EMB 73-PLD-l
                               (REPORT NUMBER)
AIR  POLLUTION  EMISSION TEST
                       AMERICAN SMELTING AND
                       REFINING COMPANY
                             (PLANT NAME;
                       GLOVER PLANT
                       P.O.  BOX 7
                           (PLANT ADDRESS)

                       GLCVER, MISSOURI  63646
           U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                Office of Air and Water Programs
            Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
            Emission Standards and Engineering Division
                  Emission Measurement Branch
               Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711

-------
             SOURCE  SAMPLING "REPORT
      EMB Project Report Number  73  PLD-1
          Emissions  from Lead  Smelter

                       at

    American  Smelting  and Refining Company
               Glover, Missouri

         17 July 1973  to 23 July  1973
                      by

                  E. P. Shea

          Midwest Research Institute
         Kansas City, Missouri  64110
Reviewed by:  John W. Snyder and Susan R. Wyatt
 Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
        Environmental Protection Agency
 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina  27711
   EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228, Task No. 27
           (MRI Project No. 3585-C)

-------
                                     PREFACE



             The work reported herein was conducted by Midwest Research Institute


   (MRI), pursuant to a Task Order issued by the Environmental Protection Agency


   (EPA) under the terms of EPA Contract No. 68-02-0228.   Mr.  E.  P.  Shea served

   as the Project Chief and directed the MRI Field Team consisting of:


   Messrs. Henry Moloney, Douglas Weatherman, Harold Branine,  Frank Hanis, Jeff

   Sprinkle, Kevin Cline, Bill Maxwell, Bob Swartz, Bill Cunningham, Dick Cobb,

   Mike Becktold, and Dave Hardin.  Dr. J. Spigarelli assisted by Mrs.  Carol Green

   performed the pollutant analyses at the MRI laboratories.   Ms. Christine

   Guenther coded the data for the computer calculations.  Ms. Susan Wyatt, EPA,

   was the Process Engineer.  Mr. E. P. Shea prepared this final  report.




   Approved for:

   MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE



/^
   *aul C. Constant, Jr.
   Program Manager




   9 August 1974
                                        ii

-------
                         I.  TABLE OF CONTENTS
II.   Introduction	    1

III.  Summary and Discussion of Results	    4

IV.   Process Description and Operation	   54

      A.  Process Flow	   54
      B.  Control Systems	   65
      C.  Sampling Conditions	   68

V.    Sampling and Analytical Procedures ........ 	   73

      A.  Location of Sampling Ports and Points	   73
      B.  Sampling Procedures	   76
      C.  Analytical Procedures	   82

Appendix A - Complete Particulate Results with Example
               Calculations	   84

Appendix B - Complete Gaseous.Results with Example Calculations. „  129

Appendix C - Complete Operation Results	  130

Appendix D - Field Data	147

Appendix E - Operating Data Log	  245

Appendix F - Sampling Procedure	267

Appendix G.- Laboratory Report, Analytical Procedures, and Sample
               Handling Log. ..... 	  269

Appendix H - Test Log	300

Appendix I - Project Participants. . . . •	308

Appendix J - Correspondence with Source	 „  311

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

                            List of Figures

No.                              Title                              Page

 1    Sinter Plant Sampling Points	   5
 2    Blast Furnace Sampling Points	   6
 3    Particulate Without Filter	43
 4    Particulate With Filter	44
 5    Lead Without Filter . . . .	45  ,
 6    Lead With Filter	  46
 7    Glover Plant Flow Sheet 	  55
 8    Sinter Plant.	56
 9    Blast Furnace 	  60
10    Aerial View	64
11    Sample Ports in Sinter Plant Ducts	  .  74
12    Sample Ports in Blast Furnace Exhaust Duct	  77
13    Blast Furnace Baghouse and Stack(s) Configuration  	  79
14    Sample Port-Point Configuration	;	80
C-l   Instrument Chart	133
C-2   Instrument Chart	 134
C-3   Instrument Chart	135
C-4   Instrument Chart	 136
C-5   Instrument Chart	137
C-6   Instrument Chart.	138 •
C-7   Instrument Chart. ........ 	 139
C-8   Instrument Chart		140
C-9   Instrument Chart.	141 ,
C-10  Instrument Chart	144
C-ll  Instrument Chart.	145 ,
C-12  Instrument Chart.	*	 146


                            List of Tables

No.                              Title                              Page

I     Average Controlled and Uncontrolled Emissions from Sinter
        Machine and Associated Operations ..... 	   7
II    Pound Particulate/Ton Sinter Produced	   9
III   Pound Lead/Ton of Lead in the Sinter Produced (Estimated)  .  .  11
IV    Summary of Uncontrolled Sinter Machine Emissions	13
V     Summary of Uncontrolled Emissions from Sintering-Associated
        Operations.	15
VI    Average of Emissions from Blast Furnace and  Baghouse.  .  .  .  .  19 ,

                                   iv

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

                       List of Tables (Continued)

 No.                               Title                              Page

 VII       Total Emissions Blast Furnace - Baghouse Per Test	21
 VIII     Pound Particulate/Total Tons of Feed Material into the
            Blast Furnace	  23
 IX       Pound Particulate/Total Tons of Lead Produced	25
 X        Pound Lead/Ton of Lead in the Sinter Feed to the Blast
            Furnace (Estimated)	  27
 XI       Pound Lead/Ton of Lead Produced.	  29
 XII       Summary of Uncontrolled Blast Furnace Emissions	31
 XIII     Summary of Emissions from Blast Furnace Baghouse - E Stack .  33
 XIV       Summary of Emissions from Blast Furnace Baghouse - F Stack .  35
 XV       Summary of Emissions from Blast Furnace Baghouse - G Stack .  37
 XVI       Percent Lead in Particulate for Andersen Test	47
 XVII     Andersen Analysis Summary	48
 XVIII    Andersen Analysis Summary (Lead) 	  51
 XIX       Sampling Points D and C Locations Sinter Ducts 	  75
 XX       Sampling Points in Blast Furnace Duct Sampling LocationD .  78
 A-I       Emission Data Uncontrolled Sinter Machine.  . ;	86
 A-II     Example Particulate Calculations for EPA 5  Train	90
 A-III    Calculations for Askania Sampler on Sinter  Machine
            Baghouse . .	96
 A-IV     Equations and Calculations for Askania Sample. ......  97
.A-V     .  Emission Data Uncontrolled Blast Furnace .  . . .	 100
 A-VI     Particulate Data and Calculated Values 	 108
 A-VII    Data for Askania Sampler on Sinter Machine  Baghouse
            Outlet 	 ....... 114
 A-VIII    Particulate Data and Calculated Values 	 117
 C-I       Operating Data from Sinter Plant	132
 C-II     Blast Furnace Results	142
 C-III    Lime Samples '......'	 143

-------
                            II.   INTRODUCTION







          This emission test is a part of a comprehensive study to determine




a control strategy for lead emissions from stationary sources.  The entire





project is referred to as the preferred standards path analysis on lead.





The purpose of this preferred standards path analysis is to recommend a





statutory and  regulatory course of action for the control of stationary




sources of lead emissions.  The recommendations must be based on a thorough




assessment of the pollutant effects and emissions as related to the Clean




Air Act of 1970, as amended.  If it is decided that a regulatory program is




desirable, there are three available options for developing standards:




Section 109-110 - Ambient Air Quality Standards, Section 111 - New Source




Performance Standards accompanied by state standards for existing sources,




and Section 112 - Hazardous Pollutant Standards.




          A well defined emission inventory, which is not at this time




available, is vital to the development of a regulatory strategy for lead. Such




an inventory will define the extent of the problem by identifying the major




lead emitters, quantifying the emissions from these sources and determining




the extent and effectiveness of presently employed general particulate




control technology for lead.





          A preliminary emission inventory of lead sources was developed




through an EPA contract to determine, from the literature and plant data,




the nature,  magnitude and extent of industrial lead emissions to the at-





mosphere in the United States in 1970.  However, only a small amount of the




                                     1    .            •  .  .

-------
data was  supported by emission testing.  A listing of industries for emission


testing has been compiled by EPA, based on information supplied by the


emissions inventory.  The emission data gathered during the testing pro-


grams will be used to determine the nature and extent of lead emissions


from stationary sources, i.e., whether a problem exists in the industry,


and if so the nature and extent of the problem.  The data will also be


used to help determine the degree to which particulate standards are ef-


fective in controlling lead emissions.  Finally, emission data can be used

    j
in conjunction with other information on number and location of plants,


trends in lead usage, growth rates, and affected populations to determine


which industries are of highest priority for regulation.


          Several  lead  smelters were  surveyed  for the purpose of conducting


emission  testing.  None:  of the smelters were completely satisfactory  for


emission  testing,  and at some of  them, emission testing was not considered


to  be economically feasible.  The ASARCO Lead  Smelter at Glover was con-


sidered to be the best  of the lot.


          This  report presents the results of  the emission  testing and


particle  sizing which was performed by Midwest Research Institute at  the


American  Smelting  and Refining Company  (ASARCO) sinter  plant and blast


 furnace in Glover, Missouri.  The particulate  emission  tests were 2-hr


 tests using  the RAC* Staksampler  equipment conforming with  the Federal


 Register, 36, No.  159,  17 August  1971.  The particle size testing was con-


 ducted  using an Andersen eight plate  impactor; the  tests were conducted
 *  Mention of a company name does  not imply endorsement by EPA.


                                    2                       .  .

-------
for 1 hr, 2 hr and 1-1/2 hr.  The sinter baghouse was not tested using the




EPA method 5 train, because there were no ports in the stack and not enough




room in the breeching to conduct isokinetic testing.  For convenience and




in order to have some emission data from this plant, we utilized the





"Askania" sampler which was installed by ASARCO in the breeching between




the baghouse and the stack.




          At the ASARCO smelter domestic ore containing about 707» lead is ;




sintered to prepare a concentrate for blast furnace feed.  The ore is mixed




with coke, recycled clay, and baghouse dust, ignited and the sulfur burned





off.  The sinter cake is disintegrated, mixed with coke, baghouse dust, scrap
iron, and dross, and fed to the blast furnace.  The lead bullion from the




blast furnace goes to the refinery on site for production of refined lead.




The control system for the sinter plant consists of a humidifying.chamber,




fresh air intake, fan and baghouse.  The blast furnace control system has




a humidifying chamber, fresh air inlet, lime addition and baghouse.  Mea-




sured emissions from the sinter plant and blast furnace operation consisted




of particulates.  Carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and oxygen were measured




by Orsat Analysis.  Another emission, sulfur dioxide, was estimated by




Drager tube readings only for the purpose of calculating carrier gas molecular




weight.  All particulate samples collected in this test  prpgram were ana-





lyzed for lead content.

-------
          The two inlet ducts and the baghouse outlet sampling point for





the sinter plant are shown in Figure 1.  The sampling points for the blast





furnace are shown in Figure 2.





          The following sections of the report treat (1) the summary and




discussion of results, (2) the description and operation of the process,




and (3) sampling and analytical procedures.







                III.  SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS







          Tables I, IA, II, IIA, III, IIIA, IV, IVA, V and VA present a





summary of particulate and lead results from the emission testing oh the




sinter plant.  Total particulate emissions were sampled and all samples




analyzed for lead content.  Table I contains an average of the controlled




and uncontrolled emissions from the sinter plant (see Figure 1);  Table IA




presents the calculated data in metric units*  The operation of the sinter




plant, during the test period, was not constant and in the opinion of the





writer was atypical.  The baghouse particulate emission rate was 4.94 Ib/hr,




arid the lead emission rate, 0.624 Ib/hr; the calculated feed rate for the




sinter machine during the "Askania" baghouse sampling period was 52.2 tons/hr.




The baghouse emission rate based on this feed rate was:   particulate - 0.0946




Ib/tori; lead - 0.0119 Ib/ton.  The average feed rate for the sinter machine




during particulate testing was 55.1 tons/hr.  The average sinter plant




uncontrolled emissions based on the above feed rate were:   particulate front





half catch (probe tip, probe, cyclone and filter) - 55.0 Ib/toh; particulate




total catch - 58.2 Ib/ton; lead front half and total catch 5.95 Ib/ton.

-------
          Sinter
          Machine
          Effluent
          Gases
Auxiliary
Operations
Ventilation
Gases
7"  Circular Duct
     1 Port(B)0 Test Points <
      3" Circular Duct
      [CJ2 Ports
            Water Spray Chamber
                        ^Excess Air
                    Fan
         Askania
         Sampler
             Nine-Compartment
             Baghouse
            Breeching
                 Figure 1 - Sinter Plant  Sampling Points

-------
Blast Furnace Effluent
Gases and Auxiliary
Operations Ventilation
Gases
          7' Circular Duct
         6 Test Point   2 Ports
Water Spray Chamber
               •Excess Air
               "Lime
  Six-Compartment
  Baghouse
                                        Test Points

                                           Particle Sizing
                                           F)      (G)
                               3 Square  Exhaust Stacks
                                  4  Ports Per Stack
     Figure  2  - Blast Furnace Sampling Points

-------
                                   TABLE I
             AVERAGE CONTROLLED AND UNCONTROLLED EMISSIONS FROM
                  SINTER MACHINE AND ASSOCIATED OPERATIONS
                                                    Sampling Point
Description               Units

Particulate Emissions     Ib/hr
- Partial  (Probe Tip,     gr/DSCF
Probe, Cyclone Filter)

Particulate Emissions     Ib/hr
- Total (Probe, Tip       gr/DSCF
Probe, Cyclone, Filter
and Impingers)

Lead Emissions            Ib/hr
- Partial                 gr/DSCF

Lead Emissions            Ib/hr
- Total                   gr/DSCF

Feed Rate                 tons/hr

Particulate Emissions     Ib/ton
- Partial

Particulate Emissions     Ib/ton
- Total

Lead Emissions            Ib/ton
- Partial
          Sinter Machine and Associated
            Operations (uncontrolled)

                     3,031
                       Baghouse
                     (controlled)gL/
                     3,207.
                      3.47k/
                      328
                      0.352b-/

                      328
                      0.352k/

                      55.1

                      55.0


                      58.2


                      5.95
                         4.94
                         0.00271
                         0.624
                         0.000341

                         52.2
                         0.0946
Lead Emissions
- Total
Ib/ton
5.95
0.0119
7o Lead - Partial
% Lead - Total
                      10.8

                      10.2
                         12.6
a/  This sample was not taken with the EPA Method 5 sampling train.   It was
      taken with an "Askania" sampler installed by ASARCO.   It is not equiva-
      lent to EPA Method 5, but. was used as it was the only method available
      for sampling at this location.
b_/  Since this baghouse has two inlet ducts, the average concentrations are
      calculated from weighted averages based on duct  flowrate  for each run
      pair.  Runs B-6 and C-l, although not simultaneous,  were used as a run
      pair because the process feed rates differed by only 27».
                                       7

-------
                                    TABLE IA
               AVERAGE CONTROLLED AND UNCONTROLLED EMISSIONS FROM
                    SINTER MACHINE AND ASSOCIATED OPERATIONS
                                                    Sampling Point
Description               Units

Particulate Emissions     Kg/hr
-Partial  (Probe Tip,     Mg/NM3
Probe, Cyclone and
Filter)

Particulate Emissions     Kg/hr
- Total (Probe Tip,       Mg/NM3
Probe, Cyclone, Filter
and Impingers)

Lead Emissions            Kg/hr
- Partial                 Mg/NM3

Lead Emissions            Kg/hr
- Total                   Mg/NM3

Feed Rate                 MT/hr

Particulate Emissions     Kg/Ml
- Partial

Particulate Emissions     Kg/MT
- Total

Lead Emissions            Kg/MT
- Partial

Lead Emissions            Kg/MT
- Total
Sinter Machine and Associated
  Operations (uncontrolled)

           1,376
           6,732^
           1,456
           7,945^
             149
  Baghouse
(controlled)g./
             149
             806^

            50.0

            27.6


            29.2


            2.98


            2.98
    2.24
    6.205
    0.283
    0.781

    47.3
    0.0473
    0.00596
% Lead - Partial

% Lead - Total
            10.8

            10,2
    12.6
aj  This sample was not taken with the EPA Method 5 sampling train.  It was
      taken with an "Askania" sampler installed by ASARCO.  It is not equiva-
      lent to EPA Method 5, but was used as it was the only method available
      for sampling at this location.
b_/  Since this baghouse has two inlet ducts,  the average concentrations are
      calculated from weighted averages based on duct  flowrate for each run
      pair.  Runs B-6 and C-l, although not simultaneous,  were used as a run
      pair because the process feed rates differed by only 2%.

-------
                            TABLE II
              POUND PARTICULATE/TON SINTER PRODUCED
               Total Particulate
                 Emission Rate
       Rate of Sinter
         Produced!/
Run No.
Controlled
A
Uncontrolled
B-2
B-5
B-6
Average
Uncontrolled
C-l
C-2
C-5
Average
db/hr)

4.94
- Sinter Machine
2,060
1,810
2,450
2,107
- Sinter - Associated
1,360
1,090
852
1,101
(tons/hr)

48.5

44.3
53.5
56.5
51.4
Operations
55.4
44.3
53.5
51.1
a/  Estimated from:

    Rate of sinter produced
            (tons/hr)
Rate of sintering
  feed material
    (tons/hr)
 Lb/Hr -f Tons/Hr
    = Lb/Ton
                                                             0.102



                                                            46.5

                                                            33.8

                                                            43.4

                                                            41.2



                                                            24.5

                                                            24.6

                                                            15.9

                                                            21.7
0.93

-------
                            TABLE IIA
               Kg PARTICULATE/MTON. SINTER PRODUCED
               Total Particulate
                 Emission Rate
       Rate of Sinter
         Produced^./
a/  Estimated from:

    Rate of sinter produced
            (Mton/hr)
Rate of sintering
  feed material
    (Mton/hr)
 Kg/Hr T MTon/Hr
Run No.
Controlled
A
Uncontrolled
B-.2
B-5
B-6
Average
Uncontrolled
C-l
C-2
C-5
Average
(kg/hr)

2.24
- Sinter Machine
935
822
1,110
956
- Sinter - Associated
617
495
387
500
(Mton/hr)

44.0

40.2
48,5
51.2
46.6
Operations
50.2
40.2
48.5
46.3
= Kg/MTon

0.0509

23.3
16.9
:. 21.7
20.6

12.3
12.3
7.98
10.9
0.93
                                10

-------
                                TABLE III
        POUND LEAD/TON OF LEAD IN THE SINTER PRODUCED (ESTIMATED)
Run No.
Controlled
 Total Lead
Emission Rate
  (Ib/hr)
                0.624
Percent    Rate of Lead
Lead  in     in Sinter
Sinter     (tons/hr).g/
Uncontrolled - Sinter Machine
   B-2
   B-5
   B-6
 368
 113
 175
                  45.4
 47.6
 47.1
 47.1
             22.5
21.1
25.2
26.7
   Average    219              47.3        24.3

Uncontrolled - Sinter-Associated Operations
   C-l
   C-2
   C-5
 178
  73.6
  76.9
   Average    110
 46.6
 47.6
 47.1
                  47.1
25.8
21.1
25.2
             24.0
              Lb/Hr ^- Tons/Hr
                 = Lb/Ton
 0.0277



17.4

 4.48

 6.55
 9.48



 6.90

 3.49

 3.05

 4.48
a/  Estimated from:

      Rate of lead in
        sinter produced
        (tons/hr)
              Rate of sintering
                feed material
                (tons/hr)
                    Percent Lead in
                 x    feed to sinter x 0.93
                      machine
                                    11

-------
                               TABLE tilA
        KILOGRAM LEAD/MTON OF LEAD IN SINTER PRODUCED (ESTIMATED)
Run No.
Controlled
total Lead
Emission Rate
(kg/hr)
Percent
Lead in
Sinter
Rate of Lead
in Sinter
(Mton/hr) 2/
Kg/Hr .f MTon/Hr
= Kg/Mton
                0.283
                45.4
Uncontrolled - Sinter Machine
   B-6
79.4
47.1
   C-l
   C-2
   C-5
   Average
80.8
33.4
34.9
49.7
46.6
47.6
47.1
47.1
a/  Estimated from:

      Rate of lead in
        sinter produced
        (Mton/hr)
              20.4
B-2
B-5
167
51.3
47.6
47.1
19.1
22.9
24.2
   Average     99.2            47.3          22.1

Uncontrolled - Sinter-Associated Operations
23.4
19.1
22.9
21.8
0.0139



8.74

2.24

3.28

4.75



3.45

1.75

1.52

2.24
            Rate of sintering     Percent Lead in
              feed material    x    feed to sinter  x 0.93
              (Mton/hr)             machine
                                    12

-------
                                         TABLE IV
                     SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED SINTER MACHINE EMISSIONS
Name
VMSTD
PMOS-
TS
QS
CJA
PERI
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
•1C.
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C.
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
PARTICULATES
Particulate Wt-Partial— /
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial
Units

DSCF

DEC . F .
DSCFM
ACFM

B-2
07-18-73
25.98
2 .2
492.7
92394
173882
116.0^
B-5
07-21-73
22.50
7.8
427.8
83958
157652
107.2
B-6
07-21-73
23.1.5
10.2
484.5
85046
174612
108.9
-- PARTIAL CATCH^./
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
3766.90
2.23
1.19
1770
3402.40
2.33
1.24
1680
4818.60
3.20
1.56
2340
PARTICULATES -- TOTAL CATCH-/
Particulate Wt-TotaJi/
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total
Perc Irapinger Catch
LEAD --
Wt-Partial-/
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial
LEAD --
Wt-Total-/
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Feedrate
Part Emission Total
Lead Emissions Total
Perc Lead Ptl
Perc Lead Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Ttl
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

PARTIAL CATCH-/
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
TOTAL CATCH-
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

T/HR
LB/T
LB'/T
%
%
%
7o '
4391.00
2.60
1.38
2060
14.20

784.06
0.465
0.247
368

784.16
0.465
0.247
368
0.01
47.6
43.3
7.73
20.8
17.9


3685.30
2.52
1.34
1810
7.68

229.64
0.157
0.0837
113
•
229.75
0.157
0.0838
113
0.05
57.5
31.5
1.97
6.73
6.24
11.7
10.4
5048.00
3.36
1.64
2450
4.54

360.12
0.240
0.117
175

360.30
0.240
0.117
175
0.05
60.8
40.3
2.88
7.48
7.15


 a/   This value  is  six  over  the upper  limit of  the acceptable  isokinetic  range
      of 90-110%.  This  difference  has  no significant  effect  on  other  results.
      The  high  value is  unexplainable.   A portion of the value may be  due  to
      an error  in  stack  temperature readings.  The  thermocouple  was replaced
      after  the run.
 b/   Partial  catch  refers to the particulate and  lead caught in the probe tip,
      probe,  cyclone and filter.
 £/   Total  catch refers to all the particulate  and lead caught in the partial
      catch  plus the impingers.

                                           13

-------
                                         TABLE IVA
                     SUMMARY OK UNCONTROLLED SINTER MACHINE EMISSIONS
Nil mi-
VMSTM
PMOS
TSN
ySH
QAM
PERI
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C
(Metric Units)
Description
Date of Kun
VoL Dry Cas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowratc, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Ftowrate
Percent Isokinetic
PARTICULATES
Particulate Wt-Partial2/
Part Load-PtL, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial—
Units
NCM

DEC . C
NM3/MIN
M3/MIN
B-2
07-18-73
0.735
2.2
255.9
2616.3
4923.8
116.0-/
B-5
07-21-73
0.637
7.8
219.9
2377.4
4464.2
107.2
li-6
07-21-73
0.655
10.2
251.3
2408.3
4944.5
108.9
-- PARTIAL CATCH-/
MC
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
3766.90
5109.98
2715.26
802.03
3402.40
5329.00
2837.99
760.03
4818.60
7334.09
3572 . 15
1059.56
PARTICIPATES ~ TOTAL CATCH-'
Particulate Wt-Total-/
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part LoadrTti, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Totalk/
Perc Impinger Catch
LEAD --
Wt-Partial-/
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial-/
LEAD --
Wt-Total-/
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Erais-Total-
Perc Impinger Catch
Feedrate
Part Emission Total
Lead Emission Total
Perc Lead Ptl
Perc Lead Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Ttl
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

PARTIAL CATCH-/
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
TOTAL CATCH^-/
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

MTON/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
7.
%
"/.
°l-
4391.00
5956.60
3165.12
934.91
14.21
784.06
1063.62
565.17
166.937
784.16
1063.75
565.24
166.959
0.01
43.2
21.6
3.87
20.8
17.9
11.7
10.4
3685.30
5772.09
3073.96
823.23
7.68
229.64
359.67
191.55
51.297
229.75
359.85
191.64
51.322
0.05
52.2
15.8 .
0.983
6.73
6.24


5048.00
7683.24
3742.20
1110.00
4.54
360.12
548 . 12
266.97
79.187
360.30
548.39
267.10
79.226
0.05
55.1
20.1
1.44
7.48
7.15


a/  This value is six over the upper limit of the acceptable isokinetic range
      of 90-110%.  This difference has no significant effect on other results.
      The high value is unexplainable.  A portion of the value may be due to
      an error in stack temperature readings.  The thermocouple was replaced
      after the run.
b/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip,
      probe, cyclone and filter.
£/  Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial
      catch plus the impingers.
                                          14

-------
                                          TABLE V
          SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED EMISSIONS FROM SINTERING-ASSOCIATED OPERATIONS
                                                                     C-2          C-5
                                                                   07-18-73     07-21-73

                                                                      93.29        87.25
                                                                       0.9          2.6
                                                                     102.5        112.6
                                                                     21055        19017
                                                                     23156        21901
                                                                      92.5         95.8
                                                                   36533.30     29616.30
                                                                       6.03         5.23
                                                                       5.48         4.54
                                                                    1090          852
                                                                   36549.50     29646.30
                                                                       6.03         5.23
                                                                       5.49         4.54
                                                                    1090          852
                                                                       0.04         0.10
                                                                    2469.70      2672.50
                                                                       0.408        0.472
                                                                       0.371        0.410
                                                                      73.6         76.9
                                                                    2469.84      2672.63
                                                                       0.408        0.472
                                                                       0.371        0.410
                                                                      73.6         76.9
                                                                      47.6         57.5
                                                                      22.9         14.8
                                                                       1.55         1.34
                                                                       6.77         9.02
                                                                       6.77         9.02
                                                                       9.63
                                                                       9.63
a/   Partial catch refers to the participate and lead caught in the probe tip,  probe,
       cyclone and filter.
b_/   Total catch refers to  all the participate and lead caught in the partial  catch plus the
       impingers.                                                                    ,
Name
VMSTD
PMOS
TS
QS
QA
PERI
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units
DSCF

DEG.F
DSCFM
ACFM

C-l
07-17-73
103.30
1.4
98.0
21732
23900
91.6
PARTICULARS -- PARTIAL CATCH-/
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
„/
Partlculate Wt-Partial-
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial3-/
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
48843.80
7.28
6.62
1360
PARTICULATES — TOTAL CATCH^/
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX







Particulate Wt-Total-
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total-
Perc Impinger Catch
LEAD
Wt-Partial-/
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial-
LEAD
Wt-Total-
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total-
Feedrate
Part Emis-Ttl
Lead Emis-Ttl
Perc Lead Ptl
Perc Lead Ttl
Ave Perc Lead Ptl
Ave Perc Lead Ttl
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

-- PARTIAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
-- TOTAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
TON/HR
LB/TON
LB/TON
%
%
%
%
48863.10
7.28
6.62
1360
0.04
CATCH5-/
6399.85
0.954
0.868
178
CATCH^/
6399.94
0.954
0.868
178
59.6
22.8
2.99
13.1
13.1


                                         15

-------
                                         TABLE VA

          SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED EMISSIONS FROM SINTERING-ASSOCIATED OPERATIONS
                                      (Metric Units)
Name
VMSTM
PMOS
TSM
QSM
QAM
PERI
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM
MT
CAOM
GAUM
CAXM
1C .
Description Units
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond NCM
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature DEG.C
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn NM3/MIN
Actual Stack Flowrate N3/MIN
Percent Isokinetic
PARTICULATES -
Particulate Wt-Partial-/ MG
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn MG/NM3
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn MG/M3
Partic Emis-Partial-/ KG/HR
PARTICULATES
Particulate Wt-Total- MG
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn MG/NM3
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn MG/M3
Partic Erais-Total- KG/HR
Perc Impinger Catch
C-l
07-17-73
2.92
1.4
36.7
615.4
676.8
91.6
- PARTIAL CATCH3/
48843.80
16662.42
15151.44
615.13
-- TOTAL CATCKk/
48863.10
16669.01
15157.43
615.38
0.04
LEAD -- PARTIAL CATCH-'
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM
Wt-Partial-/ MG
Load-Ptl, Std Cn MG/NM3
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn MG/M3
Emis-Partial-' KG/HR
6399.85
2183.22
1985.25
80.599
LEAD — TOTAL CATCH^/
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C





.

Wt-Total MG
Load-Ttl, Std Cn MG/NM3
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn MG/M3
Emis-Total KG/HR
Perc Impinger Catch
Feedrate MTON/HR
Part Eiriis Tt-.l KG/MTON
Lead Emis Ttl KG/MTON
Perc Lead Ptl %
Perc Lead Ttl 70
Ave Perc Lead Ptl 7,
Ave Perc Lead Ttl %
6399.94
2183.26
1985.27
80.60
0.00
54.1
11.4
1.49
13.1
13.1


                                                                    C-2
                                                                  07-18-73

                                                                     2.64
                                                                     0.9
                                                                    39.2
                                                                   596.2
                                                                   655.7
                                                                    92.5
                                                                 36533.30
                                                                 13800.73
                                                                 12548.18
                                                                   493.60
                                                                 36549.50
                                                                 13806.85
                                                                 12553.75
                                                                   493.82
                                                                     0.04
                                                                  2469.70
                                                                   932.95
                                                                   848.27
                                                                    33.368
                                                                  2469.84
                                                                   933.00
                                                                   848.32
                                                                    33.37
                                                                    .0.01
                                                                    43.2
                                                                    11.4
                                                                      .773
                                                                     6.77
                                                                     6.77
                                                                     9.63
                                                                     9.63
  C-5
07-21-73

    2.47
    2.6
   44.8
  538.5
  620.2
   95.8
29616.30
11961.88
10387.02
  386.43
29646.30
11974.00
10397.54
  386.82
    0.10
 2672150
 1079.41
  937.30
   34.87
 2672.63
 1079.46
  937.34
   34.872
    0.00'
   52.2
    7.41
     .668
    9.02
    9.02
a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip,  probe,
      cyclone and filter.
b/  Total catch refers to  all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus the
      impingers.
                                          16

-------
          Table II contains the average of the controlled and uncontrolled




particulate data from the emission tests, in pounds of particulate per ton




of sinter produced.  Table IIA contains the same data reported in metric units.




The controlled particulate emission rate is 0.102 Ib particulate/ton sinter




produced.  The uncontrolled emission rate averaged 41.2 and 21.7 Ib





particulate/ton sinter produced for the sinter machine and sinter-associated





operations, respectively.




          Table III presents the emission rates for lead per ton of lead




in the sinter produced for both the controlled and uncontrolled emissions;




Table IIIA shows the data in metric units,  the controlled lead emission




rate is 0.0277 Ib Pb/ton.  The average uncontrolled lead emission rate is




9.48 and 4.48 Ib Pb/ton for the sinter machine and sinter-associated opera-





tions, respectively.




          Table IV contains the summary of the particulate and lead data




from the emission tests at Point "B," the 7-ft diameter main exhaust duct




from the sinter furnace to the inlet of the control system.  Table IVA con-




tains the same data reported in metric units.  In figuring the gas molecular




weight the percent S02 estimated from Drager tube readings was subtracted





from the C02 value found in the Orsat analysis, and the S02 value was then




used in the molecular weight calculation.  The average values for particu-




late and lead are:  particulate in the front half catch - 1,930 Ib/hr;




particulate in the total catch - 2,110 Ib/hr; front half catch and total
                                    17

-------
catch lead - 219 Ib/hr.  The wide variation in loading from B stack can be


attributed to the variance in the continuity of operation of the sinter


plant.  Run No. 2 shows the highest lead emission values and the plant was


shut down more times during this run than in any other run.


          Table V presents the particulate and lead data from the "C" duct,


the 3-ft diameter hygienic duct (collection duct for sintering-associated


operations), which also is a feed duct for the pollution control system.


Table VA contains the metric conversion for Table V.  There was less than

                                      • •
200 ppm SC>2 in the duct as shown in Drager tube analysis, and therefore


the S0>2 was not used in calculating carrier gas molecular weight for the


hygienic duct.


          The average values for particulate emissions and lead analytical


values for all three runs are:   partieulate front half catch and particu-


late total catch - 1,100 Ib/hr; and lead front half and total catch - 110


Ib/hr.  The wide variations in loading on "C" duct can also be attributed


to the manner of operation of the sinter plant.


          Tables VI, VIA, VII,  VIIA, VIII, VIIIA, IX, IXA, X, XA, XI, XIA,


XII, XIIA, XIII, XIIIA, XIV, XIVAj XV and XVA contain the results of the


emission testing on the uncontrolled and controlled emissions from the


blast furnace and associated operations.  Table VI is a summary table that


shows the average uncontrolled and controlled emissions from the blast

furnace operation for all three tests combined.
                                   18

-------
                                TABLE VI
          AVERAGE OF EMISSIONS FROM BLAST FURNACE AND BAGHOUSE '
Description
Particulate Emissions
- Partial (Probe Tip,
Probe, Cyclone and
Filter)
Particulate Emissions
- Total (Probe Tip,
Probe, Cyclone, Fil-
ter and Impingers)
Lead Emissions
- Partial
Lead Emissions
- Total
Production Rate
Particulate Emissions
Units
Ib/hr
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
gr/DSCF
tons/hr
Ib/ton
Sampling
Inlet to
Control System
2370
3.11
2400
3.16
307
0.403
307
0.403
. 13.8
172
Point
Total Baghouse
Emissions
17.7
0.0142-
34.2
0,0275-'
5.97
0.00482-'
• 6.01
0.00485-
13.8
1.28
 -  Partial

 Particulate  Emissions
 -  Total

 Lead  Emissions
 -  Partial

 Lead  Emissions
 -  Total

% Lead - Partial

% Lead - Total

Collection Efficiency
  Particulate - Partial
  Particulate - Total
  Lead - Partial
  Lead - Total
Ib/ton


Ib/ton


Ib/ton
174
22.2
22.2
               12.9
              12.8
                       99.25%
                       98.57%
                       98.05%
                       98.04%
 2.47
0.433
0.450
                   33.7
                   17.6
a/  Since this baghouse has three stacks, the average concentration was  calcu-
      lated from the weighted averages, based on the flowrate,  of  the  individual
      simultaneous sets of runs.                           •

                                       19

-------
                                TABLE VIA
         AVERAGE  OF  EMISSIONS FROM BLAST FURNACE AND BAGHOUSE

(Metr-ic
Units)
• •
Sampling Point
Description
Particulate Emissions
- Partial (Probe Tip,
Cyclone and Filter)
Particulate Emissions
- Total (Probe Tip,
Probe, Cyclone, Fil-
ter and Impingers)
Lead Emissions
- Partial
Lead Emissions
- Total
Production Rate
Particulate Emissions
- Partial
Particulate Emissions
- Total
Lead Emissions
- Partial
Lead Emissions
- Total
7, Lead - Partial
% Lead - Total
Collection Efficiency
Particulate - Partial
Particulate - Total
Lead - Partial
Lead - Total
Units .-
Kg/hr
Mg/NM3
Kg/hr
Mg/NM3
Kg/hr
Mg/NM3
Kg/hr
Mg/NM3-
MT/hr
Kg/MT .
Kg/MT
Kg/MT
Kg/MT

•

Inlet to
' Control System
1070
7110
1090
7220
139
922
139
922
12.5
86.2
87.2
11.1
11.1
12.9
12.8
99.25%
98.57%
98.05%
98.04%
Total Baghouse
Emissions
8.01
32. 52/
15.5 .
63.0*'
2.71
11. 03-7
2.73
12.5
0.641
'. 1.23
0.217
0.224
33.7
17.6

_a/  Since the baghouse has three stacks, the average concentration was cal- .

      culated from the weighted averages, based on flowrate, of the individual

      simultaneous sets of runs.
                                      20

-------
                                        TABLE VII
        Description

Participate Emission
  Blast - Partial-/
Participate Emission
   Blast  - Totalk/
Lead Emission
  Blast - Partial^/
Lead Emission
  Blast - TotalW

Particulate Emission
  Baghouse - Partial
Particulate Emission
  Baghouse - Total
Lead Emission
  Baghouse - Partial
Lead Emission
  Baghouse - Total

Particulate Efficiency
 - Partial
Particulate Efficiency
- Total
Lead Efficiency
- Partial
Lead Efficiency
 - Total

Production Rate

Particulate Emission
  Blast - Partial
Particulate Emission
  Blast  - Total
Lead Emission
  Blast - Partial
Lead Emission
  Blast - Total

'Particulate Emission
  Baghouse - Partial
Particulate Emission
  Baghouse - Total
 Lead  Emission
   Baghouse  - Partial
 Lead  Emission
   Baghouse  - Total
TOTAL EMISSIONS BLAST
Units
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
Ib/hr
:y
%
;y
%
7.
%
ton/hr
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
Ib/ton
FURNACE - BAGHOUSE
Test 3
2,650
2,690
424
424
20.2
36.8
6.43
6.47
99.2
98.6
98.5
98.5
13.9
191
194
30.5
30.5
1.45
2.65
0.463
0.465
PER TEST
Test 4
2,500
2,530
303
303
10.7
24.2
2.59
2.64
99.6
99.0
99.1
99.1
13 . 8
181
183
22.0
22.0
0.775
1.75
0.188
0.191

Test 7
1,950 •
1,990
193
193
22.2
41.7
8.89
8.93
98.9
97.9
95.4
95.4
13.8 '
141
144
14.0
14.0
1.61
3.02
0.644
0.647
 a/    Partial refers to the material caught in the probe tip,  probe,  cyclone and filter.
 b_/    Total refers to the partial plus the material caught in the impingers.
                                            21

-------
                              TABLE VIIA
           TOTAL EMISSIONS BLAST FURNACE - BAGHOUSE PER TEST

Description
Particulate Emission
Blast - Partial-/
Particulate Emission
Blast - Totalk/
Lead Emission
Blast - "Partial
Lead Emission
Blast - Total
Particulate Emission
Baghouse - Partial
Particulate Emission
Baghouse - Total
Lead Emission
Baghouse - Partial
Lead Emission
Baghouse - Total
Production Rate
Particulate Emission
Blast - Partial
Particulate Emission
Blast - Total
Lead Emission
Blast - Partial
Lead Emission
Blast - Total
Particulate Emission
Baghouse - Partial
Particulate Emission
Baghouse - Total
Lead Emission
Baghouse - Partial
Lead Emission
Baghouse - Total
(Metric
Units
Kg/hr
Kg/hr

Kg/hr

Kg/hr

Kg/hr

Kg/hr

Kg/hr

Kg/hr
MT/hr

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT

Kg/MT
Units)
Test 3
1,200
1,220

192

192

9.17

16.7

2.92

2.93
12.6

95.2

96 . 8

15.2

15.2

0.728

1.33

0.232

0.233

Test 4
1,140
1,150

137

137

4.86

11.0

1.18

1.20
12.5

91.2

92.0

11.0

11.0

0.389

0.880

0.0944

0.0960

Test 7
883
903

87.7

87.7

.10.1

18.9

4.03

4.05
12.5

70.6

72.2

7.02

7.02

0.808

1.51

0.322

0.324
a/  Partial refers to the material caught in the probe tip, probe, cyclone
      and filter.
b/  Total refers to the partial plus the material caught in the impingers.

                                   22

-------
ro
                                                      TABLE VIII

                         POUND PARTICULATE/TOTAL TONS OF FEED MATERIAL" INTO THE  BLAST  FURNACE
Run No.
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7
Average
Controlled
Run 3 (E, F, and 6)
Run 4 (E, F, and G)
Run 7 (E, F, and G)
Total Particulate
Emission Rate
(Ib/hr)
2,690
2,530
1,990
2,403
36.83
24.22
41.65
Rate of Feed Material-'
(tons/hr)
\
35.9
34.2
, . 36.1
35.4
35.9
34.2
36.1
Lb/Hr f Tons/Hr
= Lb/Ton
74.9
74.0
55.1
68.0 -
1.02
0.708 .
1.15
          Average
34.23
35.4
0.959
          a/   From Table C-II,  Page 142.
                 Rate of feed material
                    into blast  furnace  =
                    (tons/hr)
            Sinter smelted (tons/day)+
               Coke smelted (tons/day)+
               Scrap iron smelted (tons/day)+
               Caustic skims smelted (tons/day)/
               (24 hr/day)

-------
ro
                                                     TABLE VIIIA

                      KILOGRAM PARTICULATE/MTONS OF FEED MATERIAL INTO BLAST FURNACE
Run No.
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7
Average
Controlled
Total Particulate ,
Emission Rate Rate of Feed Material-'
(kg/hr) (Mtcn/hr)
1,220
1,150
903
1,091

Run 3 (E, F, and G) 16.72
Run 4 (E, F,
ind G) 11. CO
Run 7 (E, F, and G) 18. SI
Average

15.54
•)
32.6
31.0
32.7
32.1
32.6
31.0
32.7
32.1

         a/  From Table C-II, Page 142.
                Rate of feed material  .
                   into blast furnace =
           ;        (Mton/hr)
Sinter smelted (Mton/day) +
   Coke smelted (Mton/day) +
   Scrap iron smelted (Mton/day) +
   Caustic skims smelted (Mton/day)
   (24 hr/day)
                                                                                         Kg/Hr v MTon/Hr
                                                                                            = Kg/MTon
                                            37.5

                                            37.1

                                            27.6  .

                                          .  34.1 .



                                            0.513

                                            0.355

                                            0.578

                                          .  0.482

-------
                                                    TABLE  IX


                                  POUND PARTICULATE/TOTAL  TONS OF LEAD PRODUCED
f\5
cn
Run No.
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7
Average
Controlled
Run 3 (E,
Run 4 (E,
Run 7 (E,
Average
a/ From Tabl



Total Parti cul ate
Emission Rate
(Ib/hr)

2,6:^0 •
j
2,530
1,9'X)
2,4')3

F, and G) 36.83
F, and G) 24.22
t
F, and G) 41.65
34.23
e C-II, Page 142.
Lead Produced
(tons/hr)
;\
I
Lead Produced-'
(tons/hr)

13.9
13.8
13.8
13.8

13.9
13.8
13.8
13.8

Bullion Produced (tons/day)
(24 hr/day)

                                                                                     Lb/hr v Tons/Hr
                                                                                       = Lb/Ton
194


183


144


174





2.65 .


1.75


3.02


2.47

-------
                                                     TABLE IXA

                                 KILOGRAM  PARTICULATE/TOTAL MTONS  OF LEAD PRODUCED
ro
        Run  No.
Total Participate
  Emission Rate
    (kg/hr)
       a/  From Table  C-II,  Page  142.

                             Lead  Produced
                               (Mton/hr)
Lead Produced-
 (Mton/hr)
                         Bullion Produced (Mton/day)
                               (24 hr/day)
Kg/Hr * MTon/Hr
   = Kq/MTon
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7 '
Average
Controlled
Run 3 (E, F, and 6)
Run 4 (E, F, and G)
Run 7 (E, F, and G)
Average

1,220
1,150
903
1,091

16.72
11.00 ,
18.91
15.54

12.6
12.5
12.5
12.5

12.6
12.5
12.5
12.5

96.8
92.0
72.2
87.0

1.32 .
.88
1.51
1.23

-------
                                                    TABLE X
                                   POUND LEAD/TON OF LEAD IN THE SINTER FEED
ro
Run No. •

Uncontrolled

   D-3         !

   D-4         :

   D-7         I
               I
Average        j
               I

Controlled     \
              . i
   Run 3 (E, F,i
               i
   Run 4 (E,. FJ

   Run 7 (E, F,'

Average
TO
Total Lead
Emission Rate
Ob/hr)
424
V
303 ;'
'1
193 I
307
G) 6.47
G) 2.6';-
i
G) 8.93
6.01 j
Table C-II, Page
te of lead in
n + f*v* -f tiaA ma •f*ov»T a
THE BLAST FURNACE
Percent Lead
in
Feed Material
47.0

45.9
45.4
46.1
47.0
45.9

45.4
46.1
142.
, Sinter
(ESTIMATED)
Rate of Lead in Sinter Feed .
Material to Blast Furnace -
(tons/hr)
15.1

14.2
14.8
14.7
15.1
14.2

14.8 •
14.7

Smelted * loaH intn
                                                                                                 Lb/Hr v Tons/Hr
                                                                                                   = Lb/Ton	
                   28.1

                   21.3

                   13.0

                   20.8



                   0.428

                   '0.186

                   0.603

                   0.405
                       to blast furnace
                       (tons/hr)
                                                     24
                                                  (tons/hr)
blast furnace

-------
                                                    TABLE XA
                      KG LEAD/MTON OF LEAD IN SINTER FEED TO THE BLAST FURNACE  (ESTIMATED)
r\j
Co

Run No.
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7
Average !
Controlled I
Run 3 (E, F, and
Run 4 (E, F, and
Run 7 (E, F, and
Average
a/ Estimated from
(metric units)
Total Lead Percent Lead
Emission Rate in
(Kq/hr) Feed Material
192 ;! 47.0
138 . 45.9
87.6 '' 45.4
139
G) 2.93
G) 1.20
G) 3.85
2.66
Table C-II,
Rate of lead in
sinter feed material
to blast furnace
(Mton/hr)

46.1
47.0
45.9
45.4
46.1
Page 142.
Sinter smelted
24
(Mton/hr)
jj
if
i

Rate of Lead in Sinter Feed
Material to Blast Furnace-
(Mton/hr)
13.7
12.9
13.4
13.3
13.7
12.9
13.4
13.3 •
% Lead into ;
blast furnace

                                                                                                    Kg/Hr  *  MTon/hr

                                                                                                     =  Kg/MTon    .
14.0


10.7


6.54


10.4






.214


.093


.'287


.198

-------
                                                   TABLE  XI


                                         POUND  LEAD/TON  OF LEAD  PRODUCED
no
10
Run No.



Uncontrolled



   D-3



   D-4          ,  i



   D-7



Average



Controlled        j
                  !

   Run 3 (E, F, and 6)



   Run 4 (E, F, and G)



   Run 7 (E, F, arid G)
                  |

Average           I
Total Lead
Emission Rate
(Ib/hr)
424
303
193
307
(5.47
:?.64
a. 93
(5.01
age 142.1
i
Bullion produced (tons/day)
Rate of Lead Produced
by Blast Furnace-'
(tons/hr)
13.4
13.3
13.3
13.3
13.4
13.3
13.3
13.3

v r*av»r»on+> r\f 1 oar!
                                                                                      Lb/Hr  ^  Tons/Hr

                                                                                         = Lb/Ton
31.6


22.8


14.5


23.0






.482


.198


.671


.450
                                 24 hr/day
                                                                               in bullion

-------
                                                    TABLE XIA


                                        KILOGRAM  LEAD/MTON OF LEAD PRODUCED
co
o
Run No.
Uncontrolled
D-3
D-4
D-7
Average
Controlled
Run 3 (E, F, a
Run 4 (E, F, a
Total Lead
Emission Rate
(kq/hr)
192
;138
87.6'
i,
ii39 ;
id G) 2.93
id G) 1.20
Run 7 (E, F, and G) '4.05
Average
2.72
Rate of Lead Produced-
(Mton/hr)
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
.2
,1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.1
a/ From Table C-II, Page 142.
Rate =
Bullion produced (Mton/day)
Y now
ont- nf loaH in
                                                                                      Kg/Hr * MTon/Hr

                                                                                        = Kg/MTon
15.7


11.4


7.24


11.4





.240


.099


.334


.224
                                  24  hr/day

-------
                                        TABLE  XII
                     SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED  BLAST  FURNACE  EMISSIONS
Name

VMSTD
PMOS
TS
QS
QA
PERI
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units

DSCF

DEG.F
DSCFM
ACFM

D-3
07-19-73
26.03
3.1
258.0
87582
125923
110.8
D-4
07-20-73
26,72
2.0
253.0
90137
127423
110.6
PARTICULATES -- PARTIAL CATCH^/
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partlc Emis-Partial-
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
5978.00
3.54
2.46
2650
5626.70
3.24
2.29
2500
PARTICULATES -- TOTAL CATCH^/
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C

MF •
CAN
CAT
CAW

MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C







Particulate Wt-Total-
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis -Total-/
Perc Impinger Catch
LEAD
Wt-Partial-/
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial-
LEAD
Wt-Total-/
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis -Total-'
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl
Perc Lead Ptl
Perc Lead Ttl
Ave Perc Lead Ptl
Ave Perc Lead Ttl
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

-- PARTIAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
•— TOTAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

TON/HR
LB/TON
LB/TON
%
7o
%
%
6065.10
3.59
2.50
2690
1.44
CATCH^/
954.57
0.565
0.393
424
CATCH^/
955.12
0.565
0.393
424
0.06
13.9
194
30.5
16.0
15.8


5675.40
3.27
2.31
2530
0.86

680.71
0.392
0.277
303

680.81
0.392
0.277
303
0.01
13.8
183
22.0
12.1
12.0
12.7
12.5
                                                                                    D-7
                                                                                  07-23-73

                                                                                     25.85
                                                                                      4.1
                                                                                    206.8
                                                                                    89140
                                                                                   120025
                                                                                    108.2
                                                                                   4278.60
                                                                                      2.55
                                                                                      1.89
                                                                                   1950
                                                                                   4376.30
                                                                                      2;61
                                                                                      1.94
                                                                                   1990
                                                                                      2.23
                                                                                    424.83
                                                                                      0.253
                                                                                      0..188
                                                                                    193
                                                                                    424.99
                                                                                      0.253
                                                                                      0.188
                                                                                    193
                                                                                      0.04
                                                                                     13.8
                                                                                    144
                                                                                     14.0
                                                                                      9.90
                                                                                      9.70
a/   Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught  in the probe tip,  probe,
       cyclone and filter.
b/   Total catch refers to  all the particulate and lead caught in the  partial catch plus  the
       impingers.
                                         31

-------
                                       TABLE XIIA
                     SUMMARY OF UNCONTROLLED BLAST FURNACE EMISSIONS
(Metric Units)
Name

VMSTM
PMOS
TSM
QSM
QAM
PERI
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units

NCM

DEG.C
NM3/MIN
N3/MIN

D-3
07-19-73
0.737
3.1
125.5
2480.1
3565.8
110.8
D-4
07-20-73
0.756
2.0
122.8
2552.4
3608.2
110.6
PARTICULATES -- PARTIAL CAT OH3-/
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM

Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial

MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

PARTICULATES -- TOTAL
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C

MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM

MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C







Particulate Wt-Total
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
LEAD
Wt-Partial
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial
LEAD
Wt-Total
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl
Perc Lead Ptl
Perc Lead Ttl
Ave Perc Lead Ptl
Ave Perc Lead Ttl
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

5978.00
8093.77
5629.37
1204.17
b/
CATCH-
6065.10
8211.69
5711.39
1221.72
1.44
5626.70
7418.02
5247.41
1135.84


5675.40
7482.23
5292.82
1145.67
0.86
-- PARTIAL CATCH2-
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
-- TOTAL CAT(
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

MTON/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
%
7o -
7.
7.
954.57
1292.42
898.90
192.283
^rr~
955.12
1293.16
899.42
192.394
0.06
12.6
96.9
15.2
16.0
15.8


680.71
897.42
634.82
137.412

680.81
897.55
634.92
137.432
0.01
12.5
91.6
11.0
12.1
12.0
12.7
12.5
                                                                                    4278.60
                                                                                    5831.83
                                                                                    4331.17
                                                                                     883:09
                                                                                    4376.30
                                                                                    5965.00
                                                                                    4430.07
                                                                                     903.25
                                                                                       2.23
                                                                                     424.83
                                                                                     579.05
                                                                                     430.05
                                                                                      87.683
                                                                                     424.99
                                                                                     579.27
                                                                                     430.21
                                                                                      87.716
                                                                                       0.04
                                                                                      12.5
                                                                                      72.2
                                                                                       7.02
                                                                                       9.90
                                                                                       9.70
a/   Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip,  probe,
      .cyclone and filter.
b/   Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus the
       impingers.
                                           32

-------
                                       TABLE  XIII
                 SUMMARY  OF  EMISSIONS  FROM  BLAST  FURNACE  BAG110USE  -  E  STACK
                                                                        E-4
Namr
VMSTD
PMOS
TS
QS
QA
PERI
Description
Date of. Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std
Actual. Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units
DSCF

DEG.F .
Cn DSCFM
ACFM

PAKTICULATES -- PARTIAL
MF
CAN
.CAT
CAW
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
PARTI CULATES -- TOTAL
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C
Particulate Wt-Total-'
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total-/
Perc Impinger Catch
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

E-3
07-19-73
51.72
3.9
141.4
55424
66816
102.0
CATCH-
82.50
0.0246
0.0204
11.7
CATCH-''
137.20
0.0408
0.0339
19.4
39.87
LEAD -- PARTIAL CATCH^'
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
Wt-Partial-'
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial-
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
24.85
0.00740
6.00614
3.51
LEAD -- TOTAL CATCH-^
.MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C







Wt-Total-/
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis -Total-'
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl
Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Perc Lead Emis Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Erais Ttl
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

TON/HR
LB/TON
LB/TON
7,
%
%
%
24.94
0.00743
0.00616
3.53
0.36
13.9
1.40
0.254
30.0
18.2


  E-7
07-19-73
51.72
3.9
141.4
55424
66816
102.0
07-20-73
63.72
5.3
126.4
70367
84169
99.0
07-23-73
52.53
4.4
131.7
57497
68474
99.9
                                                                       37.80
                                                                        0.00914
                                                                        0.00764
                                                                        5.51
                                                                       83.80
                                                                        0.0202
                                                                        0.0169
                                                                       12.2
                                                                       54.89
                                                                        7.75
                                                                        0.00187
                                                                        0.00157
                                                                        1.13
                                                                        7.88
                                                                        0.00190
                                                                        0.00159
                                                                        1.15
                                                                        1.65
                                                                       13.8
                                                                        0.884
                                                                        0.0833
                                                                       20.5
                                                                        9.43
                                                                       28.3
                                                                       15.0
 73.80
  0.0216
  0.0182
 10.7
147.00 .
  0.0431
  0.0362
 21.2  ;
 49.80
 25.47
  0.00747
  0.00627
  3.68
 25.60
  0.00750
  0.00630
  3.70
  0.51
 13.8.
  1.54
  0.268
 34.4
 17.4
a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
      cyclone and filter.
b/  total catch refets to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch pius the
      impingers.
                                            33

-------
                                       TABLE XIIIA
                  SUMMARY Of EMISSIONS FROM BLAST FURNACE BAGHOUSE - E STACK

Name

VMSTM
PMOS
TSM
QSM
QAM
PERI

Description
Date of Run
VoL Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std-
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
(Metric
Units

NCM

DEG.C
Cn NM3/MIN
M3/MIN

PARTICULATES --
MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
PARTICULATES -
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C
Particulate Wt-Total
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

Units)
E-3
07-19-73
1.465
3.9
60.8
1569.4
1892.0
102.0
PARTIAL CATCH^
82.50
56.21
46.63
5.29
- TOTAL CATCHk/
137.20
93.48
77.54
8.80
39.87

E-4
07-20-73
1.804
5.3
52.5
1992.6
2383.4
99.0

37.80
20.91
17.48
2.50

83.80
46.35
38.75
5.54
54.89

E-7
07-23-73
1.488
.4.4 .
55.4
1628.2
1939.0
99.9

73.80
49.51
41.57
4.84

147.00
.98.61
82.81
9.63
49.80
' LEAD — PARTIAL CATCHi/ :
MF.
CANM
CATM
CAWM
Wt-Partial
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
24.85
16.93
14.05
1.594
7.75
. 4.29
3.58
0.512
25.47 .
17.09
14.35
1.669
Lead -- TOTAL CATCH^
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C







Wt-Total
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl .
Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Perc Lead Emis Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ttl
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

MTON/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
%
7,
. %
7.
24.94
16.99
14.10
1.600
0.36
12.6
0.698
0.127
30.0
18.2


7.88
4.36
3.64
0.521
1.65
12.5
0.443
0.0416
20.5
9.43
28.3
15.0
25.60
17.17
14.42
1.677
0.51
12.5
0.770
. . 0.134
34.4
17.4


a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
      cyclone and filter.
b/  Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus the
      impingers.
                                           34

-------
                                        TABLE XIV
                SUMMARY OF  EMISSIONS  FROM  BLAST  FURNACE  BAGHOUSE -  F STACK
NaiiK'

VMS TO
PMOS
TS
QS
QA
PERI
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
AVG Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units

DSCF

DEC . F
Cn DSCFM
ACFM

F-3 •
07-19-73
76.05
4.6
151.3
39425
48664
93.7
F-4
07-20-73
74.13
4.9
147.3
38839
47918
92.7
PARTICULATES -- PARTIAL CATCH^/
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
38.50
0.00780
0.00632
2.63
52.30
0.0109
0.00881
3.62
PARTICULATES -- TOTAL CATCH^-'
MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C

MF
CAN
CAT
CAW

MT
CAO
CAU
CAX
1C







Particulate Wt-Total
Part Load-TtI, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis -Total
Perc Impinger Catch

Wt-Partial
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial

Wt-Total
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl
Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Perc Lead Emis Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Ttl
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

LEAD -- PARTIAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/Hr
LEAD -- TOTAL
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

TON/HR
LB/TON
LB/TON
%
%
%
%
111.40
0.0226
0.0183
7.62
65.44
CATCH^/
8.37
0.00170
0.00137
0.570
CATCH-/
8.47 '
0.00172
0.00139
0.580
1.18
13.9
0.548
0.0417
21.7
7.61


101.60
0.0211
0.0171
7.03
48.52

15.72
0.00327
0,00265
1.09 .

15.89
0.00330
0.00268
1.10
1.07
13.8
0.509
0.0797
30.1
15.6
31.4
15 . 1
                                                                                       64.20
                                                                                        0.0134
                                                                                        0.0111
                                                                                        4.50
                                                                                      123.40
                                                                                        0.0257
                                                                                        0.0213
                                                                                        8.65
                                                                                       47.97
                                                                                       27.22
                                                                                        0.00567
                                                                                        0.00470
                                                                                        1.91
                                                                                       27.32
                                                                                        0.00569
                                                                                        0.00472
                                                                                        1.92
                                                                                        0.37
                                                                                       13.8
                                                                                        0.627
                                                                                        0.139
                                                                                       42.4
                                                                                       22.2
a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
      cyclone and filter.                                                                .
b_/  Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus the
      impirigers.
                                            35

-------
                                     TABLE XIVA
(Metric Units)
Name

VMSTM
PMOS
TSM
QSM
QAM
PERI
Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units

NCM

DEG.C
Cn NM3/MIN
M3/MIN

PARTI CULATES --
MF
CAM
CATM
CAWM

Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial

MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

PARTIC::LATES --
MT
CAOM
GAUM
CAXM
1C
Particulate Wt-Total
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

F-3
07-19-73
2.154
4.6
66.3
1116.4
1378.0
93.7
PARTIAL CATCHS-'/
38.50
17.84
14.45
1.19
b/
TOTAL CATCH-
111.40.
51.62
41.82
3.46
65.44
F-4
07-20-73
2.099
4.9
64.1
1099.8
1356.9
92.7

52.30
24.86
20.15
1.64


101.60
48.30
39.15
3.19
48.52
F-7.
07-23-73
2.092
4.1
60.7
1111.6
1341.8'
91.4

64.20
30.62
25.37
2.04


123.40
58.86
48.76
3.93
47.97
LEAD -- PARTIAL CATCH-''
MF
CANM.
CATM
.CAWM. ' ,
Wt-Partial
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR
8.37
3.88
3.14
0.260
15.72
7.47
6.06
0.493
27.22
12 . 9.8
10.76
0.866
LEAD -- TOTAL CATCH^/
MT
CAOM
.CAUM
CAXM
1C







Wt-Total
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis 'Ttl
Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Perc Lead Emis Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ttl
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

MTON/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
%
%
%
%
8.47
3.93
3.18
0.263
1.18
12.6
0.275
0.0208
21.7
7.61


15.89
7.55
6.12
0.498
1.07
12.5
0.255
0.0398
30.1
15.6
31.4
15.1
27.32
13.03
10.80
0.869
0.37
12.5
0.314
0.0695
42.4
22.2


a/   Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
       cyclone and filter.
W   Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus the
       impingers.

                                         36

-------
                                       TABLE XV
              SUMMARY OK EMISSIONS FROM BLAST FURNACE BAGHOUSE  - G  STACK
Name

VMSTD
PMOS
TS
QS
QA
PERI
Description
bate of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic
Units

DSCF

DEG.F
DSCFM
ACFM

G-3
07-19-73
82.43
4.8
150.1
43723
54002
91.6
G-4
07-20-73
84.49
5.4
138.5
44762
54665
91.7
G-7
07-23-73
91.52
4.3
154.2
49840
61612
89.2
PARTICULATES -- PARTIAL CATCH^'
MF
CAN
CAT
CAW
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Partial
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
83.80
0.0157
0.0127
5.87
22.00
0.00401
0.00328
1.54
97.40
0.0164
0.0133
7.00
                             PARTICULATES -- TOTAL CATCH-'
                                                        b/
MT         Particulate Wt-Total
CAO        Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
CAU        Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
CAX        Partic Erais-Total
1C         Perc Impinger Catch
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR

140.20
0.0262
0.0212
9.81
40.23
71.40
0.0130
0.0107
4.99
69.19
164.00
0.0276
0.0223
'11.8 .
40.61
                                LEAD -- PARTIAL CATCH"
MF         Wt-Partial
CAN        Load-Ptl, Std Cn
CAT        Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
CAW    .    Emis-Partial
MG
GR/DSCF
GR/ACF
LB/HR
33.52
0.00626
0.00507
2.35
5.35
0.000980
0.000800
0.370
45.97 '
0.00774
0.00626
3.30
                                                    b/
                                 LEAD -- TOTAL CATCH-
MT         Wt-Total                   MG           33.71            5.64           46.05
CAO        Load-Ttl, Std Cn           GR/DSCF       0.00630         0.00103         0.00775
CAU        Load-Ttl, Stk Cn           GR/ACF        0.00510         0.000840        0.00627
CAX        Erais-Total                 LB/HR         2.36            0.390           3.31
1C         Perc Impinger Catch                      0.56            5.14            0.17
           Prod Rate                  TON/HR       13.9            13.8            13.8
           Part Emis Ttl              LB/TON        0.706           0.362           0.855
           Lead Emis Ttl              LB/TON        0.170           0.0283          0.240
           Perc Lead Emis Ptl           %          40.0            24.0            47.1
           Perc Lead Emis Ttl           %          24.0             7.82           28.1
           Avg Perc Lead Emis Ptl       %                          37.0
           Avg Perc Lead Emis Ttl       7.                          20.0


a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
      cyclone and filter.
b/  Total catch refers to all the particulate and  lead caught in the partial catch plus the
      impingers.
                                          37

-------
                                       TABLE XVA
(Metric Units)
Name

VMSTM
PMOS
TSM
QSM
QAM
PERI


MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM

Description
Date of Run
Vol Dry Gas-Std Cond
Percent Moisture by Vol
Avg Stack Temperature
Stk Flowrate, Dry, Std Cn
Actual Stack Flowrate
Percent Isokinetic

PARTI CULATES
Particulate Wt-Partial
Part Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis -Partial

Units

NCM

DEC.C
NM3/MIN
M3/MIN


-- PARTIAL
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

PARTICIPATES -- TOTAL
MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C

MF
CANM
CATM
CAWM


•MT
CAOM
CAUM
CAXM
1C







Particulate Wt-TotaL
Part Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Part Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Partic Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
LEAD --
Wt-Partial
Load-Ptl, Std Cn
Load-Ptl, Stk Cn
Emis-Partial

LEAD --
Wt-Total
Load-Ttl, Std Cn
Load-Ttl, Stk Cn
Emis-Total
Perc Impinger Catch
Prod Rate
Part Emis Ttl
Lead Emis Ttl
Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Perc Lead Emis Ttl
Avg Perc Lead Emis Ptl
Ave Perc Lead Emis Ttl
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

G-3
07-19-73
2.334
4.8
65,6
1238.1
1529.2
91.6
a/
CATCH-
83.80
35.83
29.01
2.66
b/
CATCH-
140.20
59.94
48.53
4.45
40.23
G-4
07-20-73
2.393
5.4
59.2
1267.5
1547.9
91.7


22.00
9.18
7.51
0.700


71.40
29.78
24.38
2.26
69.19
6-7
07-23-73
2.592
. 4-3.
67.9
1411.3
1744.7
89.2


97.40
37.51
30.34
3.18


164.00
63.15
51.08
5.35
40.61
PARTIAL CATCH-
MG '
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

33.52
14.33
11.60
1.064
b/
5.35
2.23
1.83
0.170

45.97
17.70
14.32
1.499

TOTAL CATCH"'
MG
MG/NM3
MG/M3
KG/HR

MTON/HR
KG/MTON
KG/MTON
%
%
%
%
33.71
14.41
11.67
1.070
0.56
' 12.6
0.353
0.0849
40.0
24.0


5.64
2.35
1.93
0.179
5.14
12.5.
0.181
0.0143 •
' '24.0
7.82
37.0
20.0
46.05
17.73
14.34
1.501
0.17
12.5
0.428
0.120
47.1 ' '
28.1 .


a/  Partial catch refers to the particulate and lead caught in the probe tip, probe,
      cyclone and filter.
b/  Total catch refers to all the particulate and lead caught in the partial catch plus  the
      itnpingers.
                                          38

-------
Table VIA is the same except in metric units.  Since the baghouse has three





stacks, the average concentrations shown are calculated from weighted





averages, based on stack flowrate, for each run.  The collection effi-




ciencies for the collection system, humidifying chamber, the excess air





addition, lime addition and baghouse are 98+%.  The data in Table VI show




that most of the lead emitted from the baghouse was caught in the front




half of the collection train (i.e., the probe tip, probe, cyclone and




filter), and therefore is composed of larger particles.  The particles




caught in the impingers (which are located after the filter) are smaller




than 0.3 u in diameter and account for only 0.04 Ib/hr emission.  The




filters used capture all particles larger than 0.3 u in diameter.





          Table VII summarizes the data by test.  Table VIIA presents the




data in metric units.  For Test 3, the first test on the blast furnace and





pollution control system, the efficiency of the collection system was 98.5-




99.27o.  In Test 4, the second test on the blast furnace and its pollution




control system, the efficiency of the collection system varied from 99 to





99.6%.  In Test 7, the third and final test on the blast furnace and its




pollution control system, the collection efficiency varied from 95.4 to




98.9%.  During the first and second emission tests on the blast furnace and




control system, the bagshaking was done on a very irregular schedule.
                                    39

-------
Little or no automatic bagshaking occurred during the period when samples
were being collected.  While Test 7 (the last test) was being conducted,
the bags were manually shaken several  times in addition to the so-called
automatic shaking.  This test shows the lowest collection efficiency for
the baghouse and the highest lead and  particulate emissions.  Shaking the
bags cleans them and allows the fine material, to pass through, rather than
collecting on a particulate film covering the surface of the bag.  The
highest visible emissions occur during bagshaking.

     Table VIII shows the pounds of particulate per ton of feed to the
blast furnace, and Table VIIIA has the same information in metric units.
The average emission rate for the uncontrolled particulate is 68 Ib/ton of
feed and for the particulate from the  control system 0.959 Ib/ton of feed.

     Table IX has the particulate emission data in pounds per ton of
lead produced and Table IXA in metric  units.  The average uncontrolled
emission rate is 174 Ib/ton of lead, and the average controlled emission
rate is 2.47 Ib/ton of lead.

     Table X presents the emission factors for pounds of lead from the
blast furnace, per ton .of. fe.pd. tn thp, furnace:- and Table XA presents the - -
data in metric units.  The average uncontrolled emission rate is 20.8
Ib of lead per ton of feed, and the average controlled emission rate is
0.405 Ib/ton of feed.
                              40

-------
     Table XI presents the lead emission rate for ton of lead produced
by the blast furnace, and Table XIA presents the data in metric units.  The
average uncontrolled emission rate is 23.6 Ib of lead per ton of lead pro-
duced, and the average controlled emission rate is 0.450.1b of lead per
ton of lead produced.

     Table XII presents a summary of results from the emission tests
on the duct from the blast furnace (7-ft diameter) to the control system.
Table XIIA presents the same information in metric units.  The percent lead
in the particulate catch is:  front half of train - average 12.7%; total
catch - average 12.5%.

     The particulate emissions in the total catch from sample location
"D" (inlet duct to blast furnace control system) varied from 1,990 Ib/hr to
2,690 Ib/hr, and 144 Ib/ton to 194 Ib/ton.  The lead emissions in the total
catch varied from 193 Ib/hr to 424 Ib/hr, and from 14.0 Ib/ton to 30.5
Ib/ton.
     Table XIII presents the summary of results from the three tests
                                                                 -V.'?u'
run on the baghouse 'exhaust stack E (Figure 2).  Table XIIIA presents the
                                                               •• -^
data in metric units.  The uei «.ciiL leau in trie particulate catch -is:x front
                                                              _   •'-•'V.V
half of train - average 28.3%;  total catch - average 15.0%.  The particu-
late emissions in the total catch varied from 12.2 Ib/hr to 21.2 Ib/hr and
0.884 Ib/ton to 1.54 Ib/ton.  The lead emissions in the total catcd ranged
from 1.15 Ib/hr to 3.70 Ib/hr and 0.0833 Ib/ton to 0.268 Ib/ton.
                              41

-------
          Table XIV contains the summary of results for the emission tests




from the baghouse exhaust stack F (Figure 2).  Table XIVA presents the data




in metric units.  The average percent lead in the particulate catch is:





front half of train 31.4%; total catch - 15.1%.  The particulate emissions




in the total catch ranged from 7.62 Ib/hr to 8.65 Ib/hr and from 0.509 Ib/ton




to 0.627 Ib/ton.  The lead emissions in the total catch ranged from 0.580





Ib/hr to 1.92 Ib/hr and 0.0417 Ib/ton to 0.139 Ib/ton.




          Table XV contains the summary of results from the baghouse ex-  :




haust stack G (Figure 2).  In Table XVA the data are presented in metric





units.  The average percent lead in the particulate catch from the front




half of the train is 37.0%.  The average percent lead in the particulate




catch from the complete train is 20.070.  The particulate emissions in the





total catch ranged from 4.99 Ib/hr to 11.8 Ib/hr and from 0.362 Ib/ton to!




0.855 Ib/ton.  The lead emissions in the total catch ranged from 0.390 Ib/hr




to 3.31 Ib/hr and from 0.0283 Ib/ton to 0.240 Ib/ton.




          Figures 3, 4, 5 and 6 and Tables XVI, XVII and XVIII refer to the




Andersen particle size test program conducted at the blast furnace and bag-




house exhaust stack F.  The Andersen tests were conducted at point 3, port




3 of this stack (see Figure 14, p. 80). There were three particle size   		




tests; Test F3A lasted 60 min, Test F4A 120 min, and Test F7A 92 min.




          The Andersen sampler was used with a backup filter to capture




particles not collected on the plates.  The results, not including the




filter net weight, are listed in Table XVII as "without filter."  The rer




suits which include the filter net weight are listed as "with filter."




                                    42

-------
                        WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED  SIZE

     99.99  99.9    9998  95 90  80    60  40   20  10  5   2 1     0.1   0.01
O
u
S
Q
LU
_l
y
H-

Q.
IUU.U


10.0

1.0
0.1
0.
_ 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 -
o F3A
A F4A
D F7A
o A . 	
°\ V
\ ^D
— o A —
\ D
\V ,
i \Y.E
i iii i i i i i i i i i ii ii i
01 0.1 1 2 5 l6 20 40 60 80 90 95 9899 99.9 99.
WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE





•
99
                Figure 3  - Particulate Without  Filter
                                43

-------
                       WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED SIZE

     99.99 99.9   9998  95 90  80    60   40   20  10  5   21
   100.Or	1	—	
£  10.0

O
on
U
O£
LU

LU


<

O

LU
_l

u
ce
    1.0
    0.1
                   1  1    l      1   i  1  1  I   1  1    1   I   i  i  I
                              \

                              \  D
                              \\
                                \\
                                4\
                                 1 \9
                     ol
                      •D
                                       a
                                       D

                                       D
                                                      o F3A
                                                      A F4A
                                                      D F7A
             1
1  1   1   1   1    1  1  I   i  1  1   1   1   1    1  1
      0.01  0.1     1  2  5  10   20   40   60   80  90 95  9899

                     WEIGHT % GREATER THAN  STATED SIZE
                                                               0.1  0.01
1
                                                              99.9 99.99
                 Figure 4 - Particulate With Filter
                                44

-------
                       WEIGHT % LESS  THAN  STATED SIZE

     99.99 99.9    9998  95  90  80   60  40   20  10 5   21     0.1  0.01
   100.0
    10.0
o
u
3
Q

LLJ
_1
u
    i.o
    o.i
        _   :i      iiiiiiii  ill   T  i    rii    i
                                                       o F3A
                                                       A F4A
                                                       D F7A
I    1   I  I   I   I    I   I  I  I  I   I  I    I   I    I  I
I
      0.01   0.1     125 10  20   40  60   80  90 95  9899   99.999.99

                     WEIGHT % GREATER THAN STATED SIZE


                  Figure 5 - Lead Without Filter
                                45

-------
                    WEIGHT % LESS THAN STATED SIZE

   99.99  99.9    9998  95  90  80   60  40   20  10 5   21
100.0
CRONS


o
•
0
ETER
GLE D
1.0
0.1
               1  1    I   1   1   1  1  1  1  1  1   1   1    1  1  1
          1    1
1   1   1    1   1  1  1  1   1  1
                                                  o F3A
                                                  A F4A
                                                  D F7A
                                                           0.1  0.01
1
 0.01  0.1     1  2  5  10  20   40   60   80  9095  9899   99.999.99

                 WEIGHT % GREATER THAN  STATED SIZE
                Figure 6  - Lead With Filter
                            46

-------
                   TABLE XVI
PERCENT LEAD IN.PARTICULATE FOR ANDERSEN TEST

Plate No.
F3A 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Subtotal
Filter
Total
F4A 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Subtotal
Filter
Total
F7A 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Subtotal
Filter
Total
Wt. Part.
(B)
0.00206
0.00276
0.00446
0.00557
0.00617
0.00904
0.00461
0.00248
0.00207
0.03922
0.02370
0.06292
0.00105
0.00084
0.00110
0.00142
0.00057
0.00045
0.00035
0.00010
0.0
0.00588
0.01450
0.02038
0.01376
0.02441
0.04042
0.03737
0.01261
0.00510
0.00402
0.00211
0.00116
0.14096
0.10490
0.24586
Wt. Lead
(mg)
0.3515
0.6765
0.8265
1.2765
1.8265
3.3265
2.6015
1.3415
0.4365
12.6635
3.3973
16.0608
0.4915
0.3640
0.7615
1.0415
0.3815
0.3215
0.3915
0.2515
0.0
4.0045
1.3823
5.3868
7.3265
13.3515
21.9765
21.2265
6.5265
2.9265
2.1265
1.3265
0.4915
77.2785
25.4723
102.7508

% Lead
17.1
24.5
18.5
22.9
29.6
36.8
56.4
54.1
21.1
32.3
14.3
25.5
46.8
43.3
6.9
73.3
66.9
71.4
112.0
25.2
0.0
68.1
9.5
26.4
53.0
54.7
54.4
56.8
51.8
57.3
52.9
62.9
42.4
54.8
24.3
43.7
                    47

-------
                                                                     TABLE XVII





                                                             ANDERSEN ANALYSIS  SUMMARY
00
HUN NUMBER FTA
DATE 071973

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8

SAMPLE
PLATE
* PAN
47.63437
37.38783
37.99770
38.37489
39.09322
29.08619
29.03880
28.91710
37.91781

PAN
FOR
SAMPLE
17.36350
17.51861
17.36051
17.51416
17.37078
17.50546
17.36314
17.50431
17.36192

DENSITV=
IMP.EFF.C=

TARE
PLATE
» PAN
51.20703
40.80516
41.57186
41.79439
42.65582
32.51144
32.61109
32.35057
41.49457

1.000
.140

PAN
FOR
TARE
20.93822
20.93870
20.93913
20.93923
20.93955
20.93975
20.94004
20.94026
20.94075

SAMPLING
RATE =
78110 CFM
FILTER
TOTAL
WT= .02230 GM
WT= .06152 GM
-WITHOUT FILTER-
TARE
OF
PLATE
30.26881
19.86646
20.63273
20.85516
21.71627
11.57169
11.67105
11.41031
20.55382

SAMPLE
WEIGHT
(GM)
.00206
.00276
.00446
.00557
.00617
.00904
.00461
.00248
.00207

WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.25
7.04
11.37
14.20
15.73
23.05
11.75
6.32
. 5.28

CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.25
12.29
23.66
37.86
53.60
76.64
88.40
94;72
100.00

--WITH FILTEH--
WEIGHT
PERCENT
3.35
4.49
7.25
9.05
10.03
14.69
7.49
4.03
3-j f
• J6
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
3.35
7.83
15.08
24.14
34. 17
48.86
56.36
60.39
63.75
JET
VEL.
(CM/S)
60.14
112.15
187.12
309.32
549.90
1330.63
2425.07
4850.14
P«»TIC
01 AM.
(MICR)
10.99
6.86
4.65
3.16
2.03
1.01
.62
.42

-------
                                                                   TABLE XVII (Continued)




                                                              ANDERSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY
VO
RUN NUMBER F4A DENSITY=
DATE 072073 IMP.EFF.C=

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
SAMPLE
PLATE
» PAN
47.54297
37.44772
38.45145
38.72037
39.64761
29.14621
28.83634
29.13314
38.72241
PAN
FOR
SAMPLE
17.34190
17.49750
17.34356
17.49893
17.34281
17.49803
17.34262
17.49745
17.35103
TARE
PLATE
* PAN
47.56231
37.31178
38.46902
38.58227
39.66647
29.01016
28.85598
28.99814
38.73347
1.000 SAMPLING
.140 RATE = .70920 CFM
PAN
FOR
TARE
17.36229
17.36240
17.36223
17.36225
17.36224
17.36243
17.36261
17.36255
17.36209
TARE
OF
PLATE
30.20002
19.94938
21.10679
21.22002
22.30423
11.64773
11.49337
11.63559
21.37138
SAMPLF
HEIGHT
(GM)
.00105
.00084
.00110
.00142
.00057
.00045
.00035
.00010
.00000
FILTER WT= .01360 GM
TOTAL WT = .01948 GM
-WITHOUT FILTER- — rtlTH FILTER —

WEIGHT
PERCENT
17.86
14.29
18.71
24.15
9.69
7.65
5.95
1.70
.00
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
17.86
32.14
50.85
75.00
84.69
92.35
98.30
100.00
100.00

WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.39
4.31
5.65
7.29
2.93
2.31
1.80
.51
.00
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.39
9.70
15.35
22.64
25.56
27.87
29.67
30. 18
30.18
JET
VEL.
(CM/S)

54. 61
101.83
169.90
280.85
499.28
1208.14
2201 .04
4403.68
PARTIC
01 AM.
(MICR)

11.54
7.20
4.88
3.32
2.13
1.06
.65
.44

-------
   TABLE XVII (Concluded)






ANOERSEN  ANALYSIS SUMMARY
RUN NUMBER F7A UENSITY=
DATE 072373 IMP.EFF.C=

STAGE/
PLATE
/O
0/1
1/2
2/3
3/4
4/5
5/6
6/7
7/8
SAMPLE
PLATE
+ PAN
47.61919
37.38215
38.01382
38.41076
39.06809
29.08781
29.02014
28.92835
37.89888
PAN
FOR
SAMPLE
17.33652
17.49122
17.34025
17.51814
17.33916
17.51060
17.34482
17.51553
17.34322
TAKE
PLATE
* PAN
47.77276
37.37055
38.13734
38.35971
39.22112
29.07705
29.17675
28.91633
38.06024
1.000 SAMPLING
.140 RATE = 1.03750 CFM
PAN
FOR
TARE
17.50385
17.50403
17.50419
17.50446
17.50480
17.50494
17.50545
17.50562
17.50574
TARE
OF
PLATE
30.26891
19.86652
20.63315
20.85525
21.71632
11.57211
11.67130
11.41071
20.55450
SAMPLE
WEIGHT
(O.M)
.01376
.02441
.04042
.03737
.01261
.00510
.00402
.00211
.00116
FILTER »T= .10490 f,M
TOTAL WT= .24586 GM
-WITHOUT FILTER- — WITH FILTER —

WEIGHT
PERCENT
9.76
17.32
28.67
26.51
8.95
3.62
2.85
1.50
.82
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
9.76
27.08
55.75
82.26
91.21
94.83
97.68
99.18
100.00

WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.60
9.93
16.44
15.20
5.13
2.07
1.64
.86
.47
CUM.
WEIGHT
PERCENT
5.60
15.53
31.97
47.17
52.29
54.37
56.00
56.86
57.33
JET
VEL.
(CM/S)

79.88
148.97
248.54
410. 36
730.41
1767.41
3221.11
6442.22
PAKTIC
n i aw .
(HICR)

9.52
5.94
4.02
2.73
1.75
.86
.53
.35

-------
Run F3A
                  gm Partic
0
1
2
3 .
4
5
6
7
8
Filter
Run F4A
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Filter
Run F7A
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.3515
0.6765
0.8265
1.2765
1.8265
3.3265
2.6015
1.3415
0.4365
3.3973

0.4915
0.3640
0.7615
1.0415
0.3815
0.3215
0.3915
0.2515
0.0755
1.3823

7.3265
13.3515
21.9765
21.2265
6.5265
2.. 9265.
2.1265
1.3265
.0.4915
0.00206
0.00276
0.00446
0.00557
0.00617
0.00904
0.00461
0.00248
0.00207
0.0237

0.00105
0.00084
0.00110
0.00142
0.00057
0.00045
0.00035
0.00010
0
0.0145

0.01376
0.02441
0.04042
0.03737
0.01261
0.00510
0.00402
0.00211
0.00116
                                             TABU: xvm

                                  ANDERSEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY (LEAD)
Pb without Filter
mg Pb/gm Par tic
171
245
185
229
296
368
564
541
211
143
468
433
692
733
669
7i4
1,119
2,515
--
95.3
532
547
544
568
518
574
529
689
424
Weight
m
2.8
5.3
6.5
10.1
14.4
26.3
20.5
10.6
3.5

12.0
8.9
18.7
25.5
9.3
7.9
9.6
6.2
1.9

9.5
17.3
28.4
27.5
8.4
3.8
2.8
1.7
0.6
Cum Weight
2.8
8.1
14.6
24.7
39.1
65.4
85.9
96.5
100.0

12.0
20.9
39.6
65.1
74.4
82.3
91.9
98.1
100.0

9.5
26.8
55.2
82.7
91.1
94.9
97.7
99.4
100.0
                                                                          Pb  with  Filter
Filter   25.4723
0.1049
243
Weight
(7.)
2.2
4.2
5.1
7.9
11.4
20.7
16.2
8.3
2.7
21.3
9.0
6.7
13.9
19.1
7.0
5.9
7.2
4.6
1.3
25.3
7.1
13.0
21.4
20.6
6.4
2.8
2.1
1.3
0.5
24.8
Cum. Weight
a>
2.2
6.4
11.5
19.4
30.8
51.5
67.7
76.0
78.7
100.0
9.0
15.7
29.6
48.7
55.7
61.6
68.8
73.4
74.7
100.0
7.1
20.1
41.5
62.1
68.5
71.3
73.4
74.7
75.2
100.0 .
                                                                         Particle
                                                                         Diameter
                                                                                              10.99
                                                                                               6.86
                                                                                               4.65
                                                                                                 16
                                                                                                 03
                                                                                                 01
                                                                                               0.62
                                                                                               0.42
                                                                                              11.54
                                                                                                 20
                                                                                                 88
                                                                                                 32
                                                                                                 13
                                                                                                 06
                                                                                               0.65
                                                                                               0.44
                                                                                               9.52
                                                                                               5.94
                                                                                               4.02
                                                                                               2.73
                                                                                               1.75
                                                                                               0.86
                                                                                               0.53
                                                                                               0.35
                                                51

-------
          Figures 3, 4 and 5 are plots of the data in Table XVII using the

cumulative weight percent as the "weight % greater than stated size" and

using the particle diameter in microns calculated from MRI's Andersen com-

puter program, a development of the Ranz and Wong equation.—

          Figure 3 shows the particle size distribution of the particles

caught in the Andersen analyzer for all three tests.  In Test F3A, 94.5%

of the particles are larger than 0.62 u, and 127o are larger than 11 u.

Test F4A shows that 98.37o of the particulates are larger than 1.1 u, and

32% are larger than 11.5 u.  The results of Test F7A show that 99.2% are

larger than 0.52 u, and that 27% are larger than 9.6 u.

          Figure 4 presents the results of the particulate size analysis

including the particles that passed through the Andersen and were caught

on the filter.  In Test F3A, 62% of the particles are larger than 0.62 u,

and 8% are larger than 11.1 u.  The results of Test F4A show that 30% of

the particles are larger than 0.66 u, and that 9.5% of the particles are

larger than 11.15 u.  Test F7A shows that 58% of the particles are larger

than 0.35 u, and 16% are larger than 9.6 u.

          The particle size analysis of the particulate emissions shows

that more than 65% of the material emitted is smaller than 3.5 u, and about

half of the particulate emission is smaller than 1 u.
I/  Ranz, W. E., and J. B. Wong, "Jet Impactors for Determining the Par-
      ticle Size Distribution of Aerosols," Industrial Hygiene and Occupa-
      tional Medicine, Vol. 5, pp. 464-477 (1952).
                                   52

-------
          The data for the Andersen particle size tests are presented in



two ways.  The first presentation is for the particles which are caught on



the Andersen plates.  This gives a particle size distribution from about



0.6 u to 11 u.



          The data including filter are presented to spread the particle



size distribution from 0.3 u to 11 u.  The purpose of the filter is to



catch small particles which pass through the Andersen without being captured.



          Figure 5 shows the plot as a result of the analysis for lead of



the particulate catch during the Andersen test.  This does not include the



material caught on the filter.  The figure shows that on the average 96.07o



of the lead was larger than 0.7 u, and that half of the lead was found in



particles larger than 5 u.



          Figure 6 presents the lead data for the same three runs but in-



cludes the lead caught on the filter.  About 24% of the lead was smaller



than 0.4 u, arid 80% of the lead was smaller than 9.0 u.
                                                                       • I


          Table XVI presents the percent lead in the particulate on each



stage of the Andersen particle size analyzer as well as on the filter for



each of the three tests.  The percent lead in the total catch varied from



25.5 to 43.7% with Test F7A having the highest percentage lead.  The dif-



ference in method and frequency of bagshakirig between the first two tests



when the bags were shaken very infrequently and Test 7 (D, E, F, G and FA)



when the bags were shaken manually every 25 min explains the higher partic-



ulate and lead yield for Test 7.  The same reasoning might explain the



higher percentage lead in the total Andersen catch.



                                   53

-------
          Table XVIII is a summary of the analytical data for lead on the

particulate catch; in the Andersen tests the filter weights are included.


                IV.  PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION


A.  Process Flow—'

          The ASARCO smelter at Glover is a custom smelter in that all ore

is purchased from other companies.  It has a design capacity of 90,000 tons

of lead per year and started production in 1968.  The average inlet concen-

trate analysis is 70-757o lead, 2-l/27o zinc, and 17o copper.  Figure 7 is

the Glover plant flow sheet.  The plant is further described in the follow-

ing paragraphs.

           1.   Sinter machine:  ASARCO's plant  at Glover has  a highly auto-

mated updraft  sinter machine  designed  to handle more  than 1,500  tons of

material  per day.  Figure  8 is a  photograph showing the sinter machine,  mixing

drum, feed  conveyors and  updraft fans.  A lead charge which is  sized, mixed,

pelletized, and moistened,  is  fed to the sinter machine where sulfur is

eliminated  and the heat of the oxidizing reactions converts  the  charge to

a  fused cellular  cake, known  as  sinter.  The basic chemical  reactions are

as  follows:
  The  following process description  is  based  on  information  obtained  from
   plant personnel,  Bulletin  No.  X-18,  published by ASARCO, AIME World
   Symposium on Mining and Metallurgy  of  Lead and  Zinc,  Donald  0.  Rauski
   and  Burt C. Auacher, Eds.  AIME,  New York  (1970); and  Lead—Progress
   and  Prognosis:  The State  of  the Art:   Lead  Recovery, A. Worcester and
   D. H. Beilstein,  IMS, AIME, New  York,  Paper  No. A71-87.
                                   54

-------
                       GLOVER  PLANT  FLOW SHEET
                             hoppei Cut
                                                                 ¥ Customers
From Bulletin No. X-18,
published by ASARCO.
  SIO.OB.
Figure 7
                                     55

-------
From Bulletin No. X-18,
published  by ASARCO.
                                          Sinter Plant


                                          Figure  8

                                               56

-------
                   PbS + 1-1/2 02	* PbO + S02




                   2PbO 4- PbS 	*3Pb + S02







          Charge materials to the sinter machine include lead concentrates,





return sinter, blast furnace slag, and "plant clean-up" materials.  The lead




concentrate is conveyed from a storage bin through a Pennsylvania Impactor





where six hammers break the material into smaller pieces.  Return sinter,




which consists of fines rejected from the final product of the sinter    ,




machine, is added to the sulfur-containing lead concentrates to dilute the




total sulfur content down to a level that can be handled by the machine




(5-6%).  Return sinter passes through a cooling drum where it is quenched




and then onto an enclosed conveyor which takes it through two crushers





(corrugated rolls and smooth rolls) and finally to a storage bin.





Slag  from  the blast  furnace which contains a minimum of  3%  lead  travels  by




conveyors  to  the  sinter plant.   Spillage  from  the sinter machine, sinter





breaker, spiked rolls  and windbox cleanings  is  picked up by  two  apion con-





veyors  and, together with  floor clean-up and baghouse dust,  are  conveyed  to




a  storage  bin and then through the Pennsylvania  Impactor.   The  concentrate,




return  sinter, slag, and plant clean-up are fed  through  two 3.05-m by  9.5-m




mixing  drums where the feed  is moistened  and conditioned.




           The feed is  conveyed to a splitter chute where it is  divided into





an ignition  layer and  a main  feed layer.  A baffle diverts  part  of the feed




into  the hopper for  the ignition layer, and when that  demand  is  satisfied,




the majority of the  feed passes  into  the  main  feed hopper.  The  ignition




                                    57

-------
layer passes through a vibrating grizzly which rejects oversized material




and returns it to the main feed hopper.  The ignition feed is distributed





evenly across the width of the machine by shuttle conveyors operated by a





hydraulic system and then passes through a gas-fired ignition muffle which




is over a downdraft windbox.  The main feed layer is next placed on top of





the ignition layer and the entire bed flows through the updraft section of




the machine, which is 29 m in length and consists of 12 windboxes each




2.44 m long.  In the updraft section of the machine, the airflow is reversed




so that the heat from the ignition layer flows upward to ignite the main




feed layer.  The material burns as it travels the length of the machine.




The material is cooled as it reaches the end of the machine "so that the





cake will not collapse nor will metallic lead run out of the sinter to




blind the pallet grate bars" (Rauski arid Mauacher, p. 78).  The sinter





passes into the sinter breaker and then to a spiked roll,  where the material





is pulverized.   Spillage from these pulverizers is passed onto the clean-up




conveyors as part of the plant clean-up that is later recharged to the sin-




ter machine.   A pan conveyor transfers the hot sinter from the spiked roll





to the Ross Classifying Rolls.  The coarser sinter is pushed by the Ross





Rolls into one of two sinter bins which feed the furnace.   A swivel vibrator




diverts the sinter into one of the two bins according to the level of material





within each.  The fine sinter falls through the Ross Rolls into a storage




bin and then passes through the cooling drum as return :sinter to the sinter





machine.
                                   58

-------
          Two small baghouses within the sinter plant handle ventilation





air from the conveyors and crushers for the return sinter.  The material





collected by the baghouses is added directly to the belt carrying the sinter





feed.  In addition, a wet scrubber system is planned for in-plant ventila-




tion.





         . Air from the sinter machine passes through a main duct to the




water spray chamber and then into the sinter plant baghouse.  Ventilation




air from the sinter breaker, the spiked roll, the pan conveyor which




carries the product sinter to the Ross Rolls, two clean-up conveyors, and





the cooling drum, passes through a second, auxiliary duct to the water spray




chamber and into the sinter plant baghouse.  Ventilation air from the Ross




Classifying Rolls and swivel vibrator (transfer of sinter to storage bin) is




cleaned by the blast furnace control system;





          2.  Blast  furnace:  ASARCO has an Australian step jacket design





blast  furnace, with  a nominal capacity of 300 tons of lead boullion per




day.   The furnace  proper  is 7.6 m  long, 1.5 in wide at the lower tuyeres




and 3.0 m wide at  the upper tuyeres.  A blower can provide up to 510 cu m




of air per minute  at 0.26 kg/sq cm to the furnace.  This air is distributed




between the lower  and upper tuyeres by a proportioning controller.  The




lower  section of the furnace, where the tuyeres are located, is tapered  (see





Figure 9).  The  top  of  the  furnace, where charging takes place arid effluent




gases  are ducted to  the control system, is of a typical  thimble top design.
                                   59

-------
                                                                   A  Second Slag
                                                                   Tap for Making
                                                                   Slag Blocks
                                                                                   Upper Tuyeres
                                                                                   Lower Tuyeres
   Tap and
aa Granulator
                                                                     20 T Lead  Pot Being Transferred
                                                                     from  Furnace to Dross  Kettles
                       V  Covers Lead Pot
                          During Tapping
From Bulletin  No. X-18,
published  by ASARCO.
                                        Blast Furnace
                                         Figure 9
                                           60

-------
          A large building at ASARCO houses all receiving and storage bins


for the sinter machine and blast furnace.  The  charge  materials for the


furnace, consisting of coarse sinter, iron, coke, caustic skims, etc., are


stored in a row of bins.  The charge materials are automatically weighed as


they pass through feed hoppers into a charge car.  The charge car is posi-


tioned on a transfer car and moved along a track which runs past the row


of feed hoppers to the side of the furnace.  An automated gantry crane


lifts the charge car from the transfer car and elevates it to the top of


the furnace where the contents are dumped through the bottom of the car.


According to the management, the charge to the furnace was a constant mix-


ture of feed materials during the course of the test program.  Charging


usually takes place 17-18 times per shift.


          A Roy tapper is situated at the front of the furnace, where a


continuous stream of molten material flows from a 5-ft long slit in the

                                                          •
furnace into a box-shaped settler.  As the material cools in the settler,


the lead settles to the bottom and the slag accumulates at the top.  The


lead is tapped continuously into 20 T ladles.  The slag is tapped continu-


ously into a slag granulator where two jets of water break the slag into


small granules of material.  The water forces the slag from the granulator


underground to an elevator.  The elevator transports the slag up to a pair


of wooden silos for dewatering.  From there the slag with a relatively high


lead content (3.2 Pb - June) is transferred by conveyor to the sinter


machine and the slag with a low lead content is transported by truck to a
                                    61

-------
dumping area.  A second slag tap is occasionally used, if a customer specifies


a need.  The second slag tap, similarly to the lead tap, consists of a


continuous flow of material directly from the settler into large ladles to


form solid slag blocks.  Ventilation gases from the front of the furnace,


including the Roy tapper, the two slag taps, and the lead tap, are handled


by one fan, and pass through the blast furnace water'spray chamber and


baghouse.  Ventilation air from the slag granulator is handled by a separate


fan, but is also ducted through the blast furnace control system.


          When a 20 T lead ladle has been filled, the lead tap is plugged,


the hooding over the ladle is lifted, and the ladle is transferred by a


27-ton crane to one of two dross kettles.  The lead ladle is partially


covered by a lid to minimize fuming during tapping, during transfer of the


lead ladle to the dross kettle, and during pouring of the molten lead into


the dross kettle.



           A dome-shaped hood is used to cover the dross kettles for ventila-


 tion only during pouring of the molten lead into the dross kettles.  This


 ventilation air passes through the blast furnace control system.


           There are two dross kettles, one with a capacity of 300 tons and


 the other with a capacity of 250 tons.  The lead is poured into one of two


 kettles which is maintained at 540°C.  The copper solidifies and floats to


 the top where it is drossed off.  The lead which remains is transferred to


 a second dross kettle which is maintained at a temperature of approximately
                    /              .                                       •

 425°C.  The copper dross from the second kettle and some drosses from the




                                   62

-------
refinery are transferred back to the first kettle to reclaim lead that may

be mixed in the copper dross.  In several of the lead smelters, the copper

dross is treated in a reverberatory furnace 'to make copper matte, but at

ASARCO in Glover the copper dross is transferred by rail to a separate

facility for treatment.  The lead from the dross kettles is transferred by

crane to the refinery.

          3.  Refinery system:  Figure 10 is an aerial photo of the smelter

which shows the baghouses and the exhaust stacks as well as the general

outline of the buildings, along with the humidifying chambers.  The

humidifiers and baghouses are the control systems.  ASARCO operates a

refinery at the Glover plant which removes impurities from the lead bullion

and casts the metal into 100-lb pigs or 1-ton blocks for shipment.  The

refinery was surveyed during the course of the testing, but no emission '

tests were conducted at this facility.

          The lead concentrate at the Glover plant contains a high percentage

of lead and minimal impurities compared with the two other ASARCO plants.

The lead  bullion  passes through a series of four kettles for decopperizing,

desilverizing, and dezincing and then to a fifth kettle for refining with

caustic soda and sodium nitrate before it is cast into pigs or blocks.

          No visible emissions were observed within the plant.  None of the

refinery kettles are vented to the outside.  The only two operations vented

to the outside are combustion air from heating of the kettles and air from

the baghouse Used to collect zinc produced in a zinc-silver separating

retort.
                                  63

-------
                                                                  610' Stack for  Sinter
                                                                  Machine Gases
                                                                       Blast  Furnace &
                                                                  rspS-jDross  Kettles
                                                                                358' Stacks for
                                                                                Blast  Furnace Gases
                                                                                     Storage  Bins
                                                                          Sinter Machined
From Bulletin No.  X-J8,
published by ASARCO.
                                        Aerial View


                                        Figure 10


                                          64

-------
B.  Control Systems


          1.  Sinter machine water spray chamber and baghouse:   Effluent


gases from the sinter machine, two clean-up conveyors,  sinter breaker,


spiked roll, pan conveyor, and the cooling drum are vented through a water


spray chamber and a baghouse containing microtan synthetic bags which are


resistant to the high temperature of the sintering machine exhaust.   The


inlet to the water spray chamber from the sinter machine is 450°-500°C.


The inlet to the water spray chamber from the discharge system is 150°C.


          The sinter plant baghouse was designed by ASARCO and is an en-


closed concrete structure of the compartmented, pressure type with a design


efficiency of 99.8%.  The bags are 12-1/2 in. diameter by 20 ft long with


204 per compartment and the bags had an  average age of 9 months during  our


test.  The baghouse is inspected daily to insure proper maintenance of the



bags.



           In the sinter machine control  system for the purpose of cooling,


 an undetermined quantity of air is introduced through  a vent located between


 the water spray chamber and baghouse.   The nine compartment baghouse (total


 cloth area 129,000 sq ft) has an inlet gas rate of 232,000 ACFM at  204°F

                         -/'.-.             ''    •                        ~ "
 (air-to-cloth ratio of 1.8 or 2.0 ACFM per sq ft with  one compartment being  —


 cleaned).  Gases from the baghouse are vented through  a 12 in. thick,


 610 ft tall concrete stack of 20 ft diameter.  The stack has four tempera-


 ture monitors which in conjunction with a ground level ambient air  SQ2


 monitor, are used to regulate the  smelter production  rate based upon weather




                                   65

-------
conditions to prevent an excess ground level concentration of SC^.  There is





a sampling house on the ductwork between the baghouse and stack which has





an "Askania" sampler.  This bag sampler collects a continuous isokinetic





sample at one point for a 3-4 day period after which the collected material




is weighed.





          The water used in the spray chamber is recycled continuously.  The





baghouse dust is burned to prevent ignition and to compact the dust.  Both




the water spray chamber and the baghouse are cleaned out every 3 weeks, and




the collected material is recycled through the sinter machine.  A grab sample




from each of these systems is analyzed for lead at this time.




          The baghouse compartments shake consecutively once the pressure




has reached a specified point.  Each compartment shakes for approximately





33 sec; a complete baghouse shake continues for 6 min 40 sec.





           From 1 January 1973 through 16 July 1973 the sinter machine




 water spray chamber has collected on the average 19 tons of particulate




 per day (54.27o Pb) and the sinter machine baghouse has collected on the




 average 33.5 tons of particulate per day (59.7% Pb).  These figures are





 based on measurements made when the control system is cleaned (approximately





 every 3 weeks).




           2.  Blast furnace water spray chamber and baghouse:  Effluent gases





 from the blast furnace, swivel vibrator (transfer of sinter to storage bins),




 Ross Classifying Rolls, dross kettles, Roy Tapper, slag granulator, lead.





 tap, slag taps and feed hopper drop points are cooled in a water spray





 chamber before going to the baghouse.





                                    66

-------
          The blast furnace baghouse was designed by ASARCO and is an en-


closed concrete structure of the compartmented, pressure type with a


design efficiency of 99.8%.  The blast furnace baghouse contains wool bags


which are less flammable than synthetic bags.  The bags are 12-1/2 in.


diameter by 20 ft with 204  in  each of six compartments and the average age


of the bags was 8.2 months.  The baghouse is inspected daily to insure


proper maintenance of the bags.  The six compartment baghouse (total cloth


area 77,000 sq ft) has an inlet gas rate of 131,000 ACFM at 137°F (air-to-

      . •     '    /     7
cloth ratio of 1.7 or 2.0 ACFM per sq ft with one compartment being


cleaned).  Gases  from the baghouse are vented through three 58-ft stacks,


each handling gases from two compartments.


          An undetermined quantity of air is introduced through a vent


between the water spray chamber and baghouse for codling purposes.  In the


blast furnace control system, lime is also added between the water spray


chamber and the baghouse to aid in collection efficiency and to retard


ignition of collected dust.


          The bags in each compartment are mechanically vibrated for cleaning.


A damper is closed to prevent flow while vibrating and left closed for about


20 sec after vibration to allow particulate settling.  Compartments are


cleaned on a rotation basis when the pressure drop across' the baghouse


exceeds 3 in. of  water.  If cleaning one compartment fails to lower the


pressure drop enough to satisfy the present value, the next compartment  is


cleaned.  During  the testing program, it was observed that two compartments


were  generally cleaned at one time.


                                   67

-------
           The  collected dust  from  the blast  furnace operation  usually  con-





tains a high percentage of  lead and appreciable quantities of  cadmium  and




arsenic.   From 1 January  1973 through 16 July  1973, the blast  furnace  water




spray chamber  has collected on the average 10.8 tons of particulate per day





(56.0% Pb), and the blast furnace baghouse has collected  on  the  average




30 tons of particulate per  day (56.07o Pb).   These  figures are  based on





measurements made when the  control system chambers are cleaned out (ap-




proximately every 1-1/2 to  2  weeks).







C.  Sampling Conditions





           1.   Sinter machine;  An isokinetic sample could not  be obtained




with the EPA train at the outlet of the sinter machine baghouse.  There is




no port in the stack, and the breeching between the baghouse and the stack




is not enough duct diameters  long for isokinetic sampling.  Outlet measure-




ments are  therefore based on  results from the Askania sampler  which is




operated continuously by the  plant.  Three inlet tests were conducted  up-





stream from the water spray chamber, thus providing information on uncon-




trolled emissions from the  sinter machine and from auxiliary operations




(crushers, conveyors, cooling drum, etc.) associated with the  sinter machine.




A particulate sizing test on  the two inlet ducts was planned but was not




completed due to sampling problems.  The Askania sampler, which consists




of a bag filter, collects an  isokinetic sample from the single point of





average velocity.  For the purposes of this test, a pre-weighed clean  bag




was inserted in the sampler at 8:30 a.m. on 20 July and removed 23 July at





4:00 p.m.

-------
          Historically  the  lead companies have installed  the pollution  con-




trol equipment  (water spray chamber and baghouse) as material recovery  sys-





tems, part of their production equipment.  Recovery of lead, not pollution





control, was the primary reason for the installation of the baghouse.   In




order to more nearly complete their material balance calculations, which





are made on a yearly basis, ASARCO decided that they should make an attempt




to sample the outlet of the baghouse and analyze for lead.  Realizing that




the recognized  isokinetic sampling equipment would not work, they set out




to design a fixed sampler to approximate an isokinetic sampler.  They in-




stalled a couple of ports in the breeching and conducted  a pitot temperature




traverse to determine the point of average velocity.  Calculations deter-





mined the orifice size and pumping rate for drawing a proportional sample




from the breeching.  The sample system consists of a fixed stainless ori-




fice with a stainless heated delivery line to a heated chamber in which a




bag filter (same material as the bags in the baghouse but much tighter




weave) is installed to trap the samples, and a vacuum pump calibrated to




deliver fixed volume of gas from the breeching.  The temperature pressure




and gas flow are measured.  At the end of a specified period, generally




during a scheduled shutdown of the sinter machine, the bag is removed,




weighed and placed on a pan in an oven for drying.  After drying, the bag





and pan are removed and reweighed to obtain a sample weight.  This sample




is then analyzed by ASARCO for lead content to determine  lead losses to




the atmosphere.







                                   69

-------
           During  the  first  test,  the  sinter machine was  off during 9 min





at the beginning  of the  test.   During four of  those minutes a main feed




hopper was being  emptied.   Emissions  from the  main feed  hopper  are venti-





lated through the blast  furnace control  system,  so that  no operation ven-




tilated  to the  sinter machine was  functioning  during  the 9-min  shutdown.





The sinter machine duct was not sampled  within - 10%  of  100% isokinetic




during the first  run and was repeated at a later date; therefore, only the





auxiliary  duct measurement was  affected  by the sinter machine shutdown.




           2.  Fugitive emissions:  Occasionally, fugitive emissions within




the one-sided sinter machine building were observed to be fairly high.  In




particular, the cooling drum at some  times was a source  of in-plant emis-




sions.   One scrubber has been installed  by the plant  in  the sinter machine




building as a trial unit to collect fugitive dusts for the purpose of indus-




trial hygiene.  A complete scrubber system is  planned to control in-plant




dust.  The dust released by the cooling  drum has a high  moisture content





which would clog  a baghouse, thus necessitating wet scrubber control.




           3.  Blast furnace:  Measurements at  the inlet  and the outlet of




the blast  furnace control system were made simultaneously.  The inlet test




was made upstream from the water spray chamber, and the  outlet test was




made on all three stacks simultaneously.  A lime sample was collected at




the point where lime is introduced into  the gas  stream between the water




spray chamber and baghouse to ascertain  the total particulate loading to




the baghouse.  The lime sample was obtained by catching  a sample from the







                                   70

-------
lime feeder for 1 miri.  The sample was weighed and lime addition rate cal-




culated on this data.  Particle sizing was planned on both the inlet and





the outlet, but due to sampling problems at the inlet, only the outlet was




tested for particle size.





          Dynamiting of the blast furnace was a common occurrence during





the course of testing.  The purpose of dynamiting is to decrease the pos-




sibility of a furnace blow, when emissions would seemingly be highest.  A




blow occurs when the material which has built up on the sides of the fur-





nace, forming a chimney within the furnace collapses.  When a chimney forms




within the furnace, the air moves directly through the furnace without




maximum contact with the furnace material.




          During the first test at the blast furnace (19 July 1973), the




sinter machine was not operating.  Therefore, ventilation air from the Ross




Classifying Rolls and Swivel Vibrator was being ducted through the blast





furnace baghouse.  According to plant personnel, these two operations may




be expected to contribute a low gas volume, but a relatively large amount




of dust to the blast furnace control system.  During the second test, one





baghouse compartment was closed down.




          During the third test at the blast furnace (23 July 1973)j the





baghouse compartments were manually shaken six times.  Review of the con-





trol room charts indicated that the bags which usually shake when the pres-




sure has reached 3 in. of water, had shaken on the average of 70 times/day




(2.8 times per hour) between 15 June and 15 July.  The maximum number of







                                   71

-------
bag shakes was 111 times-day and 4 or 5 shakes an hour was not uncommon.




From our arrival on 16 July through 22 July, the bags shook on the average





of only 33.7 times per day (1.4 times per hour).  During Runs No. 1 and 2,





the bag shakes occurred very infrequently during the actual test time.




The infrequent shaking of the bags is assumed to be related to the frequent




dynamiting of the furnace.  When material adheres to the sides of the  fur-




nace, the air moving through the furnace has less contact with it and  the




emissions would seemingly be less.  Because the highest visible emissions




to the atmosphere have been observed to follow baghouse shakes, it was de-




cided to manually shake the bags in order to compare the emissions with




the first and second tests when the bags were shaken infrequently.  The




manual shaking of the bags was continued during the particle sizing test.




          4.  Fugitive emissions:  Fugitive emissions from several opera-




tions associated with the blast furnace—dross kettles, ray tapper, slag




granulator, lead tap, slag taps, and feed hopper drop points—are reduced




by hooding and ventilation to the blast furnace control system.  The lead





tap, particularly at windy times when the lead tap was heavy, produced some




fugitive emissions.  At the slag tap, the hooding is not in direct contact





with the receiving chamber, and did not appear to be adequate for complete




collection of fumes.  According to plant personnel, problems with the  slag




granulator fan contributed to the fuming at the slag tap.  The ladles which




receive the lead at the lead tap are partially covered to minimize fugitive




emissions.  Occasionally fuming occurs, especially when there is spillage





during the transfer of lead bullion from the furnace to the dross kettles.




                                   72

-------
                V.  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

          .This section of the report discusses the physical layout of  the

sampling locations and sampling points at each location.  The  sampling pro-

cedures used to collect particulate samples at the smelter are presented

herein.  The analytical procedures are also discussed;

A.  Location of Sampling Ports and Points
          For the sinter plant the two sampling  locations are  shown  in

.Figure 11.  In the 3-ft duct which vents the operations associated with
sintering, the sample ports were 25 ft, 8-1/3 pipe diameters,  downstream

from the elbow, and 10 ft, 3-1/3 pipe diameters,  upstream from a distur-

bance.  There were two ports 90 degrees apart in the duct.  Due to the
physical layout one port was located at 30 degrees from the vertical axis

and the other 30 degrees below the horizontal.
          The single port in the 7-ft duct was located 56 ft,  8 pipe diam-

eters, downstream from the nearest flow obstruction, but only  7 ft,  1  pipe
diameter, from the nearest upstream obstruction,  a 45-degree elbow.  This

port was located at the center line of the duct.  The port was at 90 degrees

to the duct.  The duct came from the fourth floor of the sinter plant  to  the

roof of the single-story humidifying chamber at  45 degrees.
          The location of the sample points in each duct is shown in Table

XIX.  There were 16 points in Duct B and each point was sampled twice  for

a total of 32 sample points per test.  There were six points  in each port

of Duct C.
                                   73

-------
                          •25'
                            •10'	
                                                                                     FROM  SINTER MACHINE
\.        FLOW
   •4" PIPE NIPPLE
           •SAMPLE POINTS
V
-SAMPLE POINT C
   FROM OPERATIONS
   ASSOCIATED WITH SINTER
                      3' DIAMETER
           -SAMPLE  POINTS
                                  71 DIAMETER
                                4" PIPE NIPPLE
                                                              3' Die..
                                                                                              7' Dio.
                                                                                            SAMPLE POINT  B
                                                                        HUMIDIFYING
                                                                          CHAMBER
                             Figure 11 - Sample Ports in Sinter Plant Ducts

-------
                                TABLE XIX
                     SAMPLING POINTS  D AND C LOCATIONS
SINTER DUCTS

Point
Port No*
Duct I/B 1
2
3
4
5
6
. ' 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Duct U/C 1
2
3
4
5
6
Duct
Diameter
(in.)
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
89-9/16
39-5/8
39-5/8
39-5/8
39-5/8
39-5/8
39-5/8


1
1.6
4.9
8.5
12.5
16.9
22.0
28.3
37.5
62.5
71.7
78.0
83.1
87.5
91.5
95.1
98.4
4.4
14.7
29.5
70.5
85.3
95.6
Location
in Duct
(in.)
1-1/2
4-3/8
7-5/8
11-1/4
15-1/8
17-7/8
25-3/8
32-3/4
56-13/16
64-3/16
71-11/16
74-7/16
78-5/16
81-15/16
85-3/16
88-1/16
1-3/4
5-7/8
11-5/8
28
33-3/4
37-7/8
Outside Port
to Inside Duct
(in.)
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/8
3-1/8
3-1/8
3-1/8
3-1/8
3-1/8

Use
(in.)
4-3/4
7-5/8
10-7/8
14-1/2
18-3/8
21-1/8
28-5/8
36
60-1/16
67-7/16
74-15/16
77-11/16
81-9/16
85-3/16
88-7/16
91-5/16
4-7/8
9
14-3/4
31-1/8
36-7/8
41
Duct L/C
Same as upper port
                                     75

-------
          The sample location in the 7-ft duct  from  the blast  furnace  is




shown in Figure 12.  The ports were located at  45 degrees with  the horizon-





tal, one on the north axis and the other on the south.  The ports were 60




ft, 8.57 pipe diameters, from the upstream 90-degree elbow and  15 ft,  2.14




pipe diameters, from the downstream 90-degree elbow.  The sample point





dimensions, six in each port, are in Table XX.




          Figure 13 shows the configuration of  the blast furnace baghouse




and stacks E, F and G.  Figure 14 shows the location of the ports and  sam-




ple points in each of the three stacks.  The ports were located 36 ft  6 in.,




4-1/2 pipe diameters, above the breeching or inlet to the stack and  11 ft




6 in., 1-2/3 pipe diameters, from the outlet to the  atmosphere.  The sam-





pling point calculations yielded a value of 32  sampling points, eight  per




port.







B.  Sampling Procedures




          An RAG* Model 2343 Staksampler train  was used to sample for  par-





ticulates.  Glass-lined probes were used for all sampling.  The procedures





used are those in the Federal Register, 3j^, 159, 17  August 1971.  There




were two exceptions:  (1) the exhaust duct from the  sinter baghouse  was




sampled using the ASARCO's permanent continuous sampler called  Askania;




this sampler is supposedly an isokinetic sampler; and (2) as it was  not




possible to install and use two 90-degree ports in Duct B, one  port  was




used and each of the 16 points was sampled twice.
*  Mention of a specific company does not constitute endorsement by EPA.



                                   76

-------
                  •60'
                      -*
           FLOW;.
                        7'
                        t	

                       SAMPLE POINT D'
SAMPLE  POINTS
                                      HUMIDIFYING'
                                      CHAMBER
                                                1
                 f
                 {A"
4" PIPE NIPPLE
      Figure 12 - Sample  Ports in Blast  Furnace Exhaust  Duct

-------
no
**~
                                                       TABLE  XX





                                      SAMPLING POINTS IN BLAST  FURNACE DUCT. SAMPLING
LOCATION D


Port
Duct N/D






Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Duct
Diameter
(in.)
83-3/4
83-3/4
83-3/4
83-3/4
83-3/4
83-3/4


%
4.4
14.7
29.5
70.5
85.3
95.6
Location
in Duct
(in.)
3-5/8
12-1/4
24-5/8
59-1/8
71-1/2
80-1/8
Outside Port
to Inside Wall
(in.)
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4
3-1/4

Use
(in.)
6-7/8
15-1/2
27-7/8
62-3/8
74-3/4
83-3/8
                        Duct S/D     Same, as North Port

-------
v£>
                       Stack 1   Stack 2
                                                N
Stack 3
1
f Inlet -
I













i
1

"c
L.
o
Q.
E
o
O



/ \

2











/ \

3











i
1

1
|
1

1.



I
1

/ \
i
5 6
i
1
1
I
|



1
i
1
                                   (Top View)
                                          1/2" Asbestos
                                          Cement Board
                                                                                                     Sample Port
                                                                                                                EPA Train
                                                                                                                Rail Support
                                                                                            (Profile)
                             Figure 13 - Blast Furnace Baghouse and Stack(s) Configuration

-------




J








00
fc










1






3:
•O












• <





»_.
-------
          Ducts B and C were sampled simultaneously for  2 hr.   The  points

in Duct C were sampled for 10 min with readings every 5  min,  a total  of

2 hr.  The 16 points in Duct B were sampled for 4 min with a  total  time of

64 min per traverse or 2 hr 8 min total sampling.  When  sampling was  dis-

continued on Duct C to change ports, the sampling on Duct B was continued

for 4 min and then discontinued until sampling was started again on Duct C.

          At the blast furnace all particulate sampling  was conducted

simultaneously for a minimum of 2 hr.  The  7-ft duct (12 points) was

sampled for 10 min on a point (total of 2 hr)  with readings taken every

5 min.  Sampling on the exhaust stacks was 4 min per point, 32 points for

a total of 2 hr 8 min.  When the crews on the exhaust stacks  stopped  to

change ports the crew on the duct also stopped until all four crews were

ready to go.

          The Andersen* particle size sampling was conducted  at Stack F

Port 3 Point 3 using the RAG* Staksampler  equipment  with a 3-ft glass

lined probe and an Andersen* sampler.

          The Orsat samples were taken by using a stainless steel probe

which contained a glass wool filter.  The probe was inserted  to Point 3

of each stack and samples were pumped directly into the  Orsat analyzer for

5 min to purge the probe, line and Orsat.  Three analyses were made for

each test, and each analysis lasted 5 min.  Ducts B, C and D  were sampled
*  Mention of a company name or product does not constitute endorsement by
     EPA.
                                   81

-------
and analyzed for each test.  Stacks E, F and G were analyzed for Test 3.

On Tests 4 and 7 only G was analyzed.  The results of the Orsat analyses

for Test 3 showed that the three stacks had the same composition within

the accuracy of the method.

          A Drager tube was used to obtain approximate analysis of the SG

in the gases from the sinter exhaust ducts and the blast furnace exhaust

duct;  A stainless steel probe with a glass wool filter was inserted into

the stack to Point 3 and a sample withdrawn into the tube using an MSA*

hand pump.  This was done for each test.

          Lime is added to the particulate from the blast furnace in the

duct between the water spray chamber and the baghouse.  Each day that par

ticulate sampling was conducted around the pollution control system for

the baghouse, a lime sample was taken for the purpose of determining the

lime addition rate.  The sample was taken from the vibratory feeder for a

period of 1 min.  The lime was weighed and the lime addition rate of 44.7

Ib/hr was determined from the weight of lime collected in 1 min.


C.  Analytical Procedures

          the particulate analysis was accomplished using the procedures

in the Federal Register. 36_ (159), 15,715-15,716, 17 August 1971.

          After the samples were analyzed for particulates, the solid res

idue was digested in 10 ml of boiling aqua regia for 1 hr with reflux.
*  Mention of a company name or product does riot constitute endorsement by
     EPA.

                                   82       .

-------
The liquid was  cooled, diluted  to  50 ml  and  analyzed  for  lead  on the  atomic





absorption spectrdphototneter.





          The Andersen particle  analysis on  the  plates was  done  in the





field.  Then each plate was carefully washed with  acetone into a sample





container.  The probe wash and  filter were treated as particulate samples





and returned to the MRI laboratories for particulate  and  lead  analysis.




The acetone was evaporated from  each of  the  particulate samples  and then




they were analyzed for lead content using the  procedure described above.




          Orsat and SC^ (approximate) analyses were conducted  in the  field




as described in Section V-B.




          The large filter used  to collect particulate samples from the




inlet ducts to the sinter and blast furnace  control system  had enough par-




ticulate that it was not necessary to digest the filters  for. lead analysis.




A weighed sample of the particulate from the large filters  was digested




for lead analysis.  The small filters used in  the  baghouse  exhaust stacks




were digested along with the particulate  for lead  analysis.




          All particulate and lead blanks have been subtracted from the




values before they were reported.
                                   83

-------