by dilution with
deionized water. Several titrations using this NaOH standardization solution
were used to repeatedly standardize the analytical reagent grade 0.01 N H^SO.
from Baker Chemicals. After the sulfuric acid solution had been standardized
against the standard sodium hydroxide solution, the 0.01 N H^SO^ solution was
in turn used to standardize the barium perchlorate solution. As before, this
standardization check was done repeatedly and the average of several titra-
tions was used to calculate the average normality of the Ba(C10.L solution.
5-23
-------
As a further check on the accuracy of the standard NaOH solution, it
was standardized against a primary standard potassium acid phthalate solution
from Baker Chemicals. The KHCgH^ was dried in an oven at 105°C to 110°C
for 1 hour and then allowed to cool in a desiccator. An accurately weighed
amount was then added to a flask and dissolved in boiling deionized water.
The solution was allowed to cool to room temperature and phenolphthalein
indicator was added. When this primary standard solution was used to verify
the accuracy of the standard NaOH solution, the maximum deviation between the
two solutions was 0.0002.
The 50-ml buret used for all titrations was also calibrated. The buret
was filled with water and a measured volume of water was delivered into a
tared container. The container was then stoppered and weighed on the Mettler
balance. The ambient temperature was recorded to convert the mass of water
to volume, using data from Introductory Qualitative Chemistry by Olson, Koch,
and Pimental. Since the difference between the delivered volume and the cal-
culated volume was less than 1 percent in all cases, no correction factor for
the buret reading was necessary. The same procedure was used to calibrate
the pi pets used in the titrations. Again, no correction factors were re-
quired. After performing all these standardization and calibration checks,
the analyst was now prepared to perform the titrations of field samples.
After the sample bottles containing the isopropanol solutions were
shaken to make sure the solution was homogeneous, a measured aliquot (varying
from 1 ml to 100 ml) was transferred to a flask with a calibrated pi pet. Two
to four drops of thorin indicator were then added and the aliquot was titrated
with the standardized barium perchlorate solution to the pink end-point. In
addition, a blank (isopropanol and deionized water) of approximately the same
size aliquot was titrated in a similar manner. The following data was re-
corded in the analytical log book:
• The volume of barium perchlorate titrant used to titrate the aliquot
• The volume of barium perchlorate titrant used to titrate the blank
• The normality of the barium perchlorate titrant
5-24
-------
• The total solution volume of sulfuric acid (first two impingers
and filter)
• The volume of the aliquot titrated
Each aliquot was titrated twice.
After the sample bottles containing thehydrogen peroxide solutions
were shaken to make sure the solution was homogeneous, a measured aliquot
(varying from 1 ml to 25 ml) was transferred to a flask with a calibrated
pipet. A total of 100 ml of isoproponol and two to four drops of thorin
indicator were added to the aliquot, which was then titrated to a pink end-
point using the standardized barium perchlorate solution. The following
data were recorded in the analytical log book:
• The volume of barium perchlorate titrant used to titrate the aliquot
• The normality of the barium perchlorate titrant
• The total solution volume of sulfur dioxide (third and fourth
impingers)
• The volume of the aliquot titrated
These titration data were used to calculate the concentrations of SO-/
HpSO, and SOp in the various gas streams.
5.3.3 Orsat Analysis
All gas samples were analyzed in the field laboratory at Kennecott
with an Orsat gas analyzer. As required by EPA Method 3, each bag was sam-
pled until three consecutive analyses varied by no more than 0.2 percent for
each component analyzed (CO, CO).
5-25
-------
APPENDIX A
DAILY ACTIVITIES
A-l
-------
APPENDIX A
DAILY ACTIVITIES REPORT
Day No. 1. August 2. 1976
1. Left Tucson and drove to Hayden, Arizona. Arrived at Kennocott
Copper Smelter at 9:40 a.m. Crew met with Messrs. Matheson,
Fitch, Mortimer to discuss the tests.
2. Kennecott indicated that no testing could be done at the acid
plant since the additional platform required to test the second
sampling port had not been installed on the stack.
3. Safety rules were reviewed and discussions were held with Stuart
Nebuker regarding reverb furnace operations and process data
collection.
4. Kennecott personnel were experiencing some operating problems
at the reverb and it was scheduled to be down on 8/3/76 and possi
bly on A-shift of 8/4/76. Steiner, Sutton (process observed for
Aerotherm) and Fitch (Kennecott Environmental Department) went
on a tour of the various control rooms while the remainder of
the test crew unloaded the sampling equipment.
5. Control rooms visited - Reactor (Roaster), Reverb, Reverb ESP
Electronics, Converter Aisle, and Acid Plant.
6. Lloyd Kostow of EPA Region IX arrived at 12:20 p.m.; crew ate
lunch and began preparations for making preliminary measurements
(velocity and temperature traverses, stack gas composition and
moisture content) of reverb furnace stack gases. Kostow, Sutton
and Kearney (Kennecott Environmental Department) went through
the process again to make a list of the process parameters to
be recorded during the stack testing period.
"
-------
7. Tare weight of bottle for silica gel was 63.6 gm and the weight
of the bottle plus silica gel was 283.9 gm.
8. At 5:30 p.m., the crew arrived at the sampling platform on the
reverb furnace stack to start the preliminary measurements.
The stack circumference was measured with a rope and was 98.5 ft.
Sampling ports were labelled A, B, C, and D starting at the
elevator and going clockwise. The distance from the sampling
platform to the top of the breeching entering the base of the
stack was 169 ft. as measured by a weighted rope.
9. The following stack wall thickness measurements were made:
A-port: 21.5 inches including pipe nipple
18 inches not including pipe nipple
D-port: 26 inches including pipe nipple
18.6 inches not including pipe nipple
C-port: 23.5 inches including pipe nipple
18 inches not including pipe nipple
B-port: not measured
Since the inside brick work had broken away during the installation of the
sampling ports, the exact wall thickness was difficult to determine. The
measurement made at A-port was deemed to be more reliable and a value of 18
inches was used for wall thickness.
10. The outside radius of the stack was calculated to be 15.68 feet;
the inside radius was calculated to be 14.18 feet; the sampling
ports were 6 diameters downstream of the breeching and much greater
than 2 diameters from the stack exit.
11. The sampling point locations were marked on the probe. Since the
sampling probe was 10 feet long (unirails at Kennecott could not
support a longer probe), the inner most sampling Point (No. 6)
could not be reached which necessitated sampling Point No. 5
twi ce.
A-4
-------
12. At 6:55 p.m., the crew started the preliminary measurements and
obtained the following data:
• ' D-port: No. 1 - 230°F, 0.0012 to 0.0020 inch H20
No. 2 - 265°F, 0.0012 to 0.0020 inch H20
No. 3 - 291°F, 0.0028 to 0.0040 inch O
No. 4 - 300°F, 0.0008 to 0.0020 inch H20
No. 5 - 300°F, 0.0008 to 0.0028 inch H20
t C-port: No. 1 - 254°F, 0.0072 inch HO
(7:15 p.m.) No. 2 - 290°F, 0.0056 to 0.0068 inch H20
No. 3 - 295°F, 0.0080 inch H20
No. 4 - 298°F, 0.0052 inch H20
No. 5 - 301°F, 0.0048 inch H20
• B-port: No. 1 - 241°F, 0.0060 to 0.0080 inch H20
(7:33 p.m.) No. 2 - 291°F, 0.0040 to 0.0060 inch H20
No. 3 - 294°F, 0.0040 to 0.0056 inch H20
No. 4 - 298°F, 0.0016 inch H20
No. 5 - 299°F, 0.0016 inch H20
t A-port: No. 1 - 242°F, 0.0070 inch H20
(7:52 p.m.) No. 2 - 266°F, 0.0066 inch H20
No. 3 - 273°F, 0.0072 inch O
No. 4 - 208°F, 0.0036 inch H20
No. 5 - 296°F, 0.0044 inch H20
13. After completing the preliminary measurements the crew returned
to the Kennecott Laboratory with the stack gas composition bag
sample and the moisture train sample. These samples would be
analyzed the following day since the smelter was going to be down.
A-5
-------
Day No. 2, August 3. 1976
1. No testing was conducted on this day since the smelter was down
for repairs.
2. Kostow and Steiner travelled to Inspiration Copper in Inspiration,
Arizona to review their plans for conducting compliance tests.
3. Returned to Kennecott Laboratory by 2:15 p.m. to analyze the
samples collected the previous day. The following results
were obtained:
H?0 condensed = 60 ml
H20 silica gel = 17-1 gm
Moisture content = 7.09 percent by volume
co2 o2 co
4 percent 12.3 percent 0.8 percent
3.5 percent 13.4 percent 0.3 percent
4.2 percent 13.5 percent 0.4 percent
4. The solutions were changed in the Orsat analyzer to insure fresh
chemicals were used for subsequent gas analyses.
Day No. 3, August 4. 1976
1. No testing was conducted on this day since the smelter was still
down for repairs.
2. The preliminary measurement data was used to calculate appropri-
ate sampling nozzle sizes and sampling rates.
3. Part of the sampling crew drove to Phoenix to purchase additional
acetone.
Day No. 4, August 5, 1976
1. Arrived at Kennecott at 7:01 a.m. and photographed dust plume
leaving the roof monitor of the building housing the reactor,
reverb and converters.
A-6
-------
2. Test crew made up fresh chemicals for use in the tests to be
conducted; barometric pressure was 27.87 inch Hg; 4 sets of
glassware were made to minimize trips between the stack and
the lab.
3. Started Test No. 1 at 9:50 a.m. after successful leak check
(0.05 cfm at 18 inch Hg) Sampling stared in Port B at Point No. 5
and the velocity was high, unstable and difficult to read. Point
No. 5 and Point No. 6 were treated as the same point.
4. Impinger outlet temperatures could only be read at Points No. 4
and 5 because the thermocouple lead wire was too short.
5. Stack temperature profile was uniform across the stack and sam-
pling port changes between traverses took ~30 minutes.
6. The following process observations were made during B-traverse:
Reactor Start 83661.4
Finish 836631.2
Difference 19.8
10:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. — reactor down due to
underflow
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Air flow = 17
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 7.9 percent
Converters = 2 and 4 online
Reactor and converters 2 and 4 were online until 10 minutes
before the end of the traverse and then went offline.
7. A decision was made to change control modules for the next traverse
because of the difficulty experienced in controlling oven temperature.
8. The sampling equipment was transferred to sampling Port A and a
leak check of 0.002 cfm at 17 inches Hg was obtained. Velocity
was lower and much more stable on this traverse.
A-7
-------
9. After completing the traverse, the impinger train was purged (10
minutes) and replaced with another fresh impinger train.
10. The following process observations were made during A-traverse:
Reactor
Reverb Missed tonnage but everything running smoothly.
Acid Plant
11. Moved sampling equipment to Port D and got a satisfactory leak
check. Velocity seemed low during entire traverse.
12. At the beginning of sampling Point No. 2, an electrical short
developed in the pump power cord: the sampling was stopped
momentarily while the circuit breaker in the control console
was reset and the short was repaired with tape.
13. The following process observations were made during D-traverse:
Reactor Start 836743.7
Finish 836779.0
Difference 35.3 (~70 percent of design rate)
Reactor log numbers (rate) taken on an hourly
basis were steady all morning
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Stack gas temperatures are higher than those
measured during preliminary measurements; visi-
ble emissions from reverb stack due to poor com-
bustion conditions
Acid Plant S0« inlet = 5 percent
Converters = No. 4 online
14. Moved sampling equipment to Port C and got an acceptable leak
check. Stack gas temperature was uniform at ~300°F. The veloc-
ity was high in the center and decreased smoothly at the wall.
A-R
-------
15. The following process observations were made during C-traverse:
Reactor Start 836821.0
Finish 836855.9
Difference 34.9
Reactor bed temperatures started increasing from
1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. from 1100°F to 1240°F
Reverb
Reverb ESP
Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
AC Volts AC Amps DC mamps Sparks/min
0
150
Outside No. 1 310 62 240
and No. 2
Inside No. 1 200 28 90
and No. 2
Middle No. 1 270 64 240 0
and No. 2
Middle No. 3 280 60 240 0
and No. 4
Inside No. 3 270 64 260 0
and No. 4
Outside No. 3 100 62 240 0
and No. 4
16. At 2:05 p.m. received a call from the reverb furnace control room
indicating that opacity should improve because combustion conditions
were changed in the reverb furnace.
17. Started Test No. 2 in Port C at 4:36 p.m. after a perfect leak check
at 20 inches Hg. Static pressure in stack was -1.3 inch H~0. The
velocity was high and too much silica gel in the impinger train
caused a high pressure drop; pump vacuum was 24 inches Hg and
sampling may not be isokinetic.
A-9
-------
18. The following process observations were made during C-traverse:
Reactor Start 837046.8
Finish 837065.1
Difference 18.3
Rate was ~4 percent at start and ~70 percent at
finish
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Reverb outlet pressure = -0.51 inch H_0
Acid Plant SO- inlet = 6 percent (just after first traverse)
Converters = No. 2 and No. 3 online
Reverb ESP AC Volts AC Amps DC MA Sparks/min
Outside No. 1, 310 63 240 0
No. 2
Inside No. 1, 200 28 100 160
No. 2
Middle No. 1, 275 64 240 0
No. 2
Middle No. 3, 300 62 240 0
No. 4
Inside No. 3, 270 62 190 50
No. 4
Outside No. 3, 100 63 240 0
No. 4
19. Moved sampling equipment to Port D; broke the silica gel impinger;
replaced; got a perfect leak check at 16 inches Hg. Pump vacuum
again climbed to 24 inches Hg so it was difficult to maintain
isokinetic; at 5:05 p.m. fugitive emissions from the roof monitor
were constant and a gas leak developed at the acid plant.
A-10
-------
20. The following process observations were made during D-traverse:
Reactor Start 837103.3
Finish 837135.2
Difference 31.9
Reactor at -75 percent rate at start and -70
percent at finish; bed temperatures down to 1200°F
from 1240°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.051 inch H20
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 2.2 percent
Converters = No. 2, No. 3 online
Reverb ESP Same as previous traverse
21. At the completion of the traverse, the impinger train was purged
(10 minues) and replaced with another impinger train. Moved
sampling equipment to Port A and got a good leak check at 20 inches.
Pump vacuum still at 23 inches Hg so sampling was probably not
isokinetic.
22. The following process observations were made during A-traverse:
Reactor Start 837167.3 (65-percent rate)
Finish 837200.5 (70-percent rate)
Difference 33.2
Reactor bed temperatures down to 1180°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.051 inch FLO
Acid Plant S0? inlet = 4.4 percent
Converters = No. 3 online
A-ll
-------
Combustion Gas Analysis - 7:30 a.m.: 0.6 percent CO
1.0 percent CO
Combustion Gas Analysis - 1:30 p.m.: 1.2 percent CO
2:00 p.m.: 0.4 percent CO
23. Moved sampling equipment to Port B and got a good leak check at
27 inches Hg. At 6:42 p.m., fugitive emissions from roof monitor
and acid plant were photographed by Fitch (Kennecott). At 7:45 p.m.
the continuous velocity monitor (Haystings-Raydist) was not giving
the same readings as our pi tot-tube and pressure transducer. Prob-
lem was traced to a defective umbilical cord which was kinked and
gave higher than actual velocity readings during the entire test.
A new umbilical cord was substituted and both the continuous
velocity monitor and our pi tot-tube/pressure transducer now gave
identical velocity readings. Purged impinger train for 10 minutes
and returned to the laboratory for sample recovery.
24. The following process observations were made during B-traverse:
Reactor Start 837246.1 (70-percent rate)
Finish 837280.0 (68-percent rate)
Difference 33.9
Bed temperatures up to 1240 to 1260°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.051 inch O
25. Brought samples to laboratory and began sample recovery for Test
No. 1 and obtained the following results:
• Good seal on 142-mm filter; filter dark green in color with
no penetration; filter did not stick to filter holder; did
not wash filter holder
• Moisture train filter had same dark green color around outside
edges but more yellow in center
A-12
-------
t Volume of H20 condensed = 86 ml; silica get collected 37.1 gm
of H20
• IPA impingers - solid brown particles floating in IPA on first
impinger; tip covered but solution was pale brown in color;
second impinger tip covered, solution clear
t 50-mm filter - white, not wet
• hL02 impingers — tips covered and solutions were clear
26. The crew left the plant at 9:00 p.m.
Day No. 5. August 6, 1976
1. Arrived at plant at 7:00 a.m. and went to lab to complete sample
recovery of previous day's tests.
2. The following data was obtained for Test No. 1:
co2 o2 co
4.2 percent 13.4 percent 0.9 percent
4.2 percent 13.4 percent 0.4 percent
4.2 percent 13.5 percent 0.4 percent
4.2 percent 13.5 percent 0.4 percent
IPA impingers - first impinger solution pale yellow in color,
tip covered, solid particles suspended in solution; second
t- .1 impinger solutionpale milky white in color; tip covered
train I . 5Q_mm f1lter _ wh1te> not wet
Glass frit -yellow stain which would not wash off with IPA
• H^Op impingers — tips covered, solutions clear
3. The following data was obtained for Test No. 2:
• H20 condensed = 73 ml; silica gel trapped 54.4 gm of H20
• No gas analysis for Test No. 2 since sample leaked out of
tedlar bag
A-13
-------
First
train
Second
train
i IPA impingers - first impinger solution pale yellow in color,
tip covered, no suspended solids; second impinger solution
pale yellow in color, tip covered, no suspended solids
i 50-mm filter - slight yellow color
i hLOp impingers - tips covered, solutions clear
i IPA impingers - first impinger solution pale milky white in
color, tip covered; second impinger solution pale yellow in
color, tip covered, solution clear
i 50-mm filter - slight yellow color
» H?02 impingers - tips covered, solutions clear
4. Fresh chemicals were prepared for the tests and the crew were
setting up the sampling equipment on the stack by 11:00 a.m.
Got word from Kennecott that there are problems with reactor and
it may be down on B-shift. Reactor and acid plant down at 11:40 a.m.
then back on again.
5. Set up equipment at Port C and got a good leak check; started
testing at 11:47 a.m.; velocity looks normal and pump vacuum is
only 6 inches Hg.
6. The following process observations were made during C-traverse:
Reactor Start 837969.6 (70-percent rate)
Finish 838000.7 (60-percent rate)
Difference 31.1
Bed temperatures halfway through traverse were
1130 to 1170°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = 0.06 inch H?0
7. Called at 12:01 p.m. to check on Haystings Raydist reading - 208
to 210 fpm; checked data from C-traverse and calculated 194 fpm
using pi tot tube and pressure transducer.
A-14
-------
8. Moved equipment to Port D and got an acceptable leak check;
traverse went very smooth and the impinger train was purged for
10 minutes after the traverse.
9. The following process observations were made during D-traverse:
Reactor Start 838030.8 (60-percent rate)
Finish 838060.0
Difference 29.2
Bed temperatures up 1170 to 1200°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch hLO
Gas analysis = 9.8 percent C02/S0,,; 0.4 percent CO
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 1.2 percent
Converters = None online
10. Moved equipment to Port A and installed a fresh impinger train;
got an acceptable leak check; very low velocity in stack and oven
temperature is less than 250°F.
11. The following process observations were made during A-traverse:
Reactor Start 838110.0 (65-percent rate)
Finish 838140.0
Difference 30.0
Bed temperature up 1230 to 1260°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 HLO
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 0
A-15
-------
Reverb ESP AC Volts AC Amps DC MA Sparks/min
Outside No. 1, 320 63 240 0
No. 2
Inside No. 1, 200 28 100 150
No. 2
Middle No. 1, 270 64 240 , 0
No. 2
Middle No. 3, 300 62 240 0
No. 4
Inside No. 3, 270 63 250 0
No. 4
Outside No. 3, 100 64 240 0
No. 4
12. Moved equipment to Port B and got a good leak check. Encountered
no difficulties during this traverse. At the completion of the
traverse, the impinger train was purged for 10 minutes and the
crew returned to the lab at 4:30 p.m. to begin sample recovery.
13. The following process observations were made during B-traverse:
Reactor Start 838173.4 (60-percent rate)
Finish 838204.0
Difference 30.6
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Skimmer's report indicated five matte taps
delivered
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 0.6 percent
Converters = No. 2 online
Reverb ESP Same as for A-traverse
A-16
-------
16. The following gas composition and moisture results were obtained
for Test No. 3:
co2
3.7 percent
3.7 percent
3.8 percent
°2
13.7 percent
13.8 percent
13.8 percent
CO
0.4 percent
0.4 percent
0.4 percent
HpO condensed = 148 ml
hLO in silica gel = 27.3 gm
Moisture content =11.4 percent
17. The following observations were made recovering the samples from
the trains:
• 142-mm filter — good seal, no penetration, brown in color
t Flexible hose — had a lot of condensed particulate in it
• IPA impingers — first impinger was murky, tip covered;
second impinger was clear, tip covered
t 50-mm filter —white, not wet
• HpOp impingers — tips covered, solutions clear
18. On the advice of Kennecott personnel (Fitch), no further tests
were conducted and the crew left the plant.
Day No. 6. August 9. 1976
1. Arrived at plant at 6:55 a.m. and noticed fugitive emissions in
roof monitor - operational problems may still be present.
2. Crew proceeded to lab to charge sampling trains with new chemicals;
barometric pressure was 27.81 inches Hg; Fitch informed us the
acid plant was down for repairs on 8/7/76 and everything should
be okay.
3. Arrived at the reverb stack at 9:00 a.m. and began setting up the
equipment.
A-17
-------
4. Started testing at 10:57 a.m. in Port C after a good leak check;
static pressure was -1.3 inch H20; no difficulties with traverse.
5. The following process observations were recorded during C-traverse:
Reactor Start 841025.0 (63-percent rate)
Finish 841053.1 (65-percent rate)
Difference 28.1
Bed temperatures were 1200 to 1210°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Gas analysis = 10.2 percent S02/C02, 0.8 percent CO
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 8.5 percent
Converters = No. 3, No. 4 online
Reverb ESP Okay
6. Moved equipment to Port D and had a good leak check; velocities
slightly higher than previous traverse and stack temperatures were
slightly lower.
7. At the completion of the traverse, the impinger train was purged
(10 minutes), and replaced with another train.
8. The following process observation were recorded during D-traverse:
Reactor Start 841087.1 (65-percent rate)
Finish 841124.6
Difference 27.5
Bed temperatures were low (1130 to 1150°F)
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch H20
9. Moved equipment to Port A and had a good leak check; stack gas
temperatures increased (>290°F); a drop in velocity to zero was
A-18
-------
noticed at Point No. 4 which lasted about 5 minutes and the con-
ditions returned to normal.
10. The following process observations were made during A-traverse:
Reactor Start 841157.8 (65-percent rate)
Finish 84,200.0 « J^ "Ot
Difference 42.2
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch H?0
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 7.8 percent
Converters = No. 3, No. 4 online
Reverb ESP Okay
11. Moved equipment to B-point and had a good leak check; no diffi-
culties experienced during this traverse; completed test and
purged impinger train for 10 minutes; cleaned out the sampling
probe on stack and replaced 142-mrn filter with a new one.
12. The following process observations were made during B-traverse:
Reactor Start 841232.4 (55-percent rate)
Finish 841261.8 (64-percent rate)
Difference 29.4
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch h^O
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 59 percent
Converters = No. 3, No. 4 online
Reverb ESP Everything normal
-------
13. Moved equipment to C-port for the start of Run No. 5 and had a
good leak check. Started heating oven at 3:27 p.m.; acid plant
has visible emissions from stack and leak in the ductwork; roof
monitor was smoking; start traverse at 3:40 p.m.
14. The following process observations were made during C-traverse:
Reactor Start 841365.8
Finish 841393.1
Difference 27.3
Reverb Gas analysis = 10 percent COp/SO,,, 1.0 percent CO
15. Moved equipment to Port D and had a good leak check; at the
completion of the traverse, the impinger train was disconnected,
purged and replaced with a new impinger train.
16. The following process observations were made during D-traverse:
Reactor Start 841418.1 (68-percent rate)
Finish 841450.9 (18-percent rate)
Difference 32.8
Bed temperatures 1100 to 1130°F
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch O
i
Reverb ESP AC Volts AC Amps DC MA Sparks/min
Outside No. 1, 320 62 240 0
No. 2
Inside No. 1, 320 48 160 150
No. 2
Middle No. 1, 260 60 240 100
No. 2
Middle No. 3, 240 4 150 0
No. 4
A-20
-------
AC Volts AC Amps DC MA Sparks/min
Inside No. 3, 260 46 190 50
No. 4
Outside No. 3, 100 63 140 0
No. 4
17. Moved equipment to Port A and had a good leak check; stack gas
temperatures decreased to ~285°F and velocities were slightly lower.
18. The following process observations were made during A-traverse:
Reactor Start 841494.3 (65-percent rate)
Finish 841526.1 (70-percent rate)
Difference 31.8
Bed temperatures from 1100 to 1150°F
19. Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch H?0
Acid Plant S02 inlet = 3.2 percent
Converters = none online (just reactor)
20. Moved equipment to Port B and had a good leak check; temperatures
are up on this traverse and velocity was normal. After completion
of the traverse, the impinger train was purged for 10 minutes;
the crew returned the samples to the lab for recovery.
21. The following process observations were recorded during B-traverse:
Reactor Start 841550.2 (70-percent rate)
Finish No value
Reverb Gas flow = 21
Airflow = 17
Outlet pressure = -0.06 inch H?0
Matte taps delivered = 5 on No. 3 converter
= 6 on No. 4 converter
A-21
-------
22.
Acid Plant S02 = 5.5 percent
Converters = No. 2, No. 4 online
The crew returned to the laboratory at 8:11 p.m. and the following
data was recorded for Test No. 4:
t nJj concensed = \t
t O in silica gel
co2
4.3 percent
4.4 percent
4.3 percent
'.(} mi
= 31.7 gm
°2
13.5 percent
13.6 percent
13.6 percent
CO
0.2 percent
0.2 percent
0.3 percent
First
train
Second
train
IPA impingers — first impinger solution slightly colored,
some precipitate; second impinger solution clear
50-mm filter — white, not wet
H,,02 impingers - clear
IPA impingers - first impinger solution dirty yellow color,
some precipitate; second impinger solution clear
50-mm filter - white, not wet
H0 impingers -both clear
23. The following data were recorded for Test No. 5:
co2
4.3 percent
4.3 percent
4.4 percent
13.6 percent
13.5 percent
13.4 percent
CO
0.5 percent
0.6 percent
0.6 percent
First
train
IPA impingers - first impinger solution was clear; second
impinger solution was grey
50-mm filter - dark grey color
H202 impingers - both clear
A-??
-------
Second
train
Day No. 7,
1.
• IPA impingers - first and second impinger solutions were clear
• 50-mm filter — white, not wet
• hLCL impingers - both clear
August 10, 1977
A rearrangement of assignments occurred to accommodate the in-
stack filter tests. Steiner left Hayden to witness particulate
testing at Inspiration Copper in Inspiration, Arizona. Sutton
relinquished his process observer duties to Lloyd Kostow of EPA
Region IX and replaced Steiner in the test crew.
Upon arriving at the plant, the test crew prepared four sets of
impingers, two 142-mm filter holders and four 47-mm instack
filter holders.
Operational difficulties were encountered with the elevator
servicing the sampling platform which caused delays.
The S-type pitot tube extensions were put on the sampling probe
to accommodate the instack 47-mm filter holder and the sampling
points were remarked on the probe.
Even with the pitot tube extensions on the probe, Point No. 6
could not be sampled. Test No. 6 began in Port C after a good
leak check at 1:25 p.m. Points No. 5 and 6 were considered one
point again.
Moved equipment to Port D and changed the instack 47-mm filter;
leak check was acceptable; stack temperature increased to ~312°F
during this traverse; the impinger train was disconnected and
purged after this traverse was complete; a new impinger train
was connected to the sampling train.
Moved equipment to Port A, changed the instack filter and got
an acceptable leak check; it started to rain and a slight drop in
stack temperature was noted (~303°F now).
Moved equipment to Port B, changed the instack filter and got a
valid leak check. Stack gas temperature decrease to ~300°F.
Velocity increased during the traverse.
A-23
-------
9. At the completion of this traverse, the impinger train was purged
and the various components were taken to the lab for sample
recovery.
10. The following observations were recorded for Test No. 6:
• 47-mm filters - all appeared to be wet because of the way
they peeled off the support screen and tore apart
ilPA impingers - first impingers solution very slightly milky;
second impinger solution clear
• 50-mm filter - white, not wet
'
H?0? impingers - clear
IPA impingers - first impinger solution light brown with
Second \ particles; second impinger solution was clear
train „
50-mm filter — white, not wet
\\-fl? impingers — clear
Day No. 8, August 11, 1977
1. Test crew went to the lab and prepared four impinger trains, four
47-mm instack filter holders and two 142-mm filter holders.
2. Upon arriving at the sampling platform, the crew cleaned the sam-
pling probe from Test No. 6 and sent the flexible hose to the lab
for cleaning.
3. Test No. 7 was started in Port C after a successful leak check
at 10:45 a.m.; stack gas temperature had decreased to ~283°F.
4. Moved equipment to Port D, changed instack filter and got a valid
leak check; after completion of traverse, the impinger train was
disconnected, purged for 10 minutes, and replaced with a new train.
5. Moved the equipment to Port A, changed instack filter and got a
good leak check; no change noted in stack gas temperature or
velocity from previous traverse.
6. Moved equipment to Port B, changed instack filter and got a good
leak check: stack gas temperature decreased to ~255°F. After
A-24
-------
First
train
completion of the traverse, the impinger train was purged and the
probe was cleaned out; the components were taken to the laboratory
for sample recovery.
7. The following abservations were made recovering samples for Test
No. 7.
• 47-mm filters — all filters appeared to be wet because of the
way they peeled off the support screen and tore apart.
IPA impingers - first impinger solution light white color;
second impinger solution clear
50-mm filter -white, not wet
i H900 impingers - clear
Second
train
IPA impingers - first impinger solution white; second solution
was clear
50-mm filter - white, not wet
H?0,, impingers — clear
8. Steiner returned to Kennecott at 4:00 p.m. and obtained the fol-
lowing results:
• HLO condensed = 148 ml
in silica gel = 27.5 gm
co2
4.3 percent
4.2 percent
4.2 percent
co2
4.3 percent
4.3 percent
4.3 percent
4.2 percent
°2
13.5 percent
13.6 percent
13.7 percent
13.8 percent
13.8 percent
13.8 percent
14.0 percent
A-25
CO
0.3 percent
0.3 percent
0.4 percent
CO
0.7 percent
0 percent
0 percent
0 percent
Test No. 7
Test No. 6
-------
Day No. 9. August 12. 1976
1. The test crew packed up the sampling equipment and samples and
drove to Phoenix. The equipment was put on the loading dock at
Hughes Airwest Air Cargo terminal for shipment to San Jose. The
collected samples were picked up by ONC for truck shipment to
Mountain View. The crew flew home.
Day No. 1. December 14. 1976
1. The test crew, consisting of R. Larkin, C. Stanley, and E. Rice,
is accompanied to the plant by Ms. Linda Wunder-Freet of EPA
Region IX. Arrival time is 0800.
2. Since the test equipment was already setup from previous testing
for EPA-OAQPS, all that had to be done was charging of the
impinger train and laoding of the filter.
3. While the test equipment was being readied, R. Larkin checked the
plant for steady-state acid plant operation and the converter's
copper blow schedule.
4. SO,, concentrations existing from the tail gas stack were found
to be approximately 1300 ppm - well over the value representative
of normal operation. The problem was caused by blower malfunctions.
However, the major delay was caused by the copper blow schedule.
The next blow was not scheduled until between 1900 and 2000. It
was decided not to test today.
5. For the remainder of the day, samples and equipment from the pre-
vious week's testing were packed for shipment. In addition,
Clint Fitch, Kenncott's Control Supervisor gave the test crew
and the Region IX representative a plant tour.
Day No. 2. December 15. 1976
1. Test crew arrives at the plant at 0800.
2. A copper blow is in progress and the acid plant is under steady-
state operating conditions - so the first test started at 0919.
A-26
-------
3. The test proceeded with no upsets and was completed at 1150.
Equipment was returned to the laboratory for sample recovery.
4. The following observations were made regarding the appearance
of the samples from Test No. 1:
• All washes and impinger solutions were clear
• The filter had a light off-white tinge and no visible particulate
5. The gas sample in the Tedlar bag was analyzed on an Orsat appara-
tus and gave these results:
02 - 8.3 percent
S02 -0.2 percent
CO - 0.0 percent
6. The next copper blow was scheduled for 2000 hours to the crew
returned to the motel at 1400 after recharging the train for
the next test.
7. We returned to the plant at 1900 and transported the sampling
train to the test location. Copper blow had started and the
acid plant was operating normally, so Test No. 2 started at 2015.
8. There were no problems during Test No. 2 and upon completion at
2318 the equipment was returned to the lab for sample recovery.
9. We left the plant at approximately 0100 — December 16, 1976.
Day No. 3, December 16. 1976
1. The test crew arrived at the plant at 0930. By 1030 copper blow
had started and the acid plant was operating normally so Test
No. 3 started at 1048.
2. At 1104 the test was stopped for 13 minutes due to an interruption
in the copper blow. During this time, the train was purged with
the gas meter reading changing from 968.884 to 969.404. Copper
blow and the test continued at 1117.
3. The test was completed at 1335 with no further interruption.
The appropriate equipment was returned to the laboratory for
A-27
-------
sample recovery while the remainder was packed in the shipping
crate.
4. By 1900 all equipment and samples had been apcked for shipment.
We left the plant at 1930 and flew home the following day.
A-28
-------
APPENDIX B
CALCULATIONS AND DATA SHEETS
B-l
-------
0.0474
0.0474 cm.o
/Tstd] /Pbar + 13.6\
\ W \ Pstd /
V = V
m.std m V' / rstd
= 17.71 («.qfe )
TTT
lO.D
ft!
B = Vw,std
w Vw,std + Vm,std
-t
fc t-'] c r{ T
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data) %/
p H,0 \ /R T
V * v I 2 I I
Yw,std Vlc IM I I Pstd
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
M. = 0.44 ('/-C02) + 0.32 (%02) + 0.28 (%\\2 + %CO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44 (3.«| ) + 0.32 (13.01) + 0.28 (83.03 + 0) + 0.64 ( )
Ms = Md ^^wo) + 18 Bwo
(1- -oW-J + 18
= 28.^68) Ib/lb-mole
Gas Velocity and Flowrate
= 85.48 X
ft/sec
-------
•E PLANT '<-*•.,„.*
I LOCATION .^
S3-V
S3--S
Average
I3-6T
CO
(I by Vol.)
O.B
0. 3
Average
.*r
-------
0.0
f PLANT
[ LOCATION
0.1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 336
0.2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
10F
T7IT
1.1
FDATE
K
1.2 COPERATORS
"[
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.) £!&- ~7 &
TYPE s PITOT COEFFICIENT
1.4
-
MET BULB
DRY BULB
MOISTURE
|_Bwo
TEMP
CF)
TEMP (°F)
(1 VOL.)
•
STACK GAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
EOF
F1n»l
Initial
Liquid Collected
Implnger 11 Height
(S-C
/3>O
Implnger 12 Height
(gm)
^80
3S-Q
— 70
Silica Gel Height
(9")
30/. £>, 2.?
j5^6 . 72.
5-?S. /3
Total. Vm
Si.b^
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
»
9.
y-
y-
^
3~
3-
3.
•A.
ZL
*
Average
a
Gas Meter
Temp
^(°F) ^^
/OS /OS"
/OS /Of
/£>^ sO5
SO& tof
/ot, /oz
/on- sc£
,06 SOS
/Ob /Of
/oS /oS
/tx* /05
« -
Avg.,Tm
(oe.^-c
Velocity
Head
(1n. wg.)
Stack Gas
T«mp
CF)
S>&7
^66
-------
Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
.•> r • • •
P H20 \ /R T
V = V I-———-1 stq
Vw,std Vlc U 0 I I Pstd
= 0.0474 Vlc
0.0474
5 IK ft-
V = V
m.std m
17.71
B
AH
wo Vw,std + Vm,std
3 5
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
M, = 0.44 («C09) + 0.32 (7,0j + 0.28 (WL + %CO)
d c. f- f-
+0.64 (%S02)
oA
= 0.44 K1) + 0.32 (VHb) + 0.28 (<3i.^+ ^) + 0.64 ( 0
= 23-H Ib/lb-mole
Ms = M, (1-BWO) + 18
18
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
w = K C
p p
Va'Js ? H- 4-uo
'
-^.^0? ft/sec
-------
Q5 - 3600 (1 - BWO) Vs>avg A y T
Tstd \ I Ps
. .
s.avg/ \ std
= 3600
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
v . V
vw,std vic IM 0 I I p
std
std
= 0.0474 V
lc
= 0.0474
ft:
V = V
m,std m
/T \ /P + ^
l_std| I bar 13
\ w V pstd
= 17.71
ft;
-------
Vstd
"v T7
Vstd m.std
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
O
M
's V.
m.std
(2.205 X 10"6)
(2.205 X 10"6)
lb/ft;
I of /r£j.>j&-".4
.417
-6
6. Emission Rate of Participate Matter
ER = QSCS
= 35;/s?s-1b/hr
-6>
-t
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
I =
p
1.667TS {0.00267 V]c + f— [ bar + yy^
GV P A
s s n
0.00267 (1Z3.I) + ^'* K)-S1 + -1T^
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
'V
\l \l \fmll SOl 0
• i • j
* W V1; \ Va
Cu cn = (1.08 x 10"") —
vm,std
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER = Qs CH2S04
ib/hr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
Ccn = (7.05 x 10"5)
rn.std
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER =
Ib/hr.
10(00
= (7.05 ~
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
0,0
0,1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
0,2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
1.2
TDATE &/r
TIME so.-
|_RUN /
£ OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.) —
10F
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. H6.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
1.4
-
WET BULB TEMP (
DRY BULB TEMP 1
MOISTURE (J VOL
[_Bwo
•F)
1,5
EOF
1.6
EOF
EOF
STACK SAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
Final
Initial
Liquid Collected
Imptnger 11 Height
(9">)
V-//
3SO
9 /
Implnger 12 Weight
(gm)
*?s-
S~PO
-s~
Silica Gel Weight
(9")
V&3 &
¥36. 7
3-7- /
Total, W^
/JtJ-/
Clock
Time
/o.ve
so : s~&
^; oe
// , / &
/s; a &
//; 3 &
". v B
"' *B
'*: /&
/it: x&
Dry Gas
Meter
•7VS tt?
7*9. -7,0
7 *r
79J* &
&<"/. S3
Total, Vm
-\\.d\\.
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
/.£>'
/. i"
/.•&
^.i"
/. -5
/.£
f. ^
s.f
/. 5"
Average
{ C^
Gas Meter
Temp
&& 87
90 69
9/ B7
9S <-,
?3 90
93 92
JV a*
9Y 93
** 9y
Avg..Tm
°>l.\
Velocity
Head
(In. Kg.)
Stack Gas
Temp
^77
a
-------
c
3
0.
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x
(IN.)
2,1
2,3
DATE
TIME
RUN
B /S
2,2 [ OPERATORS <£,/c.
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
— /•
-,-,
^
STACK GAS MOLECULAR WEIGHT
2,5
Clock
Time
//,'
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
3.
EOF
Velocity
Head
(1n. wg.)
Stack Gas
Temp
^77
87
2,6
EOF
EOF
co2
(X by Vol.)
^- a,
Average
^- a.
°2
(X by Vol.)
?,
Average
/3. ^
CO
(X by Vol.)
o.y
o. V
-------
PLANT A^eijfie co // i
LOCATION /f?-c»v,^ ^7/1
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 3J3.«.?£ ^ f,. Sc
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /o
NOZZLE D1AHETER (IN.) o_ 75-
PARTICUUTE SAMPLING DATA
Stmpl 1ng
Point
Nurtwr
/9-£
"•°S
Ss .' /O
//: '£
/', iO
•
St.ck G>!
S*&0
?bU
ffkl
?*'*
y->&
37*.
20-*
y&o
y.7*
S7f
Xtt
Probe
&5$~
**1
A53
PS/
J?59
JS9
zstr
*<-£
fX.,
jz<:2
£X,3-
Inplnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
•77
77
77
ee
Oven
Temp
CF)
2V5
**>
JBS
L3t6
376,
356,
?ȣ
y&o
ys<>
*£f
356
Dry Gas Meter Temp
Inlet
CF)
e.^
B<~
87
SB
es
ee.
93
93
9$
9(,
969
& • @G&&^
& • &o9$
0.00/9
C.CCJ7
O.OO17
O.OOZT.
o. oo(.o
0. OOV7
Orifice
Meter
(In. •«.)
a>. 5"
3.5
,.5
ToUl
Pinp
Vicuun
(In. ho.)
/&
/3
'*•
S"
5-
-------
LOCATION
STACK OIMCTER (I».) S3&
DUCT DIMENSIONS [!«.) X (IN.)
DATE
T1HE
RUN
4,02 L
4.03
C OPERATORS /t
I STATIC PRESSURE (IN.KG.) — /• 3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HE.) .
4,07
STACK PRESSURE (IN. US.). S. 7-
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MDLE)
HETER BOX NUMBER £?£? 3 S
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT fi>. 7O(£>
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /O
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) £>. 7^
PARTICULATE SAMPLINC DATA
Point
Number
0-H,
0-5
£>-«
£> - 3
0-a.
O-/
c - t>
c- s
c - :t*
/».•/£
,».•«
'3.a&
'
/. Ofp
/.'/£•
'.•at,
Stack Gas
*9Z
#
#98
#
3 SB
2C.-3
XCV
££•3.
SSB
&C*/
ast.
3&O
Inplnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
9?
/OCl
/DO
90
en
87
ee
Oven
Temp
CF)
*s*?
aso
SS*
3S7
SSB
PS?
573
Sfe/
?,a6
ISLi,
Dry Gas Hi
Inlet
CF)
so/
xo/
SO 3
SO 3
SC3
/03.
/o/
/el
/OS
/o y
/& 2-
X£?3
Avinoe
A..r.« '
ter Temp
outlet
CF)
/oo
SCO
/Of
/OZ.
/o-a.
/CZL
/»/
/as
/of
S03.
JO'S.
SOSL
Averaoc
Velocity
Head
ojse^B.
O . OO 3S
£>. 00/3
0. OO'X
O. OO/3
C. OOf 3
0.C23S
•>.<>**/
c>.oc?t>
C. OO&O
/. £'£
/37. /5"
/
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
V = V
Vstd vlc
P M \ /R T
'H20
std
std
0.0474 V
Ic
0.0474
I* .039 ft3
V = V
Vstd m \T
«
+ 13. 6\
std /
17.71
wo Vw,std + Vm,std
= A 07
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
0.44 («C02) + 0.32 («02) + 0.28 (%N2 + %CO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44 ( ) + 0.32 ( ) + 0.28 ( + 0) + 0.64 (
= 1°>.1\ Ib/lb-mole
Ms = Md H-B^) + 18
18
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
s,avg pcp
- BS.48 X
= 7-103^/560
-------
Qs = 3600 (1 - Bwo) Vs>avg A
Tstd \ I Ps
s.avg/ \ std
= 3600 (1-
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
V = V
Vstd Ic
pH0 \ /R T
std
0.0474 V
Ic
= 0.0474
V = V
Vstd m VI
m
AH
13.6\
= 17.71
-------
w.std
5wo ' V.. .^ + V_
w.std m,std
. Concentration of Particulate Matter
M
's V,
m.std
(2.205 X 10"6)
a
(2.205 X 10"6)
1b/ft;
6. Emission Rate of Particulate Matter
ER
- (>.(} 323X 'O X
= 58.311
3/6.4 9
7
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
1.667T J 0.00267 V Pbar A H
s \»-»^' «ic T \ 13.6
m
I =
(1.667)00,1) 0.00267
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
soln
t 'tbj V^y V va
d
CH ,n = (1.08 x 10'1*)
24 V
* vm,std
= (1.08 x 10"
-<».
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER = Q CH SQ
V a
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
(H)
- 5 \ ""/ \ /
Ccn = (7.05 x 10 5) 1—±L.
m.std
05X10-5)
'Ub X IU ;
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER = QSC$0
. f. * -,
Ib/hr.
-------
0.0
PLANT
LOCATION
0,1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 33 <£,
0,2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
"776"
1.1
1.2
1,3
10F
DATE
TIME
RUN
OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WS.) — /. 3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.) y_?.
LTYPE s PITOT COEFFICIENT o 7/
\\
IWET BULB TEMP (°F)
DRY BULB TEMP (°F)
MOISTURE (I VOL.)
E
1,5
EOF
1,6
EOF
EOF
STACK GAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
Final
Initial
Liquid Collected
Implnger 11 Height
(gut)
r#
Silica Gel Weight
(gm)
*>-£>S-- 3
VS-0- 9
s-y y
Total, «w
/37. V
Clock
Time
v.
SfVS
Dry Gas
Meter
(ft1)
&/
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IN.
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
Co/***,
tecA
DATE
TIME
RUN
*3^V"
OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
-X. 3
STACK GAS MOLECULAR WEIGHT
Clock
lime
£-.'05
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
.OF
Velocity
Head
(1n. wg.)
Stack Gas
Temp
293.
,6
)F
)F
co2
(% by Vol.)
^«^ /^?/^ - ^-5e
tffafa. /^rcw T^s/ /
Average
V »
°2
(X by Vol.)
Average
/3,5"
CO
(X by Vol.)
Averaae
^. ^
-------
PLANT
IOCAT1W rfrisf
STACK OlAHETER (IN.)
OUCT DUCKSIMS (IN.) X (IN.)
4.01
4,02 C OPERATORS /ffl're*-
ST»TIC PRESSURE (III.KB.) — /. 3
4,03
AHBIEWT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) 37. &?
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HG.). .» X. 8&
4.07 HOLECUUW WIGHT (L8/LB-NDLE)
HETER BOX NUWER fa 3 6
ORIFICE KTEB COEFFICIENT f> . 7C&
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /O
NOZZLE OIAKETER (IN.) O-75" ,c
PARTICUUTE SAHPUN6 DATA
Singling
Point
Nuntor
A -(•
/\ -S
A-*
A - 3
XA -a
A - 1
6-1,
6-5
a-v
&-->,
& - 2.
*~'
Clock
Tim
t>:39
«..»<•
(.:*?
i .5 V
6-;sV
•7.0*
7, Of
7.y/
7, ft
B:e<
B:ot
8: »
S; 'i
S;y.t
Stick Gil
Tenp
CF)
303
^eV
300
^90
*93
37V
303
30V
300
*?
VSY
3SV
Dry Gas Meter Teeip
Tnlet
CF)
x-oa.
XC 3
XX. 3
,c/
SO&
so?
/Of
,e/
/o/
/OJ
/C/
/C/
Annoe
Outlet
CF)
x23i
XJ. OJJs
C • OS 71
0 C37(,
0.03C7
o.OJ-rl
e.00-/?
a.oo-ss
O.OOY¥
6.003-3
0.0033
O. OCX'S.
Orifice
Neter
J- 9
3 9
3-9
f.C
jt.O
*.f
/.,
S- 2-
o- 9
0.7
O. 7
O.S-
Avengt
Gli Net
-------
PLANT
LOCATION /fisw-4 S/tZcA
STACK DIAMETER (IK.) 3 3.6,
oua DIMENSIONS (IN.) i (IN.)
4.01
DATE
TIME
RUM
4,02
C OPERATORS /Cv'rcA.
[STATIC PRESSURE (IK. KG.) — /. 3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) jj?..
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT f)t
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HG.). £7- 66
4.07 MOLECULAR WEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE)
"wo
4,05
METER BOX NUMBER
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT £7.
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) SO
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) £>, ;».£-
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Stapling
Point
Nunber
e--(.
c -f
C.-V
C-3
<,-,
£>-S
£3- C
£>- ^
"-'
Clack
Time
*.&>
*;*s
*;*<,
v:s,
f-'St
5". C/
f:ck
f;vc
jr.'«5-
5:fo
*.**
Stick Sis
Tern
CF)
3oo
300
3O/
3OC
3CO
303
305-
30 fo
,*K
*.er.«
Probe
^«~e
*sf
Sso
*se
jive
*«9
+S6
^5-^
Inplnger
Outlet Tap
CF)
/<=>»
Oven
Tenp
CF)
.336
,#f C
^vf
^•c?
rf^5-
S^7
Sis'
a^»
S30
H6,/
*£
DrvGa. h>
Inlet
CF)
xc5-
/o^
xo<£.
/OS
so 7
/'O
/OB
xe>3
^
Avenue
ter Tew
outlet
CF)
/of
so ^~
/0<>
/of,
so 7
/C7
/eg
/(P6
Avertoe
Velocity
(In. *«j.)
ff.ottmf
a. 0'79
0.0/5-3.
o- o/a. v
?. CO 7V
O.ox*/
o. oftz
°0 °o*66
Orifice
Meter
(In. •:.)
£'&
9-W
£.7
A.->
*•*
A.7
3.0
3.0
a. 8
3-O
Avertoe
ds Meter
Volune
(ft.1)
ff. ¥/
US'. 73
70. 7f
7S.7f
eo.es
8¥- 7t.
es-*t
?3, 72
98. B 7
SO?. /5"
/£> ^. V'c?
s/^. 5&
>/1. 76
TOUl
Vicuum
(1n. hg.)
a.y
*-*
a?
*/
-
a
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
Vstd = vic v^2o ; \ pstd
0.0474 Vlc
0.0474
v = v (^\ (?bar +
v_ ... vm ^ y ^ p
'm.std 'm \Tm / \ Pstd
= 71-017 ft3
= Vw.std
Vw,std + Vm,std
1\
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
= 0.44 (*C0) + 0.32 (*0) + 0.28 («N + %CO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44
0.32
0.28
0.64 ( o
1b/lb-mole
Ms = Md
18
= ^•147
+ 18
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
s,avg
ft/sec
-------
Qs = 3600 (1 - B^) Vs .... A
Tstd \ I Ps
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content ( Parti cul ate Train Data)
v . v
Vstd vic M, 0 std
0.0474
0.0474
u = V
vm,std n
Tstd| ( Pbar + 13
kfjj~7 \ Pstd
r^7T
-------
w.std
wo " Vstd + Vm,std
= 0,1471
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
o
M
's V.
m.std
/30.
(2.205 X TO"6)
(2.205 x io"6;
6. Emission Rate of Participate Matter
ER = QSCS
/33-C?7
to
0
10
=35:
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
,.667 Ts J 0.00267 V,,. + f- [*" + $&
m
0V P A
s s n
(1.667)0^) 0.00267 (\K ) +
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
'V
C = (1.08x10-)
v - v ^ ' soln
• 4. • J
t -tbi v-y \ va
a
24 Vm,std
10-)
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER = C
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
Ccn = (7.05 x 10"5)
m,std
-5
= (7.05 x 10" )
\Q$Q
\
/
Ib/ft
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER = QCfn
lb/hr.
-------
[ PLANT SffsJie c O
°'J [ LOCATION /ftstpr^
0.1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 33H,
0.2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
TTo
FoATE
1.1 TIME
10F
/7
_
RUN
1.2
OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. HG.) —/.3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.) -27 a -,
TYPE S P1TOT COEFFICIENT ^
1.4
-
WET BULB TEMP (
DRY BULB TEMP (
MOISTURE (I VOL
|_Bwo
°F)
1,5
EOF
1,6
EOF
EOF
STACK GAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
Final
Initial
Liquid Collected
Implnger 11 Height
(gm)
•V96
3S~0
/&
Implnger 12 Height
(gm)
^OO
£7)0
0
511 1c» Gel Height
(gm)
7 7fr £
97S~. OO
?&?.. z^y
Total. Vm
. .\
Rota meter
Reading
(cfh)
/. -:•
Avg.. T
y * m
•v-. "-
Velocity
Head
(In. »g.)
Stack Gas
Temp
«=*>;>
^7C,
,?75
^fc7
y.K.f
y-fil
•****
*^
39 i.
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) .336,
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
DATE S
2,1 TIME /
RUN 3
2,2 T OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.) -/. 3
2,3 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.) &
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
STACK GAS MOLECULAR WEIGHT
EOF
:OF
:OF
Clock
Time
Er
/y 3*
/; oo
/;,o
/, 10
/. 30
/'•3V
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
^
3
*
SL
2
A
2.
Velocity
Head
(1n. wg.)
co2
(* by Vol.
3, 7
3. 7
3-&
Average
3. ?3>
°2
(X by Vol.)
/-?. 7
,3.e
/3, B
Average
/3.?'
*
-------
PLAHT /
LOCATIW
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 33
DUCT DIMWSICmS (M.) X (I"-)
4.01
4,. 75
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Point
Number
C- -/
C-Z-
c- - i
e. - V-
.
//. ff 7
/*:c*
J»;c >
'•2;/a
«/«•
^.•5-0
/.' Oil
/.' 1C
Stick Gil
CF)
,3-fro
£77
,B 73
a?/
P93
36,9
*-?/
H.9O
Probe
^53-
2S&
XS'
^1,5
w;
***
**7
.*s-/
350
Implnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
By
*«B
r>**
u*
#5P
Dry Gis Meter Teitp
Inlet
CF)
/CO
so/
so/
/OS.
/03
,0*
/C7
/OB
/oe
S0&
/£><>
Avenoe
«vtra«
Outlet
CF)
*«
«V
sea
/Of
/Of
soz.
/OL
/at
S& *?
so 7
Average
Velocity
Heid
(In. «t.)
0. oc //
1S.C°<9
&. oos 9
0.CC**
&.OO38
0.C03&
£>. ocas
6. CO/9
a .ooz?
v.oo/z
Orifice
Meter
0. 2
o. r
e.V
O. 7
o 8
c.e
o./
C.?
0.3
0. 7
e.e
A«r««
Gil Miter
Volune
(ft.1)
79. 33C
e/. His
8S -*7S
es. ^s
e& ^eo
•?/. «yo
*£***o
K.O<*S
?B '**
*fOO. 77S
'0£- 1>£6
Total
Pim|)
VlCUUIB
(In. hg.)
^
fc
&
7
e.
e.
^
4
7
5
7
B
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK OIAMTTER (IN.) .336
DUCT DMNSIOHS !I«.) I (IN.)
et'e.s?
4.01
DATE
TIME
4.02 C OPERATORS jff?ifCK-
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.UG.) — f. ?
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) 7. Si-
4.07 MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE)
METER BOX NUMBER
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT £7.
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /O '
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) fj. 73-
4.06
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampling
Point
Number
A-/
A-a
A --5
A - V
A -i'
A- t
B-l
Q-3*
O~V
8-5
Clock
Time
A' 03
<2:e~>
J.-Sgi
a:*7
^*
9: 10
3. HO
3.3?
Stack Gas
«*&0
ff&7
&90
?9e>
^1
J%
303
30S
Average
Probe
9S?
SK,*
*S1
SLG.O
***
^i
;f;
Implnger
Outlet Teap
CF)
?e
Oven
TS
#3*
*3B
?*/
«¥
/Of,
/of,
sot
/07
SO&
/£>&
/°S
Av^r|ff
Velocity
e.ooos
f.oooB
o.oocS
0.00//
0.OO3?
0-OO/S
e .003,7
O.0033
Orifice
Meter
O./
o.y.
O. f
o. ?-
£>-<>
0. 7
C-S
0.&
O. 7
0.9
Avenue
Gat Meter
Volune
(ft.1)
S08-7*/
8/0- 710
e^.^%
9/3 • eio
9/7. eve
3*0. tSO
B3O. *3±
33* . 676
33S. 99C
Total
Vacuum
(1n. hg.)
y
*
*
*"
i,
f
a
7
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
/
vw,std f Vlc
p H90 R T
0.0474
* 0.0474
fts
17.71
B
1-0
w,std
Vw,std * Vm,std
-------
- (4 ^t 1-vL
2. Stack Gas Composition
Hd * 0.44 (*C02) + 0.32 (%Q2) + 0.28
Ms - Md (1-BWO) + 18
is
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
v = s»avg
vs,avg
\l T
\ P
= 85.48
ft/sec
-^v
= 0.44 ( ) + 0.32 (I^L } t 0.28 ( 4 t 0.64
-------
3600
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
ft
V = V
m.std m
T V /p + AHv
IsXtf] [bar 13.6)
Tm / \ W /
= 17.71 (
-------
ion of PartfcuTate Matter
jt 0_
,
(2-205
(2-205 X
V
) /
-------
7. Percent Isokinetk:
1 .667 Ts 0.00267 V]c
m
0Vs Ps An
0.00267 ( ) t
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid H1st
CH sn = (1.08 x 10"")
H2S04 y
/v . v \ (K\ (!§oln
V Vtbj ^j ^ va
m,std
(1.08 x 10
9- Emission Rate of Sulfur Triox1de/Ac1d Mist
ER = 0 C., „„
Ib/hr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
Ccn = (7.05 x 10'5)
so? v
i Vstd
= (7.05 x 10"
6/.S"
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER
-------
r /'
°'° [LOCATION j?£^e,~6 rs/a
0.1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.) ,336
0.2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
FDATE &
TIME 9
|_RUN y
1.2 [^OPERATORS
1,1
1,3
f
10F
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. US.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
LTYPE s PITOT COEFFICIENT
1.4
WET BULB
DRY BULB
MOISTURE
TEMP (
TEMP (
(« VOL
•F)
.)
1.5
EOF
1.6
EOF
EOF
STACK 6AS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
Final
In1t1«l
Liquid Collected
Implnger «1 Height
(9")
^7^
3S-C
/35-
Implnger »2 Height
(9")
^^5"
£&O
- S'
Stltci Gel Height
(9°i)
^ e 9. 3
^5 ?•&
3/ -7
Tot.l , Vfa
/S/. 7
Clock
Tine
Y.-S2.
,C.-CA
/C. /SL
/c : az
sc.-z*
/c:*»
/f;sa
//: 03.
//.• / a
// -• A a.
//. J3
/// ys
// / SA
Dry Gas
Meter
(ft1)
•ret, . 9f><,
r?y. '*&
co/. 3/5-
OOG. SS>°
0^5-. 9S»
das. ess
esc. set,
o 37- fas'
err . *3o
of/, flo
OSB- 7/0
0€S. 633.
O 73 . 973
Total. VB
«buon
Rotaneter
Reading
(cfh)
/.S
/.S
/•$
/.*
/ S
/.r
S'f
/,5-
/•€
/.S
,.£
,.S
Average
\>Z
Gas Meter
Temp
CF)
Ul «u/
S7 fi5-
ee et,
89 &<*
90 e?
90 BB
90 ee,
9v e?
90 0?
?/ ?£>
9a 90
?* 9/
93 9/
AV...T.
^•T-<
Velocity
Head
(In. xg.)
Stack Gas
CF)
J?fi5-
.560
j?e^
^ee
SL8V
*?9
s>e><)
ye.3,
S>B?
s>ee>
29C
&9/
-------
PLANT "*
LOCATION ,fV <-'<"•£• .i*
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 33fe
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) I (IN.)
DATE ="
TIME 9;
RUN ^
2.2 C OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. «.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
,5 7 g /
0.7 ?/
STACK GAS MOLECULAR HEIGHT
2.6
Clock
Time
9.-ss
/£>,'& 3.
/& r / 3.
sc.-itSL
/. 33.
/o: VS
so, sa
//:oz
//; /a.
//; 93.
».'3Z
»:**
Rotanetsr
Reading
(cfh)
2.0
*,'l
/. O
/. c
/ -0
/ • o
/.o
/.o
/.o
/.o
VtlocUy
Hctd
(1n. wj.)
Stick G»
CF)
^
S.B&
*ev
sen
367
StS3
X&7
2.6 e
2.10
*»,
EOF
EOF
co2
(X by Vol.)
Sf ^
j£ sf
Average
^•"b
(t by Vol.)
,3.*
Average
\3,io
CO
(I by Vol . )
*-3
Averaoe
>l*b
-------
PLANT £-# f»
LOCATION /?e<3 3 g
ORIFICE HETER COEFFICIENT O.
PROSE LENGTH (R.) /•&
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) o . ~? S
«.08
-
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampling
Point
Nia*er
A-/
A - =
XI -3
A-*
A-*
A-b
3"
£• A
4-3
4-v
3 5-
Clock
Tine
/y.-ro
V:v^
/»:sc
/*-5»-
','£>0
,:os
•;,0
,:an
/.H7
-.33.
':37
,.'VZ
'.'S3
Stick Gai
C^
S>7-Z
5>9e
PS*>
gtf-y
?**
y93
29*
j-re
3°/
303
•30V
\ t_
Average
Probe
CF?
fit-
A*!.
*ve
ZL1> 3
J3^
*Sf
*«0
vse
2
&.¥£>
s&s
Ia»1nger
Outlet Te«p
CF)
Bf>
e-?
©fc
©4
Oven
JJT
#5°
fX>
fLSD
\»sf
e&'
*so
S-S/
x*9
950
SB'S
Dry Gas Meter Temp
Inlet
CF)
9-7
97
73
9e
9?
r?
9V
99
/CO
/OO
/O/
Average
TV v
Average c
Outlet
CF)
97
97
9?
97
98
76
r?
99
99
99
soo
soo
Aueraoe
^1T^ ^
,1 VT
Velocity
Head
<1n. ^.)
c^?£> y. ^
&rO&^^
£1 .0030
a. oocn
o . cov/
C.OOV7
O.oooS
0,00*1
o.ey
C. 7O
Averaoe
• ±*** 1
Gai Meter
VoluK
(ft.')
7X . 7SC
-?*> C.VT
77. -3*1
Be. 065
6'- 7^o
&y. vfc
B7 yeo
S7.*/3.
B&.V7t
90 • m
93. 77O
-K.&3,/
'OS •
-------
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) X (IN.)
4.01
DATE
TIME
RUN
4.02
C OPERATORS Af
|~ STATIC PRESSURE (IN.UG.) — X-
4.03 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.MS.) <5>7
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
4.07
STACK PRESSURE (IN.H6.). J
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-NOLE)
METER BOX NUMBER
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT O-
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) XC»
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) O.-?S~
«,oe
i-
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Point
Number
c -/
C-3.
<: -3
C ~ Y
e -&
cr-6
£}-/
0-3
0-3
&-*>
O-S
Clock
Time
/O. 5?
S/.-03.
/'••O7
//:'3.
SS.S7
„.-**
y,.*7
#:C3
(3.-07
/f:/tt.
/e;/7
'* :a 7
Stack Gas
T^
&&S
SL&3.
X££T
»?
£&3
fftO
M
stv*
*V7
pst
ft£V
oft,
Implnger
Outlet Temp
(•F)
7S
??
&o
£0
80
e/
&f
Oven
x^jf
?Y¥
nve.
2*9
9«9
*V9
4 ^£
&^7
3^6
31^^
250
£&&
Dry Gas Meter Te»p
CF)
&7
ee>
ei
69
90
90
93
. cow
0.00/9
o-ccv?
Orifice
Meter
O.37
t>.1>3
o,6,S
o.-?f
o.&o
0-75
c-?-?
0-Sif
o.eo
o.es"
f .00
Averaoe
Gas Mater
Volume
I".')
V/.S7C
•/ 3.
Vacuum
(In. hg.)
SL.
B
5"
5"
4
5"
;a
-------
^
1, Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
;V'\ •
PH,0\ /RTstd
V
w.std Me \, I V P
std
0.0474
0.0474 ^ \$k« \
Pbar * 13.6\
Q I
u
Vstd
Vw,std + Vstd
-------
* 13 <^S, f)
2. Stack Gas Composition
Md * 0.44 (*C02) + 0.32 (TOg) + 0.28 (XN2 + %CO)
•1-0.64
= 0.44 (TO + 0.32 Q^,5 > + 0.28 (%-5lf + + 0.64 ( O )
Ms - Md (1-BWO) + 18
+ 18 (.
ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
V = v r /../AD \ •*/ =>,avg
s,avg
\l s>a
V PsMs
= 85.48 X ' X l
ft/sec
-------
T \ / P
Qc * 3600 (1 - B_) Vc „ A ' std I ' s
s — i "wo' -s.avg" \TS /I Pst(j
3600
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
P H20 \ /R T
V... .^ - V, ' 2 ! ' SJ
•w.std 'lc VM,
0.0474 Vlc
0.0474
ft3
V = V
m.std m
= 17.71
ft
-------
8
WO
X
,0- .
''/ft
-------
7. Percent. Isokinetic
1.667TS {0.00267 V,c + f— \ ""' + yy1^
^~
(19'V < 0.
I
(1.667)(19' < 0.00267 )
13.6
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Ac id Mist
'V
C
(1.08 x 10~") —
u w \ i »• i i sol n
t 'tbj v-; v va
u
vm,std
^ ( ir-.
(1.08x10 )
9- Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER = 0. C.. „„
-------
10. Concentration1 of Sulfur Dioxide
Ccn = (7.05 x 10"5)
Vstd
(7.05 x 10"
lb/ft3
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER
ib/hr.
-------
0.0
PLANT /
LOCATION
0.1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
0.2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) « (IN.)
10F
tMTE 3/9
TWE 3/4,
f
l.Z [^OPERATORS &
/76
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. «.)
1.3 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HE.) S7- B/
I TYPE 5 P1TOT COEFFICIENT
*- '°
/09- V*5
//*. -7Sf
,»•/. ove
/3/- 5*99
/39- OS*
,VS. 77?
r.r«
ToUl. Va
^"I.UW
Rotaneter
Reading
(cfh)
/.S
s.f
,.f
/• f
,.S
/.f
,.s
s.-r
,.*>
f.S
/.•*
Average
\-^
Gas Meter
Tenp
,00 /Of
/&yt. /a
/ ' c1 x /^y
/00 /a/
SCO /£>/
99 /
/oo /oo
/0o soc
Avg.. T,
\CD
Velocity
Head
(1n. wg.)
Stack Gat
(•F)
??*
f"?7
»97
•300
3oo
3CZ>.
£*?'
?
5193
*9*
;a?»
3L9C
^.^'
-------
PLANT "• Z '
LOCATION /r><.' Si
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 33t
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) X (IN.)
2.1
2,2
2.3
F DATE Z/9/?t>
TIME a:ro/"^
1 RUN _.
L OPERATORS &*/crtr/x
[ STATIC PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
L TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
/-
SI7.8/
O. 77/
STACK CAS MOLECULAR HEIGHT
2,6
Clock
Time
a.-yo
3:s'£>
y//o
*J ' ,' SO
r &&
ff~* j@
s-.-jo
£ ,' 3o
£~f' ^c<
Rotaneter
Reading
(cfh)
S.O
*.°
*A°0
£.0
A.O
*-o
f-o
a-o
3-0
3-0
Velocity
Head
Stack Gas
Temp
<°F)
^5T
9^7
3oJ
500
^w
»?3
*9Z
&*3
^yy.
S9C
EOF
EOF
(*l>yVo).)
(X by Vol.)
/:?•
CO
(I by Vol.)
-------
PUKT
LOCATION
STACK OIAJTTER (IK.) 33«S
DUCT DIHENSIONS (I*.) I (IK.)
/lkiycfts>
4.01
4,02 C OPERATORS /f"a>/-c A
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.M6.) — /• 3
4,03 AWIEHT PW5SUP.E (IN.HC.) 37. &/
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT ,,-;,
4.07
STACK PRESSURE (IN.H6.) 37. ?/
HXECULAX BEISHT (LB/LB-KXE)
HETER (OX NUNBER OC> 3 &
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT i7- 7<5 <£
PROBE LEKSTH (FT.) 'C
NOZZLE DIAICTER (IN.) O.
PARTICUUTE SAMPLING DAT*
Sanpllng
Nuetxr
C- - /
C -S
C- *
c-v
C-5-
-,-S-0
y.-ff
S:oO
S;of
V'
Stack Sas
*ee
3^0
333
#fS
yw.
*x>
*«9
S*c
t8
dry Gas Meter Tero
Inlet
CF)
'O/
sc,s
so/
/OS
/£>/
97
17
96
97
9S
re
. ~;
Avereae
Outlet
CF)
',0*
so*
S0S
/C3.
/C/
99
re,
97
?7
97
9B
Average
•veraoe. , -
Velocity
Head
C.OOC&
0 . OO •/(
0.002S-
C.CO*<
0, 0035
O.C^S
0,00/3
0,001*
O. OO33
O.OOW
o-ocv/
o. oovt
Orifice
Meter
°£,
O.V3
o.so
0 70
O. 70
o.n
C.V3
o.ts
O.BO
o.&o
o. fo
.&
Average
Get Meter
(ft.')
9. &7S~
//. 9&Z.
,3 • SVC
/<.. 390
,9. 07*
*3.ex*
fl3. «IZ
#£. V&2
ys. /<>o
Sf.'tO
3
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IK.) 334,
DUCT DIHEHSIOKS (IN.) I (IN.)
4,01
DATE S/9 /7(,
TIME *5~;V ^rf
RUN f
4.02
C OPERATORS r
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.WG. ) — /. 3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.H6.) £1-7 .
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
_,„ _
^e> y
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HS.). S 7- 7/
4,07 MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE)
METER BOX NUMBER £>O 3 6
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT *e
y*>a
s>yf
;H
^B
&
stye
Inplnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
9Z
93.
Oven
Teu
m
2*3
#¥9
*s°
3SX
we.
«V9
?so
#50
#so
use
Dry Gas Heter Ten
Inlet
CF)
SOO
/OS
/O/
/£>/
/CO
/oo
/oo
/Of
/OSL
sas
SC3
/03
Averaae
Outlet
CF)
/CO
/O/
/C/
/CO
/oo
SCO
/CC
/c/
/Cf
/c/
so/
,.
Average
Velocity
Head
(1n. »g.)
o.oaoB
c . oafl
O.OOff
C.oooQ
O-OO3O
O.O030
O.POO8
o.ooaa
0.003O
0.003S"
0-0036
C-.OOMI
Orifice
Meter
(1n. "».)
o.st
o-yz.
o.sa.
C./&
c. to
OJ6
0.-/3
C.
-------
Has/den
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
std lc
std
0.0474
0.0474(^5,^
ft3
_
-------
\oo- f 4 •
2. Stack Gas Composition
Md = 0.44 («C02) + 0.32 (%02) + 0.28 (%N2 t
= 0.44 (4/T)) + 0.32 (|^,<| ) + 0.28 ($|fc}+ 0)
lb/lb-mole
Ms = Md (]-Bwo) + 18 Bwo
18
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
V = K
- 85.48
ft/sec
-------
3600 (] - Bwo) Vs,avg A \ T
std
^
s.avg / \ std
= 3600
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
pH90 RT
Vw,std = Vlc IM
std
std
= 0.0474 V
lc
0.0474
ft:
V = V
m.std m
AH_
13."6\
std
O. o
= 17.71 (5":>Af)
ft;
-------
w,std
wo Vstd+Austd
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
o
M
Vstd
(2.205 X TO"6)
(2.205 x io"6;
lb/ft
7-rcZ*^-"- c
II.
(7.205 X/0
-6 •
6. Emission Rate of Particulate Matter
ER = QsCs
= (' A 9^,6 ^b^
- ^ - o 7/3 A
-k
4. •'
- 4s lib x/o
'. X/
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
I =
V / P
1.667TS } 0.00267 V,C + TL "•"
9Vs Ps fln
(1.667)048..)) 0.00267
(\Zo)
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
, . I \i
soln
CH SQ = (1.08 x 10"4)
Vtbjv^ n.
24 V
^ ^ m.std
loo
( \0 -.OS M«u»«W\-
= (1.08 x 10"')
Ib/ft
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER = QsCH2S°4
Ib/hr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
- 5 \ ""/ \ I
= (7.05 x 10 ) ' '
w
vm,std
= (7.05
Ib/ft
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER '
y ,
lb/hr.
-------
XT'
PLANT '
LOCATION
0,1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.) 3 3f,
0,2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
/fey -7 g 7
LTYPE s PITOT COEFFICIENT
1,4
WET BULB TEMP (°
DRY BULB TEMP (°
MOISTURE (I VOL.
Bwo
STACK SAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
1,5
EOF
1,6
Final
Initial
Liquid Collected
Implnger 11 Weight
(gm)
«4£
3S-C5
Sff
Implnger 12 Weight
(gn)
4"?8
s-?o
- 3.
S111c« Gel Weight
(gm)
rt£~- 3
"
»:cS
*//*•
3 : ^f~
J. f.S"
3,^
3; PS-
3.' 3s"
Dry Gas
Meter
(ft1)
SbO. 3.9B
/<, 7. SB/
s-?v. Sva.
'SS . 099
s&9. *9°
s?6- . 6~?6
ftB. V/O
X3Z . St 70
a. vc . Jtts
A*7. S3Y
Total. Vm
C7.r-^
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
s.S"
f. S"
^ sr
'•*
f, ^
,. f
''.*
/. S"
/• ^
/ s"
Average
^
Gas Meter
Temp
"t a* <
Sfe <=s'
97 9t
97 ?t>
98
-------
PLANT /7/> ««)
LOCATION /•»,
s; 3 f^*?*
&
OPERATORS &, '/c. /J"*f
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. KG.) -
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT •
STACK CAS MOLECULAR HEIGHT
Clock
T1M
2:05-
A: >£
a>:»S
a,3f
*:<<*
9. : Sf
2 :c>s
3. 'f
Rota meter
Reading
(cfh)
**.
9.
»
•S-
*
3.
3.
2
Veloclty
Head
(1n. wg.)
Stack Gas
Temp
CF)
3CT3.
3,/C
30V
•sot*
•3CS
•306-
^
EOF
EOF
co2
(J by Vol.)
^.3
\
CO
(» by Vol.)
0
O
o
Averaae
0
-------
PUWT *~t~lf>e cv>
LOCATION /Ceiser^
STACK DIAMETER (IK.) -3 *
DUCT DIMENSIONS UK.) > (IN.)
•.02 C OPERATORS X/T-/-C/4
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.yG.) —A3
4,03
AMIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) S 7. f! 7
TY.PE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
»,01
STACK PRESSURE (IN. KG.) £>
MOLECULAR WEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE)
METER BOX NUMBER £?<2 .3*5
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT f).
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) xo
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) ft. 75
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampling
Point
Nunber
c--/
c -a
C - 3
r-v
c- f
c: - t
0- ,
0- S
0-3
a-*
0-5
0- f7
S>t,o
30^-
3'J
J^a
30?
*"r'a* '
Probe
m
^r-fc
osy
***
jsy
*•*<.
we
*Sf
jift.
ffS
ff&i
ffS5'
S>S,
?s*>
f>v?
?ro
Dry Gas Meter Temp
Inlet
CF)
re
?B
re
99
99
/CO
/ oc
,c,
/or
/OO
ye
9*
Average
Outlet
CF)
re-
re
96
39
99
/cc
SCO
/GO
/ O/
/ca.
sec
9B
Averaqe
Velocity
Head
O . OC '3
oe&
O-oq/3
iS . Oc'9
t-.oc.'?!-'
P . PC 3O
n
Orifice
Meter
(1n. wg.)
C.S7
C 37
o.ts
o.tf
o.<*&
o-*>£
o.cf &3t.
et. t9S
S€. 7SC
S9 *vo
9C 7'*
9S./3/
93. 9/3.
?<,. 29*
99. OS*
Pme
Vacuum
(in ng )
a
3
t
£
c
6
/
3
3
3
S
*
1VM
-------
PLANT A?e*tfit ccf
LOCATION /et^&r^ Stiff
STACK DIAMTTER (IN.) 33H,
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) I (IN.)
4.01
DATE
TIME
RUN
/ff ,0
4,02
4,03
OPERATORS
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.K6.) — /. 3
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.KG.) &7.
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
4.07
STACK PRESSURE (IN. KG.).
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/U-MOU)
B«
METER BOX NUHBEH
O,
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Point
Htirter
A-/
-a.
A-3
/•) - 5"
S-/
a-*
&- 3
a-s
<3-<*
Clock
Tine
3:*Y
3-V4
i:*V
5/5-?
V-oy
«:/3
«;*S
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
tf/U/lb
Vw,std = Vlc \M
P H20 ^ /R Tstd
std
0.0474 V
Ic
0.0474
= V
m.std m
(!
bar + 13.
P
std
= 17.71
1.5-
[376
= '78 288. ft3
wo
'w.std
Vstd + Vm,std
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
M - 0.44 («C0) + 0.32 (%0) + 0.28 (%N + XCO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44 (4.ai) + 0.32 (\b.t) + 0.28 (32.17 + 0) + 0.64 ( o )
= 2<*.^\ lb/lb-mole
Ms = Md (]-Bw0) + 18
18
ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
= 85.48 X . W x .0466,
V
'
ft/sec
-------
Is • 3600 /, - Bwo) Vs>avg A [>L_ L%_ ^
y v s,avg/ \ Kstd
= 36U (1-
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moi/Ture Content (Darticulate Train Data)
0.0474 Vlc
0.0474
ft:
V = V
m.std m
T \ /p + AH \
'stdl ( Kbar TI76]
Tm / \ Pstd /
= 17.71
-------
w.std
wo " Vw,std + Vstd
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
M
's V,
std
(2.205 X 10"6)
//
(2.205 X ID'-)
lb/ft
I 0* ,~f Q ^--I
y
4g.it
6. Emission Rate of Particulate Matter
ER = QSCS
(4066000 )(1.
(2.*CX
•=• /.5>5"3.3 -'' '0
(4-066
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
V / P
1.667 T. I 0.00267 V, + m / bar . A H
's iu-wwtu' "ic T_ \ 13.6
1 = 0VP A
s s n
0.00267
= ui.o
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Ac id Mist
CH = (1.08 x 10"4)
V
\/ \/ \ / M \ i sol n
Vt " V1
24 V
^ * m,std
= (i.os x lo"14;
0 3
Ib/ft
9- Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
CD = n r
Ci\ U C. . f*f.
c.
'4
lb/hr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
Ccn = (7.05 x 10'5)
v
m.std
- (7.05
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER -
-------
0 [PLANT /?c<">tcc
UlU [ LOCATION /fe^fft.
0,1 [ STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
0,2 [ DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
y?,-
1.0
[DATE
TIME
.....
RUN
<6 /" /7 (•
so:** a'
1,2 COPERATORS
10F
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.) — /. "3
1.3 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.) =7 ag
I TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
O.
111
L
WET BULB
DRY BULB
MOISTURE
|_Bwo
TEMP (°F)
TEMP (°F)
(I VOL.)
1.5
EOF
1.6
EOF
EOF
STACK GAS MOISTURE (CONDENSATION)
Final
Initial
Liquid Collected
Implnger (1 Weight
(gm)
*?**
/a / zf
/s: SjT
;a:«£-
Dry Gas
Meter
(ft1)
^Z 6V3.
#yv set
Xt3. C76T
fi i'<3
3/a. 6^f
3/f. ««£"
S3 7. XJ?0
J33s/. 3*^
Total, Vm
fet. ?
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
f. -S"
x. ^
/. •£
/. S"
/. S"
x. *"
x, ^
,.*
,. -f
s. -S
/. 'f
Average
.-5
Gas Meter
Temp
^^- f^tf
OL."* Vt
&7 fi£"
89 e*.
^? s^
?/ ae
93- P9
9x ?c
91 90
^ ^
«"f
^ -?a.
Avg.,Tm
M.,'---t
Velocity
Head
Stack Gas
Temp
3>&<
*^*
27f
S7£
*ey
Sl-?7
S71
*77
H77
-27f
-------
PLANT
LOCATION
STACK DIAMETER (IN.)
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) x (IN.)
2,1
2,2
2.3
S /" /?**
SO,' V
7
OPERATORS <£,'/*
DATE
TIME
RUN
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. WG.)
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN. HG.)
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
— /.3
STACK GAS MOLECULAR WEIGHT
2,5
EOF
2,6
Clock
Time
so; &>
//•; o f
/s.' 3^
„.;*
/s:/&
/#:3X
Rotameter
Reading
(cfh)
51
*
I
*
3-
3L
5L
Velocity
Head
(In. wg.)
Stack Gas
Temp
^«c
^76-
c2<& V
&77
£77
SL77
*?*
EOF
EOF
co2
(% by Vol.)
«*
4^ <2
& O
Average
4.2-
°2
(% by Vol.)
,3.r
X3.«
».,
Average
I^.C-
co
(% by Vol.)
1
O.3
O. 3
o.y
Averaae
-------
PLMT e *"fe r
LOCATIOK <&^r^
STACK DIAMETER (I».)
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IK.) I (IN.)
4,01
DATE
TIME
RUN
OPERATORS A^^/fcA
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. KG.) — X. J
AMBIENT PRISSURE (IN.H6.) ,37.
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
4.07
STACK PRESSURE (IN. KG.) .27.
HOLECULAR HEIGHT (Lfl/LB-MDLE)
METER BOX NUMBER O f 3 S
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT o . ? O C-
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) X O
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.)
O. 7.5-
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Point
Nurfcer
Clock
Time
Stick Gas
Temp
cn
Inplnger
Outlet Temp
Oven
Temp
CF)
Dry Gas Meter Temp
CF)
Velocity
(In. wg.)
(In. «g.)
(ft.')
(In. hg )
/ £•
C-J '-^
,/•!<.;
/- 7 -V i"
-------
13-
PLANT •ZaneccT*
LOCATIMI &ue.^6 S
STACK DIAMETER (IB.) 33 t
DUCT DIMENSIONS UN.) X (IN.)
4.01
DATE
TINE
RUN
8 /'
4.02 C OPERATORS A
P STATIC PRESSURE (IN.K.) -X 3
4.03 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HC.) J7.
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
_ --- .
«•* ' / f f
4,07
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HG.). S>7. 66
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-NOLE)
METER BOX NUMBER Ot> 3 £5
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT (y. -?Ot>
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /ty
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) fy 75-
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampling
Point
N niter
Clock
Tire
Stack Gas
T«np
CF)
Pratx
Tmo
(Tl
Implngcr
Outlet Temp
CF)
Oven
Temp
CF)
Inlet
CF)
Velocity
Head
(1n. Kg.)
Orifice
Meter
(In. .9.)
Gas *t«r
Volim
(ft.1)
Pugp
Vacuum
(tn. hg.)
If
• OOO £~->
• /c
^67
99
17
.OOOfj
/.;
A-
/•/I
It
.00/3
J
±L
. DOM '
•43
fi- •
/.'A?
_2£.
iff
fi-t.
. 0033'
"-JC 7/7
7
A'JU
A- I
/OO
/OO
,37
/DO
/C>f
•3f
J"
£- 3
/OO
/C/
ICO
/O/
to/
• 0033'
02.
Jot .
/o?
/£•/
•Se
S-
Avtr^ge Avuraoe
Averaoe
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
I ~L -
Vstd • Vlc \MH
R T
std
std
= 0.0474 V
Ic
0.0474
ft*
V = V
Vstd m VT
m
13. 6
std
= 17.71 ( )
13.6
wo
ft;
V + V
w.std m.std
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
= 0.44 ('jRC02) + 0.32 (%02) + 0.28 (%N2 + %CO)
+0.64 (%SOJ
= 0.44 ( ) + 0.32 ( ) + 0.28 ( + 0) + 0.64 ( )
Ib/lb-mole
Ms = Md
18 B
wo
- O ) + 18 (0
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
s.avg p p
J
Y
= 85.48 X ••?&(> X -5205 V
*
76-40
ft/sec
-------
• 3600 „ - Bwo, V A
= 3600 (1- O )
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
PH,0
V.. ... - V '
w.std 'lc ^ ) \ Pstd
= 0.0474 Vlc
= 0.0474
ft;
v 13.6
Vm,std
/P \ AH >
|Kbar 13.6
-------
3wo " V,
Vstd
w.std m.std
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
Vstd
(2.205 X TO"6)
(2.205 X 10"6)
6. Emission Rate of Particulate Matter
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
1.667 T, I 0.00267
bar + A H
m
13.6
I =
0Vs Ps An
(1.667KO4) < 0.00267
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Ac id Mist
-««,) (i
soln
SO
S0
'08 x
m.std
= (1.08 x 10"")
Ib/ft
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER
-H2S04
0
ib/hr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
10
- 5
m.std
(7.05 x 10-5)
) to
-)
11. Emission Rale of Sulfur Dioxide
ER -
-------
nun fcc-..-^a,rA ;<4
LOCATION -TV/ J., s 5-
STACK DIAMETER (IK.) /J ^
oua DIMENSIONS IIK.) x (IN.)
4.01
DATE
TIME
RUN
11
4,02 C OPERATORS C 4t p n U /
- ^ / t
STATIC PRESSURE (IN.NG.) — . .'/'
4.03 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) 1 "f. L s"
f. • TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT ^ t
tf.tr
4,07
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HG.) ~-^ " "^
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE) 2 £"•
METER BOX NUMBER fl 1
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) ff)
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) , 2 -
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampl 1ng
Point
Nunbcr
Stack Gas
Two
CF)
Probe
Tmp
CF)
Implnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
Dry Gas Meter Temp
Inlet
CF)
Outlet
CF)
Velocity
Head
Orifice
Neter
(In. «J.)
Gil Meter
VolUK
(ft.1)
Pxv
Vacuun
(In. hg.)
n
/r
- I
ll
T^[
tig
n (.
i ?>.'
Hi
H-'
li:
I •is"
,"ifl
f •/'/')
ZS'o
Z. 2 r
<•'/!'
.iy
.
V/i V/D
n
If. ti
3^•i o'
//
O
/ L'
t"
C
r
i«
-------
k-
PLANT tc*
LOCATION 7l(, f fa 4 $&!
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) <^> £,
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) « (IN.)
4.01
DATE (2 -/ \ -'
TIME
RUN / /7
4.02 C OPERATORS ^ 5fc«,/^ £ . /?.
I STATIC PRESSURE (IK.K6.) - , /Y
4,03 AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) ^f.3
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT .7&0
4,07
STACK PRESSURE (IN. KG.). 2<
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-NDLE)
f • ^ 0
,
HETER BOX NUMBER
ORIFICE HETER COEFFICIENT
PROSE LENGTH (FT.) /p '
NOZZLE DIAKETER (IN.) , 2 j"
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
-------
TAIL.
Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
P M \ /R T
w,std
MH
std
std
= 0.0474 V
Ic
0.0474
/ft3
m.std
= V
m VT,
m
/Pbar + T376\
\ Pstd /
\
17.71 ( )
13.6
'wo
-ft:
'w,std
V + V
w,std m,std
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
= 0.44 (tfC02) + 0.32 (%02) + 0.28 (2N2 + %CO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44 ( ) + 0.32 ( ) + 0.28 ( + 0) + 0.64 ( )
o Ib/lb-mole
Ms = Md f1-^) + 18 Bwo
) + 18
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
Vs,avg ~ KpCp \v-- y avg
= 85.48 X
= 32 .^
ft/sec
-------
Qs = 3600 (1 - Bwo) Vs>avg A
3600 (i- D )
.avg/ \ std
530
9-92
SCfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
P H20 \ /R T
v = v ' £ii sto
vw,std vlc
0.0474 Vlc
0.0474
O ft:
j- I J T- T ^
AH
/ >V^\ / r^ -*•
u
m.std
17.71
ft'
-------
w.std
Vstd + Vstd
= -0
5. Concentration of Particulate Matter
C^" rr^ (2.205 X 10~6)
5 Vstd
(2.205 X 10"6)
/
•d-
lb/ft3
6. Emission Rate of Participate Matter
ER
Ib/hr
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
1.667 T {0.00267 V, +
si i L
m
I =
13.6
0Vs Ps An
0.00267 ( O ) +
V
1.6
-Ho) (32-55)(**-01)( ^.AWvo"4-)
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid "Mist
- '
»
C , = (1.08 x 10"")
w
soln
= (1.08 x 10" )
O Ib/ft
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
ER
V°4
lb/nr
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
CS02 = (7-05x10-
m.std
(7.05xlO-!)
si.-n
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER = "sCSO
6
lb/hr.
-------
J
' L
ea
PLANT (~c
LOCATION
1
i
4.01
IIA..IIUH /.i, .y-^,, _>TTJ<_ /l_
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) LS ' V
^ ^ PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
4,06
-. *A L.r- MV VM
EOF
Sampling
Point
Number
I
I
^
(
7
y
.)
/ *
,,
u
..j
H
'."
n
Zv."
wi
2- ^
i->
i~(
Clock
Time
ll^C
2i.l,l_
/IV
^;">-V
I'^ii
u -\L.
tiM
?IT,-
t>iitf
lii.'
±!_Ii-
Zin
Zl5t
:t$rs;
.'•fc^
Z>IC
i^(«t-
2 Tl^f
i>l t-
"*
Stack Gas
(•n
' i'
In
nl
m
/•x
PJ7 __
/ 1 1
/'7k:
/or
I^Y_^
/Oj
Joz-
w*
S
/i»'7
/!•'?
I kle
i^
"•1
^\l <. 1
Probe
2$ (
?i"-
_£N
2\<;
-SI.
^ycp
J-3'1
i y •)
^T '
2S 1
•-!>f
Z.^0
Zri
zri
i
252.
Zsj
^T|
Z r^-
Zs'j
Inplnger
Outlet Temp
CF)
s
(
\
1
/
/
1
y
\
\
\
/
1
(
\ ,
)
/
'
i
Oven
Temp
-^V
T^'l
"^
2Sw
2iT6
i re
'"
*?l
^rz.
-'rD
'-SI
^r5
zrj
zr>
252-
^ri
J^.fJ
^57
^ T\
^5i
Dry Gas Meter Temp
Inlet
S"i=
^^
&
*\w
5t
>v
ifc
sk.
>^-
^fr
>t
ft.
5"i.
rt
St.
. >£
r*"'
^ if
5 ^
5"u
Outlet
CF)
r.
i'k
S'-
5"fc
S?
Sic
St
^K-
Tfc
?&•
r*.
5"
5-
59
»
St*
S^r-
>'b
Average ^\lo
Velocity
Head
(In. »g.)
fjfC^^'
c'.tfs ^i
£\^ '
^.*/l-
1 4 / r\ ct
/.u% =;
/, j o •>
vTiyV^O
O rr-^i
^ *1 V*" *!»*
^i^Z-i^'
i5-((. .4
(J. '5 V*
,v\
£iy,y>4
^ • ' 5~ ^
/-. ,^4^
CUl.'l *'v
1-1-.
OHflce
Meter
(1n. »g.)
Z. .1-'^
Ar^-) J .1 )
Z -7J «•
1.95^ ^
- 7f A"
C ^j-«(
- 7l'^
-**= 4-
i 'S r
Z.fO
^. TS"
i>.?r
^ Z^,1
r c\ o
f «- >iS"
f J'/./KO
Tv<-. Ci;
'"t'ti t/r
-7^^o
•"•3.J-YO
7i J. *?o
7*t r? r
^vr.c?;
77r.f3c->
/ V * . *7 3 1
? t1?. i > <-
1*1?. vie
Jt- •
ToUl
•=(..-)%
Pump
Vacuum
(1n. hg.)
/ "3
Z 3
^ 5. N
2 ? S
J r
-3 \"
'3
'X
1
3
2__
Z-
Y
y
Y
7
V
:'!6" cw,s /^V— ---
_— ^"^ X' ^S
-,(»•:>
J.CJ-
-------
- £v At
y
PLANT v-.
LOCATION TUJ Lr.0> S^
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) ?£
DUCT DIMENSIONS (IN.) X (IN.)
DATE | ? 'I
TIME
RUK'2, />
4,02
4,03
C OPERATORS £-
[~ STATIC PRESSURE (IN. KG.) -,/"/
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) £S 0
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT
4,07
STACK PRESSURE (IN.HG.). 'Jif'^'
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE) '£%• ^C
METER BOX NUMBER 0017
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT ~J .
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) jf '
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) . J i'
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
-------
1. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Moisture Train Data)
..;'\V'-.
P H20 \ /R Tstd
V = V
Vstd vlc \M,
std
A
( ~L~ (Co~"7
0.0474 V
Ic
0.0474
/ft3
a = V
m.std m
YTstd] /Pbar + 13.
\^~) \ Pstd
17.71 ( )
\
\
\
• ft3
B
wo
V + V
vw,std m.std
13.6
-------
2. Stack Gas Composition
Md = 0.44 (*.C02) + 0.32 (M)2) + 0.28 (XN2 + %CO)
+0.64 (%S02)
= 0.44 ( ) + 0.32 ( ) + 0.28 ( + 0) + 0.64 ( )
4 Ib/lb-mole
Ms = Md d'^) + 18 Bwo
(1- ) + 18 ( )
Ib/lb-mole
3. Stack Gas Velocity and Flowrate
Vs,avg = KpCp
= 85.48 X.
ft/sec
-------
= 3600 (1 - BJ Vc av/n A
WO s,avg
I I
- 3600 (1- O )
scfh
4. Stack Gas Moisture Content (Particulate Train Data)
/ p H-0 \ /R T ,
v = u I 2 I I —
vw,std vic U 0 I I pstd
0.0474 V]c
0.0474
V n3
P + AH
y _ %. i o U-M i i bar l j
vm,std " v
^ -* ^^ / <--r— ~^^-s \ I I %/ • V/ I I ' V-/ Cx »
-------
w,std
vw,std + Vstd
5. Concentration of Participate Matter
M
's V.
m.std
(2.205 X 10"6)
— (2.205 X 10~6)
lb/ft:
6. Emission Rate of Particulate Matter
ER = QsCs
-------
7. Percent Isokinetic
1.667TS ^ 0.00267 Vlc + f^ I ^ * TTT
s
I =
0Vs Ps An
(.1.667)(CM 0.00267 ( O ) + -.
8. Concentration of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
'V
CH ,n = (1.08 x 10 ")
H2 U4 / V
N' ' so1n
m,std
= (1.08 x 10" )
o ib/ft3
9. Emission Rate of Sulfur Trioxide/Acid Mist
\ :'
ER \ Q, cu cn
ib/hr
1.6
-------
10. Concentration of Sulfur Dioxide
CQn = (7.05 x 10 )
,/- -4 (»
m.std
= (7.05
lb/ft -
11. Emission Rate of Sulfur Dioxide
ER =
-------
cM
^- L ' -7
LOCATION la- I 6« i
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) ? '
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) 2
PARTICUUTE SAMPLING DATA
-tW
Sampling
Point
Number
1
i
y
v
"T
1
/J
i/
i J
it
/i"
/t
(1
/'?
i >
Clock
T1i>e
lift.
w
KZ1
III -/
ny\
ll^j
iiy f
/o-7
"•?i*
.InS
Stack Gas
Temp
CF)
' 'I
111*
111
111.
''h
'£
'ft
Avtr>J«
Probe
(^
f^
tsZ.
;5^-
i;i
'.!5
i|
Iflplnger
Outlet Tem>
CF)
S
(
(
)
(
Oven
a
?vt
t
-;r;)
^ry
-'v r
&
Dry Gas Meter Temp
inlet
*-Y v.-'
1?
fry
v-T
I ,
6-; •
V
^y
vl
7; •'
Averaae
Outlet
CF)
£2-
(.'3
/';
<.' r
'?
^
Averaae
nveraiie Lo\£
Velocity
Head
ftfc
;ar
^.-Jfv.
*•
J. 11. *-
tf , i > 51.
Ot •!
A'Z^;
OHflce
Mtter
(In. «g.)
1 »'
/.If
I.- r
J..i r
z ir
'.fr
^.•rr
I^'-VJ"
Sf
i-'1
Average
Gil Miter
Volume
(ft.1)
!Sv
W
^/^.fu -r
-'tlllrr
lit. yrr
J' '/ el
II
s'l't
Total
Vacuum
(In. hg.)
Z1 1
Z73
;
7
7
7
IT
1 i_
/^-
3
3
3
3
y
r
r
^ *3.jy
v^ ^,
' -' »•
"/I-
Ta^^ ,fv
/,-Jl-^^, ,^,^^ -y t^yv2^>7^ ^,.j!yT 4//--/.r..c.-,v.vl
->' >l't*"
-------
1
£
4.01
4.02
4,03
' PLANT £<«^^,-t\-~ |<,a/ /^i** i,
LOCATION ~7ui/ t'4j x'tiil A_
STACK DIAMETER (IN.) f6
DUCT DIMENSIONS UN.) H (IN.)
TINE
RUN ^ C-,
. OPERATORS (-• ^(-Jllf^ ^ ^> l-g.
STATIC PRESSURE (IN. KG. ) -, /f
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN.HG.) 2ff-t>0
TYPE S PITOT COEFFICIENT , 7%O
4,07
STACK PRESSURE ( IN. HG. ) > 7, ? /
MOLECULAR HEIGHT (LB/LB-MOLE) ?f. '•/P
METER BOX NUMBER ^
ORIFICE METER COEFFICIENT
PROBE LENGTH (FT.) /(I '
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN.) ,1$
PARTICULATE SAMPLING DATA
Sampling
Point
Number
(J
li
D~
Clock
Time
Illl
/Vf
'Jlf
Stack Gas
Temp
CF)
^2V
i to
lie
/?-/
Probe
Temp
CF)
zsz.
ZTI
2VZ-
Implnger
Outlet Temp
(•F)
Oven
(^
i5 J
zvv
zsr
Zft
Inlet
CF)
•if
7}
n
ter Temp
Outlet
(•F)
Of
•1-i
iL
•Jf
V
Velocity
Head
(1n. .g.)
t?i I Z_-'WI-
c>. I TV
^>.1-JL
•"**. '
Or
2-1
;»•„
2ry
zvr
-7V
•75
/.ro i
(. J'O I
ft^r ;
ivv-r
ivtrane
Average
-------
Sample Calculation
Statistical Analysis
Acid Plant Tail Gas Stack
Participate emission rate (Ib/hr)
x1 = 27.0 (Test 1) N = 3
x2 = 15.4 (Test 2)
"a:11-7
The mean (x) for a set of N numbers, x, , is given by:
. (E x.)
X= -N—
x = (27.0 + 15.4 + 11.7J/3 = 18.0
The standard deviation (a) for this set of numbers is given by:
a = Jx/(N - 1)
a = J131.1/3 - 1 = 8.1
X = (Zx-j2) - N(x)2
where = (272 + 15.42 + 11.22) - 3(18.O)2
X = 131.1
The 90% confidence interval (CI) is approximated by:
CI = T(a/-y/¥)
= C] + c2 (N - i)c3] (O/VN)
= 1.645 + 2.605 (3 - 1) - 1.186] (8.!/>/!) = 13.0
where
c-], C2> and c3 are constants for N ^> 3:
For the 90% CI; q = 1.645, C2 = 2.605, c3 = -1.186
The lower confidence limit (LCL) is given by:
LCL = x - CI
= 18.0 - 13.0 = 5.0
The upper confidence limit (UCL) is given by:
UCL = x + CI
= 18.0 + 13.0 = 31.0
Reference: EPA Report 600/8-76-002, "HP-65 Programmable Pocket Calculator
Applied to Air Pollution Measurement Studies: Stationary Sources,"
Program APol-18.
-------
APPENDIX C
PROCESS DATA
C-l
-------
KENNECOTT COPPER CORPORATION
RAY MINES DIVISION
HAYDEN, ARIZONA 85235
April 13, 1977
Mr. Robert Larkin
Staff Engineer
ACUREX - Aerotherm
U85 Clyde Ave.
Mountain View, Ca. 9^0U2
Dear Mr. Larkin:
In your letter of March 21, 1977, you requested certain information
regarding process feed rates. In my initial reply dated March 28, 1977, I
addressed the problem of smelter feed rate as it applies to the allowable
emissions rate calculations.
Following is the best available information in reply to your other
queries using your item numbering system 2 through 5-
Item 2 - The August 3, 1976 entry on your enclosure 1 does show
207 dry tons charged. That was an error which occurred as a result of weight-
ometer location and feed accounting problems. Actually, there was no feed to
the fluo-solids roaster, but there was 207 tons of concentrate fed to the reactor
feed bin preparatory to startup.
Item 3 - Again, the total feed to the smelter should be used for the
allowable particulate emissions formula. Following is a breakdown of the total
feed to the smelter for the periods in question:
Aug.
5
1029
39
288
39
1395
Aug.
6
1102
Ui
72
29
I2kk
Aug.
7
391
17
109
29
5^6
Aug.
8
1126
kk
77
27
127^
1976
Aug.
9
1079
37
23^
^
Ikok
Aug.
10
83^
27
2U8
81
1190
Aug.
11
Ul3
16
128
25
582
Dec.
15
1528
15
330
39
1912
Dec.
16
1U15
33
58
10
1516
Tons to Reactor
Tons Lime
Tons Converter Flux
Tons Fettling
Total Feed
Item h - Following are best estimates for total material feed rates to
the converters for December 15 and 16, 1976:
12/15/76 12/16/76
Reverb Furnace Matte (Tons) 720 738
Converter Flux (Tons) 330 58
Total 1050 796
-------
-2-
Item 5 - Following is the data requested for December l6, 19?6:
1) Times that converter #2 and #3 were on finish:
Converter #2 Converter #3
1920 to 2035 0930 to
20145 to 2120 1100 to 1330
2130 to 21^5
2205 to 2220
221*5 to 2320
2) Circular chart indicating reactor feed rate. (Enclosure 1)
3) S02 strength received at the acid plant. (Enclosure 2)
h) Converter #2 and #3 blowing charts. (Enclosures 3 and U)
5) Circular chart indicating tail gas S02 strength. (Enclosure 5)
Sincerely,
K. H. Matheson, Jr.
General Manager
KHM/CSF/es
Encl.
cc: J. T. Mortimer
J. S. Nebeker
J. E. Stocker
R. R. Peacock
F. L. Murray
C. S. Fitch
-------
P *-.c \ o'.
V-73-77
-------
so
\
Encl
os Jre
-------
C k
n- ti-76.
„< - 'F
2-0
-------
NOON
-------
0-
fi
-------
Fw £(
L
7
__!!_i.._.L/
\
a._
_:. a. . i
3r_i_L.
it*
Ft
//.
" -22 : i
-------
(ofo -
WAS OfO
^ b>/ K?vi*f t*n —
~ 1100 £,
- nsr 3
- 095T S
^
0^l'9_r.._..i2'^-o 3
^
- 07^0 ^ /2_/g
4oo — (^>5"o ^5
/Z.
//3/76
-------
-------
a\ »t
/ / /,'Xv .' -Y /V \
/"-< x/v.X-'V'X
'/ TN: \ / V >v/uC--
C\V^^S\
- fft ^^^<^<^^ v w-'^^^v ^X:
-------
uJtvva
-------
30
2.0
io
S'i'
nrr
IV, i^
\*/t
-------
Scale : 0-1*0
'- 76
ll-"*!1 ' ' -^ ^- ' \ /X
ttHl77^£>yX
'WT/^'^^A?
^^ nMs^^^
mm^m^j
. \£+^.- \-\ \ - ' \ fz. \ o_V-^-l~'-" 1 "•' •
\^-^^-tn'l:T. I I M i
^^ggg^^xp^^,^
-------
APPENDIX D
CALIBRATION
D-l
-------
CALIBRATION DATA FOR VALIDYNE
DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE TRANSDUCER
Calibration
Pressure
(psi)
0
+0.005
+0.01
+0.005
0
-0.005
-0.01
-0.005
0
Transducer3
Output
(MV/V)
0.0
49.0
100.0
49.3
0
49.8
100.0
49.9
0
Calibrated as a system with GDI2, S/N 12677
Model No. DP103
Serial No. 21300
Range No. ±0.01 psi
Temp. 72°F
Date 7/8/76
Zero 608
Span 566
D-3
-------
Date 7/6/76
Time 10:00
Barometric Pressure 29.99
Ambient Temperature 72
orifice Heter Small Orifice (0.187)
Orifice He3nehel1c 50523 PM50
PrliMry Calibration Heter DGM259453
Control Module 0.0039
Operators George Sutton, Ross Gilchrist
Vet Bulb Twpereture
HETER CALIBRATION DATA
Orifice
(in.«g.)
i .SB
±0.02
±n.m
Orifice
iH0
(In. .9.)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2 2
2 4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4 0
4.2
4.4
4 6
4.8
5.0
Primary
(In. .9 )
Dry Test
(In. Kg.)
Gas Volume
VP
(ft.1)
438 076
4JH.U/6
444.245
144.246
451 711
451.731
457.146
463.235
Gas Volume
Dry Test Meter
vd
(ft.1)
Jn , yyb
80.499
bu.4yy '
86.690
•E6.651 "'
Q4 1 Q?
9A.192 '
qq fiii;
99.615
105.688
Tenperature
Primary Meter
Inlet,
TP1 CF>
72
73
/ j
73
M
74
T3
Ji
74
75
Outlet,
V °F>
7?
72
li
72
73
71
7'-
11
73
74
**'•„•
72 25
71 5
73 75
Dry Test Meter
Inlet,
70
72
n
74
74
77
n
80
83
Outlet,
70
/I
l\
71
71
7?
72
n
n
73
CVv,
70.75
72
73.5
75.5
77
Time
t
(Bin.)
10
8
8
5
5
•
1.015
1.009
1.008
1.008
0.995
"o
0.697
0.699
(1.693
0.695
0.700
Average
1.007
0.697
D-4
-------
D.U 7/6/76
TIM 11:00
B«ra«ttrlc Prtllur. 29.99
tablent Tmptriture 72
oHfic« Htttr Small Orifice (0.187)
OHftct •ujn.h.iu 50523 MH63
PrtMry Clllbritlwi feUr DGM259453
Control HMult 0.0038
Optr.ton George Sutton, Ross Gilchrist
U«t Bulb T«*«r*ture
METER CALIBRATION DATA
OHflct
AH .
«n.«9.)
1.14
1 . bJ
±0.01
Z.1Z
±n.m
2.biJ
to.02
J. IU
tO. 02
3.52
bO.02
3.92
iO.02
Orifice
6H.
(n.Hg.)
2 4
3 2
3 4
3 6
0 6
Primary
AH.
(tn.«9.)
Dry Ttit
P.
dg
(in wq.)
U> VolKM
(ft ')
463.544
46Q M?
4C>y.51Z
475. «<;
«/b.ybb
483.646
483-646
489,169
4ay. ity
495.337
(It VOluM
*«
(ft ')
46. 866 '
=,1 n^/i
53.0S3
5Q.714
by./!4
67.659
6Z-66Q ^
73.358
/J. JbB
79.697
Pr
Inlet.
TP, CF>
74
74
74
/b
75
7b
75
7fi
/b
76
miry Htte
Outllt.
'po f"
74
74
74
)4
74
74
74
74
75
Tot*
Avg .
'„ <•"
74
74 25
74 5
7fl 7^
75 25
aturr
Dr
Inlet.
7
-------
DATE 7/9/76 (7/13/76)
TIME 10:20 a.m. (7:30 a.m.)
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE 30.03 hg (29.90" hg)
AMBIENT TEMP
TEST PITOT TUBE 10' Reverb w/Fllter
STANDARD PITOT TUBE United Sensor
TEST SECTION LOCATION Center
OPERATORS George Sutton
NOZZLE SIZE 7/16"
NOZZLE-PITOT SPACING 1-7/8"
PITOT-TC SPACING 15/16"
PITOT TUBE CALIBRATION DATA
Test P1to
ef (In.
Upper Leg
0.44
0.56
0.72
0.5
0.66
0.78
0.94
1.08
1.32
1.20
t Tube
Hg.)
Lower Leg
0.45
0.54
0.70
0.5
0.65
0.8
0.93
1.06
1.29
1.18
Standard
PUot Tube
tf (1n. wg.)
0 30
0 37
0 47
7/13/76
0-10
fl 44
0 52
0 63
0.70
CP
0.817
0.808
0.805
0.819
0.805
0.811
0.804
0.804
0.808
0.814
0.808
0.798
0.810
0.815
0.797
0.804
0.813
0.822
0.803
0.810
Static
Pressure
(In. Hg.)
Gas
Temp
CF)
Wet Bulb
Temp
(F°)
Test Section
Velocity
(fps)
*v'rl(* Cp. upper ' °'808
Average C
p, lower
0.811
D-6
-------
BATE 7/12/76
TINC 9:25 a.m.
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE 29.99"
AMBIENT TEMP 74
TesT PITOT TUBE 10' Reverb w/o Filter
STANDARD PITOT TUBE United Sensor
TEST SECTION LOCATION Center
OPERATORS George Sutton
PITOT TUBE CALIBRATION DATA
NOZZLE SIZE 7/16"
NOZZIE-PITOT SPACING '
PITOT-TC SPACING 15/16"
25/32'
Test P1to
bf (1n.
Upper Leg
0.50 I
0.58
D.70
0.79
0.95
1.1
1.28
1.50
t Tube
*9-)
Lower Leg
0.50
0.60
n.?n
0.78
0.95
1.08
1.30
1.52
Standard
PUot Tube
tf (1n. Hg.)
0.31
0.37
0.44
. bl
Ofifi
Ocp
0 80
CP
0.779
0.779
0.791
0.777
0.785
0.785
0.795
0.800
0.787
0.787
0.778
0.785
0.783
0.777
0.784
0.778
Static
Pressure
(In. Hg.)
Gas
Temp
i°n
Wet Bulb
-------
DATE Oct. 6, 1976
TIME 7:45
BAROMETRIC PRESSURE 30.05
AMBIENT TEMP 56°F
TEST PITOT TUBE 10' Probe II
STANDARD PITOT TUBE United Sensor
TEST SECTION LOCATION Center
OPERATORS R. Gllchrlst
PITOT TUBE CALIBRATION DATA
NOZZLE SIZE 1/4"
(WZZLE-PITOT SPACING 7/8"
PITOT-TC SPACING 7/8"
Test Pltot Tube
iP (In. wg.)
Upper Leg
0.09
0.25
0.40
0.56
0.72
0.94
1.06
1.25
1.47
1.61
Lower Leg
0.09
0.25
0.40
0.57
0.73
0.93
1.06
1.24
1.46
1.60
Standard
PHot Tube
iP (1n. wg.)
0.05
0.16
0.26
0.35
0.44
0.57
0.65
0.75
0.87
0.96
CP
0.745
0.745
0.800
0.800
0.806
0.806
0.791
0.784
0.782
0.776
0.779
0.783
0.783
0.783
0.775
0.778
0.769
0.772
0.772
0.775
Static
Pressure
(1n. wo.)
Gas
Temp
(°F)
Met Bulb
Temp
(F-)
Test Section
Velocity
(fps)
Average C
P, upper
.780
Average C
'P, lower
.780
Average C with nozzle • 0.780
D-8
-------
o«tt 8/26
T1« 15:30
Birawtrlc Preisure 30.02
tablent T«B»nture 77
Orifice Neur Small
Or1flctN.giwh.l1c 41112NH18
Primary Cll16r«t1on Heter 259453
Control Nodule 001 7
Optriton Kn i rc k
Net Bulb Temperature
METER CALIBRATION DATA
aH ,
(1n.»g.)
0 4
1 .02
2 08
•3 AO
4.0
AHn
In «9.)
0.2
2.2
Z.4
2.6
2.8
3.0
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.0
4.2
S 0
(1n «g.)
Or, T,!t
P .
dg
(In «g )
Gis Voluiw
(ft.')
c n^Q
5 234
7415
7 143
Gat Volijnt!
'(i
(It ')
5 221
7 395
7110
Pr
Inltt,
'„, Cf)
79
7q
79
7Q
79
79
7Q
70
77
M.1
m«ry Metf
Outl«t.
'po ("F>
79
79
79
7Q
7Q
79
7Q
7Q
77
77 S
T«mof
«vg .
7n« (>F|
79
79
79
etu'f
Or
I"IH.
'a, '"'I
76
7fl
78
7?
80
81
Al
75
77
Tm N,t
Outlit.
V '•'!
76 -
7R
78
78
79
79
70
75
7? ,
'
'•") .
\, '•"
77
78
79.5
80
t
IS
10
1 0
H
^
.998
1 .001
1 .001
1.000
A*fr«9»
1 .001
* 0
0.678
0.666
0.668
0.657
0.664
D-9
-------
APPENDIX E
LABORATORY PARTICULATE WEIGHT DATA
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
E-l
-------
WEIGHT VERSUS TIME CURVE FOR GLASS FIBER FILTER
The particulate matter caught on the glass fiber filters on the rever-
beratory furnace main stack was very hygroscopic in nature and could not be
weighed directly. Instead a weight versus time curve was prepared for each
filter. Basically, two curves were prepared for each filter -one curve
illustrating the change in weight during the initial few minutes of exposure
to ambient conditions inside the analytical balance's weighing chamber, and
a second curve illustrating the long term changes in weight. Figures B-l
and B-2 illustrate two typical curves.
Examining the data in Figure B-l, it can be seen that as soon as the
filter is exposed to the ambient air, its weight starts to change very rapidly
due to adsorption of water vapor onto the surface of the hygroscopic particulate
matter. It took -10 to 20 seconds for the analyst to adjust the dials on the
balance to get the first weight reading. Several more readings were taken over
the next few minutes to accurately plot the shape of the curve so that it could
be extrapolated to zero time which presumably is the true weight of the filter
and particulate without the presence of any uncombined water. Several more
readings were then taken over an extended period of time to determine the
equilibrium weight which the filter eventually reached. From Figure B-2, it
can be seen that it took -6 to 8 hours for the filter weight to level off at
an equilibrium value.
It is important to note that the definition of particulate matter does
not include uncombined water and hence, the extrapolated weight is considered
the true weight and used in the emission rate calculations.
E-3
-------
FILTER, PARTICULATE AND RESIDUE WEIGHT DATA
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
EXTRAPOLATED WEIGHT
Test
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Fi 1 ter
Number
142-45
142-37
142-29
142-19
142-30
142-18
(outs tack)
5
3
6
4
(instack)
142-34
(outs tack)
15
18
7
16
(instack)
Tare
Weight
(mg)
1017.33
1006.90
1013.64
1019.11
1011.79
1015.25
127.75
126.75
126.17
126.95
1014.93
127.57
125.78
128.97
125.78
Dust & Filter
Weight
(mg)
1102.44
1163.85
1111.10
1056.33
1045.58
1037.90
139.05
133.58
134.58
141.82
1031.74
133.30
133.40
208.30
134.19
Dust
Weight
(mg)
85.11
156.95
97.46
37.22
33.79
22.65
11.30
6.83
8.41
14.87
16.81
5.73
7.62
79.33
8.41
Residue
Weight
(mg)
90.85
92.54
32.71
46.48
27.32
23.19
93.44
Total
Weight
(mg)
175.96
249.49
130.17
83.70
61.11
87.25
211.34
-------
FILTER, PARTICULATE AND RESIDUE WEIGHT DATA
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
EQUILIBRIUM READING
Test
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Filter
Number
142-45
142-37
142-29
142-19
142-30
142-18
(outs tack)
5)
3(
c /(instack)
4'
142-34
(outstack)
15)
18
7/ (instack)
16'
Tare
Weight
(mg)
1017.33
1006.90
1013.64
1019.11
1011.79
1015.25
127.75
126.75
126.17
126.95
1014.93
127.57
125.78
128.97
125.78
Dust & Filter
Weight
(mg)
1168.58
1230.85
1178.25
1061.27
1047.78
1044.80
141.80
134.80
136.35
144.88
1035.58
135.68
136.37
215.58
1 36 . 30
Dust
Weight
(mg)
151.25
223.95
164.61
42.16
35.99
29.55
14.05
8.05
10.18
17.43
20.65
8.01
10.59
86.61
10.52
Residue
Weight
(mg)
90.85
92.54
32.71
46.48
27.32
23.19
93.44
Total
Weight
(mg)
242.21
316.49
197.32
88.64
63.31
102.45
229.82
I
(Jl
-------
FILTER, PARTICULATE AND RESIDUE WEIGHT DATA
REVERBERATORY FURNACE MAIN STACK
FIRST READING
Test
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Filter
Number
142-45
142-37
142-29
142-19
142-30
142-18
(outstack)
5)
3/
,. / (instack'
\
4)
142-34
(outstack)
15
18
7 (instack;
16
Tare
Weight
(mg)
1017.33
1006.90
1013.64
1019.11
1011.79
1015.25
127.75
126.75
126.17
126.95
1014.93
127.57
125.78
128.97
125.78
Dust & Filter
Weight
(mg)
1108.00
1166.00
1114.00
1056.80
1046.00
1040.00
140.00
133.80
135.00
142.00
1032.00
134.20
134.00
209.50
134.50
Dust
Weight
(mg)
90.70
159.10
100.39
37.69
34.21
24.75
12.25
7.05
8.83
15.05
17.07
6.63
8.22
80.53
8.72
Residue
Weight
(mg)
90.85
92.54
32.71
46.48
27.32
23.19
93.44
Total
Weight
(mg)
181.55
251.64
133.07
84.17
61.53
91.12
214.61
I
01
-------
1.062
Filter No. 142-19
1.061
1.060
en
5 1.059
1.058
1.057
Time (hrs)
Long term weight versus time curve
-------
ft
1.05851
1.0575
Filter No. 142-19
1.0565 r-
f
20
40 60 80 100
Time (sec)
Short term weight versus time curve
120
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA 909/9-77-002
3. Recipient'^ Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle
"Stack Tests at Kennecott Copper Smelter, Hayden, Arizona"
5. Report Date
July 1977 (issue)
6.
7. Author(s)
James Steiner and Robert Larkin
8. Performing Organization Rept.
NO. 77-244
. Performing Organization Name and Address
Acurex Corporation/Aerotherm Division
485 Clyde Avenue
Mountain View CA 94042
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
Task 12
11. Contract/Grant No.
No. 68-01-3158
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX
Enforcement Division (Task officer - Larry Bowerman)
100 California Street
San Francisco CA 94111
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered
Final (Aug&Dec 1976)
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
In August and December 1976 at the request of EPA, Region IX, Envorcement
Division, the Aerotherm Division of the Acurex Corporation conducted a series of air
pollutant mass emissions tests at the Ray Mines Division copper smelter of the Kennecott
Copper Corporation located in Hayden, Arizona. The tests were conducted at the rever-
beratory furnace stack in August 1976 and at the sulfuric acid plant stack in December
1976. Tests for particulate matter (Method 5), sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid
(Method 8) were conducted at each location using a combined sampling train. In addi-
tion two tests for "condensable particulate matter were conducted at the reverberatory
furnace stack using the combined Method 5 and 8 sampling train with an instack filter
added.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. I7o. Descriptors
Copper Smelter Emission Measurement Air Pollution Particulate Matter
Sulfur Dioxide Sulfur Trioxide In-stack Filter EPA Method 5 and 8
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
Air Pollution Control
Emission Results
17c. COSATI Field Group
Stationary Source
Sampling Methods
Emission Control
Operating Data
8. Availability Statement
Release Unlimited
19. Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
22. Price
FORM NTis-39 cREv. 10-731 ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO.
THIS FORM MAY BE REPRODUCED
USCOMM-DC 8285-P74
-------
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. Each 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. Author(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/Task/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 Nome 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. Supplementary Notes. Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with
Translation of . . Presented -it 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.
If 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 the majority of documents are multidisc iphnary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignments) will be the specific
discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object. The applications ) will be cross-referenced with secondary
Field/Group assignments that will follow the primary posting(s).
18. Distribution Statement. Denote 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 & 20. 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.
USCOMM-DC 826S-P74
------- |