SN 96032.007
EMB Test Number 73-CBK-1
Phillips Petroleum Company
Carbon Black Division
Toledo, Ohio
by
T.E. Eggleston
July 1973
TRANSPOR TA TION A
ENVIRONMENTAL
'OPERATIONS
TRW/
Contract Number 68-02-0235
-------
SN 96032.007
EMB Test Number 73-CBK-l
Phillips Petroleum Company
Carbon Black Division
Toledo, Ohio
by
T. E. Eggleston
July 1973
TRW Transportation and Environmental Operations
Westgate Park
7600 Colshire Drive
McLean, Virginia 22101
Contract Number 68-02-0235
-------
PREFACE
The work reported herein was conducted by TRW Environmental Services
pursuant to the terms of Task Order No. 5, Contract No. 68-02-0235 with
the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. T. E. Eggleston served as Pro-
ject Chief and Crew Leader. Mr. Winton E. Kelly, Office of A1r Programs,
Emission Testing Branch served as Project Officer. Mr. Leslie Evans,
Office of Air Programs, Industrial Studies Branch served as Project Engineer.
ii
-------
I. TABLE OF CONTENTS
II. Introduction 2
III. Summary and Discussion of Results 3
IV. Process Description and Operation 20
V. Location of Sampling Points 27
VI. Sampling and Analytical Procedures 29
Appendix
A. Complete Particulate Results with Example Calculations
B. Complete Gaseous Results with Example Calculations
C. Complete Operation Results and Data Log
D. Field Data
E. Sampling Procedure
F. Laboratory Report
G. Test Log
H. Project Participants
-------
II. INTRODUCTION
Under the Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended, the Environmental
Protection Agency is charged with the establishment of performance
standards for new or modified stationary sources which may contribute
significantly to air pollution. A performance standard is based on the
best emission reduction systems which have been shown to be technically
and economically feasible.
In order to set realistic performance standards, accurate data on
pollutant emissions must be gathered from the stationary source category
under consideration.
Phillips Petroleum Company's Toledo Philblack plant at Toledo, Ohio,
was designated as a well-controlled stationary source in the Petrochemical
Industry and was thereby selected by OAQPS for an emission testing program.
Testing was conducted on the No. 1 off-gas boiler during the period April
9-12, 1973, by TRW Environmental personnel. The No. 1 Boiler is one of
five units that handle the off-gas from two carbon black production lines
at the Toledo Philblack plant. During testing, the boiler was operated
such that a maximum amount of off-gas from Line 2 and a minimum amount of
auxiliary natural gas were used.
Samples were collected simultaneously before and after the boiler
to determine filterable and total particulates, sulfur dioxide,
hydrogen sulfide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and total and non-
methane hydrocarbons.
-------
III. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
General
During the test series, the process operation was maintained at
normal operating levels. No major upset or change was encountered.
The baghouse and boiler were also operating normally.
Participates
In reference to Table 1 for the inlet, its average emission con-
centration was calculated to be .1363 gr/DSCF. The emission concen-
tration for Table 2, which is for the outlet, was calculated to be
.0189 gr/DSCF. These values are for the total particulate catch. The
average removal efficiency of the baghouse was computed to be 99.44 percent
for the total particulate catch.
Test ABI-1 at the boiler inlet was discontinued after 70 minutes
of the 180 minutes initially planned due to heavy snow and wind. This
was an outdoor location without protection from the weather. Because
of this, the data is not included in the summary of results.
Test ABE-3 was aborted due to a broken probe liner. The test was
repeated at both locations the same day.
The testing for particulate matter was conducted under extremely
difficult conditions, especially at the inlet location, but the conditions
were not felt to have significantly affected the results.
The percent isokinetic values are above the allowable 110 percent
as given in Method No. 5, Federal Register, December 23, 1971. However,
due to the small size"'of the particles, this should have no significant
effect on the results. The main reason for high isokinetic values was
in the estimation of the moisture in the flue gas.
-------
Test ABI-4 was interrupted for approximately 45 minutes due to
another broken probe liner. The liner was broken while being moved
from a horizontal sampling configuration to a vertical situation. The
broken liner was removed, carefully cleaned and replaced with a new
liner. During the vertical traverse, a plugging in the train was
noticed approximately 15 minutes into the traverse. The problem was
traced to a piece of scale that had lodged in the nozzle tip. The
piece of scale was not included in the sample recovery, as this was
felt to be an extremely unusual or "freak" occurrence.
s
A glass bottle from ABE-1 was broken and the amount of water
collected was estimated from that picked up in other similar runs.
The percent moisture in Test ABI-2 appears to be low when compared to
other runs.
r'
Hydrogen Sulfide
The emission rate values for the iniet and outlet are tabulated
in Table 3. The average emission r?te was determined to be .321 gr/DSCF
or .332 Ib/hr at the inlet test in.; location. 'No results were obtained
for the testing at the boiler outlet because all samples that were
collected exhibited irregular behavior during collection and analysis.
During the sample collection, the reagent used in the impinger was ex-
pended, while none of the characteristic yellow precipitate was formed.
During the analysis procedure, an excessive amount of iodine was required
to react with the collected sample. Because of these difficulties the
H2S concentration at che boiler outlet could not be determined.' One test
was attempted with an isopropanol prescrubber, but the same results occurred.
Some of these samples were retained by EPA for further investigation.
Sulfur Dioxide
The Table 4 of this summary contains the results from the sulfur
dioxide testing. The average emission value for $62 was found to be
5.4 x 10"5 1b/!)5CF or .793 Ib/hr at the outlet location. No sulfur
-------
dioxide was detected at the inlet since the rate was below the minimum
detectable limit of 7 x 10"6 Ib/DSCF or 45 ppm.
A sulfur balance around the boiler indicates that the sulfur as S02
at the outlet is more than 100 percent of the sulfur as ^S at the boiler
inlet.
Nitrogen Oxides
Table 5 is a summary of the results collected from the testing for
nitrogen oxides. The average emission rates for the inlet were found
to be 1.2 x 10~6 Ib/DSCF or .0104 Ib/hr while for the outlet the values
were found to be 8.6 x 10"6 Ib/DSCF and .126 Ib/hr.
The values for nitrogen oxides are very consistent. The only
problem encountered was on one sample from the inlet, this was 0 and
was not included in the average emission rates for NOX.
Hydrocarbons
The results from the testing for hydrocarbons are compiled in
Table 6. The average emission rates for the inlet were found to be
10,000 ppm and 1826 Ib/hr total hydrocarbons. The outlet hydrocarbon
results show that the average emission rate is 72 ppm or 26.2 Ib/hr and
the non-methane hydrocarbons were found to be 34.2 ppm or 12.4 Ib/hr.
These analyses were completed utilizing a gas chromatograph. In these
results CO was not reported as a hydrocarbon.
Some grab samples were taken in glass bottles, and the results from
these samples confirmed those taken in the bags with one exception. No
hydrogen was found in the bags, but small quantities were found in the
bottles; however, quantitative analysis was not possible. Two samples
and analyzed promptly on site by Phillips Petroleum indicated hydrogen
at the inlet to be in the range of 15 percent. From the Orsat summary
results on Table 10, the hydrogen, due to its reactiveness, was absorbed
in the oxygen absorbent in runs ABE-1 and ABI-1. The high oxygen values
resulted due to the presence of hydrogen. The samples that were not
-------
analyzed immediately showed a low oxygen content. This indicates that
hydrogen was the reason for the erratic behavior of the orsat results,
since the hydrogen permeated through the sample bags before the correct
orsat analysis could be executed.
The comparitive gas chromatography analysis by Phillips Petroleum
Laboratory shown in Table 9, shows a breakdown of constituents in two
samples analyzed immediately after collection.
Particle Sizing
The summary results for particle sizing is located on Table 7 and
the graphic summary is on the following page. From the three tests, all
conducted on the outlet, the results were plotted and found to range
from a low mass median diameter of .09 microns to a high of .86.
The results are slightly scattered, but this is not unusual when
measuring sub-micron particles.
Visible Emission Results
The summary for the visible emissions is tabulated on Table 8. The
visible emissions data was observed on the outlet which exhausted two
identical boilers, therefore, the readings are on the combined plume of
the two boilers. The maximum opacity observed was 10 percent, and in all
observations, the average opacity was less than five percent.
Carbon Monoxide
Measurement of carbon monoxide at the boiler outlet by non-disper-
sive infrared technique was attempted, but levels were in excess of the
limit of the instrument (500 ppm). The readings were approximately
2000 ppm which is less than the minimum detectable on the orsat.
-------
In order to relate the gas stream measurements at the boiler inlet
and outlet to the process operation, the proportional product rate to
Boiler No. 1 is used. The mass emissions in pounds per hour are divided
by the proportional product rates to get emission factors. These are
summarized for each sampling location in Tables 11 and 12.
The particulate emission factor at the boiler inlet can be used
to calculate the product recovery efficiency of the baghouse. Based on
the probe and filter portion of the catch, the collection efficiency
ranges from 99.45 - 99.84 percent, with an average of 99.67 percent.
When the total catch is used, the collection efficiency ranges from
99.21 - 99.63 percent, with an average efficiency of 99.44 percent. In
addition to the product recovery baghouse, the boiler itself exhibited
a particulate removal efficiency. Based on the probe and filter catch,
the particulate removal efficiency averaged 74.2 percent, while the
removal efficiency averaged 76.2 percent based on the total particulate
catch.
-------
III. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE RESULTS - INLET
RUN NUMBER
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled - DSCFa
Percent Moisture by Volume
Average Stack Temperature - °F
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate - DSCFMb
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate - ACFMC
Percent Isokihetic
Percent Excess Air
Total Product Rate - Ib/hr.
Proportional Product Rate to
Boiler 1 Ib/hr.
Particulates - probe, cyclone, and
filter catch
mg.
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/lb product #1 Boiler
Particulates Total Catch
mg.
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/lb product #1 Boiler
Percent Impinger Catch
ABI-2
4-11-73
94.27
25.53
423
8013
18026
119
5
4262
2620
628.5
.1040
.0462
7.1
.00271
1206.1
ABI-3
4-12-73
86.06
40.29
430
7218
20457
124
4
4225
2780
383.3
.0678
.0239
4.2
.00160
934.5
.1996 1.1652
.0887
13.7
.0583
10.2
1
.00523 ! .00376
48.2 58.8
ABI-4
4-12-73
89.50
43.40
430
7431
22221
124
4
4225
2750
1391.1
.2373
.0793
15.1
.00550
2004.5
.3420
.1143
21.8
.00793
30.7
AVERAGE
89.94
36.4
427.7
7554
20235
122
4.3
4237
2640
800.9
.1363
.0498
8.8
.00327
1381.7
.2356
.0871
15.23
.00564
!
45.9
-------
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE RESULTS - OUTLET
RUN NUMBER
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled - DSCFa
Percent Moisture by Volume
Average Stack Temperature - °F
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate - DSCMb
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate - ACFMC
Percent Isokinetic
Percent Excess Air
Percent Opacity
Total Product Rate - Ib/hr.
Proportional Product Rate to
Boiler 1 Ib/hr.
Parti culates - probe, cyclone, and
filter catch
mg.
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/lb product #1 Boiler
Particulates Total Catch
mg.
gr/DSCF
gr/ACF
Ib/hr
Ib/lb product #1 Boiler
Percent Impinqer Catch
ABE-1
4-10-73
114.37
31.18
509
14744
39799
115
170*
3.75
4264
2420
113.0
.0153
.0057
1.9
.000785
235.9
.0319
.0118
4.0
.00165
52.5
ABE-2
4-11-73
87.44
32.02
509
13718
37369
120
20
.58
4262
2620
103.0
.0186
.0068
2.2
.000840
159.0
.0287
.0105
3.4
.00130
35.3
ABE-4
4-12-73
104.69
31.52
522
15611
42822
122
16
1.64
4225
2780
151.4
.0230
.0084
3.1
.00113
246.6
.0375
.0137
5.0
.00182
38.0
AVERAGE
102.17
31.57
513
14691
39997
119
18
1.99
4250
2606
122.5
.0189
.0069
2.4
.000915
213.8
.0327
.0120
4.13
.00159
41.9
-------
Footnotes for Tables 1 and 2 -
a Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 70°F, 29.92 in Hg.
b Dry Standard Cubic Feet per minute at 70°F, 29.92 in Hg.
c Actual Cubic Feet per minute.
* Percent Excess Air Value in error due to hydrogen present in
Orsat sample.
10
-------
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF RESULTS:
H2S
DATE
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
AVERAGE
INLET
RUN NO.
HBI-la
HBI-2a
HBI-2b
HBI-2c
HBI-2d
HBI-3a
HBI-3b
HBI-3c
HBI-3d
EMISSION
gr/dscf
0.464
0.336
0.223
0.269
0.297
0.205
0.299
0.492
0.306
0.321
ppm
754
546
362
437
483
334
486
800
497
522
Ib/hr
0.385
0.255
0.308
0.340
0.217
0.313
0.515
0.320
0.332
OUTLET
RUN NO.
EMISSION
gr/dscf
N 0
ppm
DAT
Ib/hr
A
11
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: S02
DATE
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
AVERAGE
INLET
RUN NO.
SBI-2a
SBI-2b
SBI-3a
SBI-3b
EMISSION
Ib/dscf x 10"5
*o
0
0
0
0
ppm
0
0
0
0
0
Ib/hr
0
0
0
0
0
OUTLET
RUN NO.
SBE-la
SBE-2a
SBE-2b
SBE-3a
SBE-3b
EMISSION
Ib/dscf x 10"5
5.9
4.7
5.7
4.8
5.9
5.4
ppm
336
284
344
290
356
322
Ib/hr
0.870
0.645
0.782
0.749
0.921
0.793
* 0 indicates below detection limit. For this testing, minimum detection is
approximately 7 x 10-6 lb/dscf, or 45 ppm.
12
-------
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: NOV
DATE
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
AVERAGE
INLET
RUN NO.
NBI-la
NBI-2a
NBI-25
NBI-3a
NBI-Sb
EMISSION
Ib/dscf x TO"6
0.80
1.1
1.6
1.2
1.5
1.2
pprh
6.7
9.3
13.5
10.1
12.6
10.4
Ib/hr
0.0088
0.013
0.0088
0.011
0.0104
OUTLET
RUN NO.
NBE-la
NBE-2a
NBE-2b
NBE-3a
NBE-3b
EMISSION
Ib/dscf x 10"6
8.9
8.7
8.9
8.9
7.5
8.6
ppm
74.8
73.2
74.8
74.8
63.1
72.1
Ib/hr
0.131
0.119
0.122
0.139
0.117
0.126
13
-------
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: HYDROCARBONS
DATE
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
AVERAGE
INLET
RUN NO.
BBI-2a
BBI-3b
BBI-3c
EMISSION
TOTAL
HYDROCARBONS
ppm*
10000
10000
10000
10000
Ib/hr*
1937
1770
1770
1826
NON-METHANE
HYDROCARBONS
ppm*
0
0
0
0
Ib/hr*
0
0
0
0
OUTLET
RUN NO.
BBE-la
BBE-2a
BBE-3a
BBE-3C
BBE-3d
EMISSION
TOTAL
HYDROCARBONS
ppm*
125
45
70
50
70
72
Ib/hr*
44.5
14.9
26.4
18.9
26.4
26.2
NON-METHANE
HYDROCARBONS
ppm*
50
29
30
27
35
34.2
Ib/hr*
17.8
9.6
11.3
10.2
13.2
12.4
* Hydrocarbons measured and calculated as Methane (CHJ,
14
-------
TABLE 7
PARTICLE SIZING RESULTS*
DATE
4-11-73
4-12-73
4-12-73
RUN NO.
PBE-1
PBE-2
PBE-3
MASS
MEDIAN
DIAMETER-y
0.86
0.24
0.09
*Summary plot of particle sizing results on
following page.
TABLE 8
VISIBLE EMISSION RESULTS
DATE
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
TIME
1525-1650
1430-1500
1600-1630
% Opacity
Minimum
0
0
0
Maximum
5
5
10
Average
<5
<5
<5
TABLE 9
COMPARATIVE GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS*
DATE RUN NO.
4-10-73
4-10-73
BBI-2a
BBI-2b
% CO 2
4.60
4.57
% C?H?
1.24
1.24
% H?
15.5
14.9
% cm
0.94
0.93
% CO
13.1
13.0
% N?+Ar
64.7
65.3
% ATOM C
21.1
20.1
* Performed by Phillips Petroleum on site immediately after sample collection in
glass.
15
-------
TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF ORSAT DATA
DATE .
4-10-73
4-10-73
4-11-73
4-11-73
4-11-73
4-11-73
4-12-73
4-12-73
4-12-73
4-12-73
RUN NO.
ABI-1
ABE-1
ABI-2
ABI-2a
ABE- 2
ABE-2a
ABI-3
ABE-3
ABE-3a
ABE-3b
%co2
4.4
10.7
4.2
4.1
10.2
10.5
4.4
10.7
10.7
10.7
%o2
15.5
12.8
.6
2.0
4.0
3.6
.5
3.1
2.3
3.2
%CQ
11.2
0
7.7
5.3
0
0
13.4
0
0
0
.%N2.
68.9
76.5
87.5
88.6
85.8
85.9
81.7
86.2
87.0
86.1
16
-------
TABLE 11. PROCESS EMISSION RATES, LB/LB PRODUCT
BOILER INLET
RUN NO.
DATE
PARTICULATE,
Probe and Filter
Total
SULFUR DIOXIDE
HYDROGEN SULFIDE
NITROGEN OXIDES
(as NO^)
HYDROCARBONS (as CH4)
Total*
Non-Methane
CARBON MONOXIDE
1
4-10-73
_
— m
mm
i
2
4-11-73
0.00271
0.00523
0
0.000123
4.2 x 10'6
0.740
0
0:867.
3
4-12-73
0.00160
0.00376
0
0.000138
3.6 x 10-6
0.637
0
1.518
4
4-12-73
0.00550
0.00793
0
_
-B
-
AVERAGE
0.00327
0.00564
0
0.000130
3.9 x 10'6
0.688
0
1.193
*These numbers do not include CO as a Hydrocarbon.
17
-------
TABLE 12. PROCESS EMISSION RATES, LB/LB PRODUCT
RUN NO.
DATE
PARTI CULATE,
Prnhp ahrl Fi 1 tpr
Total
SULFUR DIOXIDE
HYDROGEN SULFIDF
NITROGEN OXIDES
(ac NOo^
HYDROCARBONS (as CH*)
Total*
Nnh-Methanp
CARBON MONOXIDE
1
4-10-73
n nnn7a5
n nmfi5
o ooo^fio
CA ?vin~°
OH-. £ X IU
n mad
n 007^5
In all ce
2
4-11-73
n nnnadfi
U. UVJUOHU
n nm^n
n nnn?fift
^C Ovin-6
to . o x ID
n nn^vn
U . UUJ/ U
n nflADd
ises CO is
BOILER OUT
3
4-12-73
n nnmnn
Afi fl v in""
f o . u x lu
n nnRfin
n nndi?
> 0.075 but
ET
4
4-12-73
n nm i ^
n nniR?
: < 0.30
AVERAGE
n 000915
n nm ^Q
0 OOO^OQ
no 7 v in~6
to. / X IU
n moQ
0 00515
" i
i
*These numbers do not include CO as a Hydrocarbon.
18
-------
CUMULATIVE WEIGHT PERCENT LESS THAN STATED MICRON SIZE
2%
10 IS 20
30
PERCENTAGE
40 SO 60
70
80 85 90
95
987o
E{g^:^
~Tri"*""
;rpi ™
^-ZiT:-'::
i=±
•irrp^:
4H-
IT1-
S
J-J-/S
I '/ >
zz:
i
.9
HD
ith
!
NS
SH
T'.L- lJ^^^-.
Eg
IN MI
• *
4fc M
rxtrr
«1
*;-—M T ^;;_
•
U
M
»J
(J
M
§ 1
S '.
•+rtt '"rrr*""
_i_^j " ;T^I^T
ffi
^i;-
^n;-i:
L^£H:-fe:f§:
•t^i::-f-^r~-^
::'iU=i-.r.=
~~~.'i~~ -;
4-4-
[II
i
-4£3
J
'
FIGURE 4
PARTICLE SIZING SUMMARY OF RESULTS
PBE-1 - A
PBE-2 - B
PBE-3 - C
3.0
3.5
! 1 1 I
4.0
1 1 !
4.5
1 ! 1 !
5.0
PROBITS
i I i i I I ! I I I I I I I I I I
5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0
19
-------
IV. PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
The fundamental steps in carbon black manufacturing by the furnace
process are as follows:
A. Production of the black from feed stock.
B. Separation of the black from the gas stream.
C. Final conversion of the black to a marketable product.
In the furnace process, carbon black is produced by burning a mixture
of gas and heavy aromatic oil. This feed is preheated and injected into
a reactor with a limited supply of combustion air. The flue gases and
entrained carbon from the reactor (furnace) are cooled by heat exchange
against the reactor feed and water quenching. This stream (450-500°F)
is then sent to bag filters for carbon black recovery. The recovered
carbon black is transported to a finishing area by screw or pneumatic
conveyors. In the finishing area the black is passed through a pulverizer
to break up lumps. This produces a 5 to 12 Ib/cu. ft. bulk density. This
petuitizing is done with water in a paddle or pin type mixer. The resulting
wet product (30-40 wt. percent water) is sent to driers. The dried product
is then screened and sent to storage. Figure 1 presents a block flow
diagram for carbon black manufacture by the furnace process. The major
source of air pollution from the process is the process vent or "off-gas"
shown as stream 4 on the diagram.
The Toledo Phil black plant has two independent process lines. The
off-gases are combusted in two parallel CO-boilers and two indirect
combustor driers. If the total heat available in the off-gas stream were
used for these purposes, more steam would be generated than could be used
in the plant. The excess off-gas is therefore incinerated and no un-
burned gases are vented except in an emergency.
The equipment tested was the No. 1 CO-boiler. The boiler was a
standard Babcock and Wilcox small-tube, twin drum,water-tube boiler,
20
-------
OIL
I
/•>*
GUeNCH WATER
(?)
PESO
«EHEA
( OPriO NAL)
REACTOR,
OIL
.
( OPTION »VU)J_
J
FUEL
J
Al R.
PR.EHeATE.fls
IUENCH
*->-
CYCLONE
AND /OR
SECONDARY
FILTER*
: _C O.
DRIER
GAS !
FILTER |
DRIER !N10»RecT
HEAT SOURCE
WET NU*ER
( PELLETIZER)
* IF BA6- FH.TEW. IS EMPLOYED,
ISVENT£1> TO
, PROCESS VENT
-©
BAG- FILTER
MICRO-
BUCICET
ELEVATOR
FUEL G-/NS
CAR
esi
FIG-ORE.
-------
POXVxiT
i r
4I7B
T ;
o '
301LER*
SAMPLE
PO I NT
-£><]-.-•> INCINERATOR,
o
-------
with water cooled combustion chamber. The boiler is designed to produce
45,000 Ib/hour of 400 psig, 650°F steam. An auxiliary support fuel
(natural gas) must be burned with the off-gas to prevent flame-outs.
The boiler is operated with about 20 percent of the total heating
value of the mixed fuel from natural gas.
The manifdid system used to direct the off-gas to the various com-
bustion devices is shown in Figure 2. During testing, the off-gas from
Line 2 was burned in the two boilers and the off-gas from Line 1 was
burned in the process driers and the incinerator. Boiler No. 1 was
operated with minimum natural gas and maximum off-gas. The remainder
of the Line 2 off-gas was burned in Boiler No. 2. The total off-gas
from Line 2 was measured by two venturi meters shown in Figure 2.
Line 2 was producing carbon black Grade N330 (the largest volume
grade made at this location) during the test. The production rate during
the test was measured by collecting the material produced each day in a
separate storage bin. At the end of a timed collection period, the
collected black was bagged and weighed.
The Line 2 and Boiler No. 1 operating conditions recorded during
testing are summarized in Table 14.
The proportional product rate to Boiler No. 1 was calculated by
multiplying the total product rate from Line 2 by the ratio: off-gas
to Boiler No. 1 total off-gas from Line 2. As can be seen from
Table 14, the average product rate that can be associated with the off-
gas to Boiler No. 1 is 2640 Ib/hour.
The age of the bags in each.of the eight compartments at the time
of testing is given in Table 13.
23
-------
TABLE 13. LINE 2 BA6HOUSE BAG AGE
2 Compartments 2 Months
1 Compartment 3 Months
3 Compartments 4 Months
1 Compartment 5 Months
1 Compartment 15 Months
24
-------
TABLE 14. LINE 2 AND BOILER NO. 1
RUN NO.
DATE .
PROCESS DATA: (Line 2)
Pressure Drop in
Baghbuse (in H?0)
Outlet Temp. (°F)
Off -Gas To: (Wet SCFH)
Boiler No. 1
Boiler No. 2
Total
Total Product Rate (Ib/hr)
Proportional Product Rate
to Boiler No. 1*' (Ib/hr)
BOILER NO. 1 DATA
Steam Flow (Ib/hr)
Steam Temp. (°F)
Boiler Press, (psig)
Header Press, (pstg)
Fuel Flow (SCFH)
Air Flow (SCFH)
Outlet Gas Temp. (°F)
Percent 02 by volume, dry
Percent Combustibles (as H2)
1
4-10-73
3.0
455
517,000
392,000
909,000
4,264
2,420
32,250
663
393
391
7,240
870,000
525
4.5
0.100
2
4-11-73
3.3
455
645,000
405,000
1050,000
4,262
2,620
21 ,500
660
393
392
7,250
874,000
531
5.4
0.000
3
4-12-73
3.3
456
720,000
375,000
1095,000
4,225
2,780
33,500
668
392
392
7,280
935,000
535
5.4
0.004
4
4-12-73
3.6
460
675,000
363,000
1038,000
4,225
2,750
31,900
662
389
392
7,110
935,000
537
5.5
0.000
AVERAGE
3.3
458
639,000
384,000
1023,000
4,244
2,640
32,300
663
392
392
7,230
903,000
532
5.2
0.026
*Based on ratio of off-gas to Boiler No. 1.
25
-------
The average operating pressure drop across the baghouse was
3.3 inches of H20.
Analysis of the data from Table 14 shows that both the product
collector and the No. 1 Boiler were operating at normal and uniform
levels during testing.
26
-------
V. LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
Sampling was conducted in a circular duct at the inlet location and
in a rectangular duct at the outlet location (see Figure 3).
The inlet location was ideal in relation to flue gas obstructions.
Sampling was carried out on one vertical and one horizontal traverse.
The closest disturbance in either direction was in excess of eight diam-
eters. As per Method 1.Federal Register, December 23, 1971, twelve
points were used in the traverse.
The outlet sampling location was less than ideal. Since the exhausts
from two boilers and one incerator are combined into the stack, the
breaching from Boiler 1 to the stack had to be the sampling location. The
equivalent diameter of this duct is 5.12 feet. There was approximately
one diameter upstream and one-half diameter downstream from the nearest
disturbances at this location. The location does not meet the minimum
requirements of Method 1, but no alternative was available. There were
42 points used in the traverse at this location.
27
-------
OUTLET
TOP
CROSS-SECTION
INLET
TOP
FLOW
PORTS
34" DIA.
FROM INCINERATOR
| FROM BOILER 2
CROSS-SECTION
LOCATION OF SAMPLING PORTS
FIGURE 3
28 I
-------
VI. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Test methods were in accordance with standard methods as published
in the Federal Register, Volume 36, Number 159, Part II, December 23,
i 1971, and other EPA methods. The following is a breakdown of the methods
used in evaluating the various test parameters:
Particu1ates\
Methods 1, 2, 5, Federal Register. December 23, 1971. In addition
to this, the impinger solutions were analyzed for mass.
Sulfur Dioxide
j Method 6, Federal Register, December 23, 1971.
Molecular Weight (Orsat Analysis)
: Method 3, Federal Register, December 23, 1971.
Nitrogen Oxides
Method 7, Federal Register, December 23, 1971.
! Hydrogen Sulfide
Method 11, Federal Register, June, 11, 1973.
Carbon Monoxide
Method 10, Federal Register, June 11, 1973.
i
Hydrocarbons
The parameters for Hydrocarbons were evaluated by utilizing a flame
1 ionization gas chromatograph. Total hydrocarbons and non-methane hydro-
carbons were measured extracting a gas sample from an integrated bag
; sample and injecting into the gas chromatograph. Calibration of the
29
-------
detector is accomplished by introducing a standard sample through the
gas sampling valve and the response measured using the same recorder
as used for the sample determinations.
Two modes are used in determining total hydrocarbons and non-methane
hydrocarbons. In one mode the injected sample by-passes the column and
goes directly to the flame detector giving a peak for total organics.
In the second mode the sample goes through the column where methane
and other materials are individually determined.
The actual values were determined by reference to the known concen-
tration of the standard calibration sample.
Particle Size Determination
A Brink Cascade, followed by a 47 millimeter glass fiber filter,
was mounted on a probe and connected to a vacuum pump by a length of
rubber tubing. The sampler was then placed in the stack to obtain
thermal equilibrium before the actual sampling was completed. The amount
of particulate material collected on each plate and on the glass fiber
filter was determined in the laboratory analysis.
30
------- |