CD
o
PROJECT NO. 76-.LIM-9
AIR POLLUTIO
EMISSION TEST
MARTIN-MARIETTA CORPORATION
ROBERTA CEMENT PLANT
CALERA, ALABAMA
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission Measurement Branch
Research Triangle Park. North Carolina
-------
Source Test of a Lime Plant
EMB 'Projects Report No.
76-LIM-9
Plant Tested
Martin-Marietta
Calera, Alabama
September 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 17, 1975
Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Emission Measurement Branch '
Research Triangle .Park
North Carolina 27711
by
Thomas .L. Peltier
Monsanto Research Corporation
Dayton Laboratory
Dayton, Ohio
Contract No. 68-02-140^1, Task No. 19
-------
TABLE OF .CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction' 1
II. Summary of Results 3
III. Process Description 2^J
IV.. Location of Sampling Points ' . 31
V. Sampling and Analytical Procedures 36
Appendix . . ' .
A. Complete Particulate Results
B. Complete S02 Results, Calculations, and
Continuous Monitoring Report
C. Complete NO Results and Sample
Calculation
D. Carbon Monoxide Results
E. Complete Visible Emissions Results
P. Process Operation Data
G. Field Data Sheets- for Methods 5, 6, and 7
H. Analytical Data Sheets
I. Sampling and Analytical Procedures
J. Sampling Log
K. Job Participants
ii
-------
LIST OP TABLES
Table
1
2
3
4
. 5
6
.7A-7H
8
9
10
' 11
Page
Summary of
Baghouse
Summary of
Baghouse
Summary of
Summary of
Summary of
Summary of
Summary of
Summary of
Hydrator
Summary of
Hydrator
Summary of
Summary of
Particulate Emissions from the
(Metric)
Particulate Emissions from the
(English)
S02 Emissions
Total Sulfur Results
NO Emissions
X
CO Emissions
Visible Emissions
Particulate Emissions- from the
(Metric)
Particulate Emissions from the
(English)
Lime Kiln Operating Data'
Hydrator Process Data
7
9
11
12
14-21
22
23
28
30
Appendix
A-l Particulate Emission Data for No. 3 Lime Kiln
A-2 Particulate Emission Data for the Hydrator
A-3 Particulate Sample Calculations
A-4 ' Symbols used in Source Sampling Calculations
S02 Continuous Monitoring Results
Corrected 10-Minute Averages of S02 Measurements
B-l
B-2
C-l
C-2
D-l
NO Results on No. 3 Lime Kiln
X
NO Sample Calculations
X
CO Results for No. 3 Lime Kiln
111
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure i Page
1 \ Outlets 'of baghouse on No. 3 kiln 32 '
2 Inlet to baghouse on No. 3- kiln ' 3!)
3 Outlet of hydrator 35
IV
-------
.SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
Under the Clean Air Act of 1970, the Environmental Protection
Agency is given the responsibility of establishing performance
standards for new installations or modifications to.existing
'installations in stationary source categories. In accordance
with its responsibility, 'EPA selected Monsanto Research
Corporation (MRC) as the contractor to perform a sampling
program at Martin-Marietta Lime Plant in Calera, Alabama.
Emission data will be utilized in establishing standards of
performance for new stationary sources (SPNSS) in the lime
industry.
The field "test work was directed by John M. Davis, Field
Testing Section, Emission Measurement- Branch. The sampling
was performed by MRC with Thomas L. Peltier as Team Leader.
This report' tabulates the data collected from the inlet and
outlet of the baghouse controlling the exhaust of the Mo. 3
lime kiln at the Martin-Marietta Lime Plant during the sam-
pling program of September 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 17, 1975.
A lime hydrator was also tested during the sampling program
at the plant.
The lime kiln that was sampled is a continuous operation
which produces between l8l and 209 metric tons (200 and 230
tons) per day of calcined lime. A baghouse is used to control
1
-------
the particulate emissions from the kiln, which burns both
natural gas and pulverized coal. Particulate, sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide emissions were measured
at the outlet of the baghouse. Visible emissions measurements
were also recorded. Sulfur dioxide levels at the inlet were
also determined.
The hydrator, which converts quicklime to hydrated lime, pro-
duces 18.1 Mton/hr (20 tons/hr). The particulate emissions
from the continuous .operation are controlled by a wet scrubber.
The exhaust from the hydrator was sampled for particulate
emissions, at the outlet of the scrubber.
The EPA personnel conducted a separate sampling project on
September 13', 1975.- A continuous S02 monitoring device, a
Dynascience Air Pollution Monitor, took readings from both the
inlet and outlet of the baghouse. The purpose of this test
was to obtain SC>2 readings by a -method other than EPA Method 6
to determine if a high lime environment affects the accuracy
of' Meth'od 6.- Results from that sampling program are included
in Appendix B.
The following sections of this report include: (1) summary of
results, (2) process description and operation, (3) location
of sampling points, (4) sampling and analytical procedures.
Appendices include all field data and analytical data from
this sampling project.
-------
SECTION II
SUMMARY OP RESULTS
Summaries of the particulate emissions from the baghouse
serving the No. 3. lime kiln are given in Tables 1 and 2. 'Six
Method 5 tests were performed on the outlet of the baghouse.
Two runs were performed on each of the 3 outlet stacks. In
Tables 1 and 2 the results of the six tests are listed indi-
vidually along with an average result for the 3 stacks com-
bined. This was obtained by summing the six tests.and dividing
the sum by two to obtain an emission rate for -the entire kiln
and baghouse. '
The six runs show the process emission rate to be 0.0^06 Kg/
Mton Peed'(0.08ll Ib/ton. feed) at an average .stack flow rate
of 875 NmVmin (30911 dscfm). An average of 0.692 Kg/hr
(1.564 Ib/hr) of particulates were of a size to be collected
in the front half of the sampling train.
The run numbers in Tables 1 and 2 refer to the stack location
and the run number on that stack. The stacks were labeled 1
through 3 with the southern-most stack being No. 1. On
September 9, the first day of Method 5 sampling, two simulta-
neous Method 5 tests were started on Stacks 1 and 2. Approxi-
mately halfway through the tests, a MRC operator discovered
a broken U-bend on the train in Stack 2. The Run 2-1 (Stack
No.' - Run No.) was aborted and the train cleaned while Run 1-1
was continued. On September 10, two simultaneous Method 5
-------
Table 1. -SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM. THE BAG-HOUSE (METRIC)
1-1.
9-9-75
1.90
1.15
131
278
96.3
132
12.9
22.8
0.377
71-3
39.1
0.652
2-2
9-10-75
2-33
11.87
112
293
112.2
132
21.2
9.1
0.160
39-7
17.0
0.3TT
1-2
9-10-75
2.23
11.60
127
291
111.2
132 '
31.1
11.1
0.218
51.2
21.3
0.129
3-1
9-10-75
2.13
11.71
"lie
302
117.9
132
27.1
li:3
0.201
68.6
28.2
0.512
3-2
3-11-75
2.13
11.22
.X'
137
315
115.6
132
10.8
16.5
0.311
72.1
29.2
0.552
2-3 Average"
9-12-75
2.00
9-25
112
269'
108.5
132
. 15.2 39.5
7.6 10.7
_0_._123 0.692
33-3 171-3
16.7 77-3
0.269 1.357
Run Number
Volume of Gas Sampled
::m=a
Percent moisture by volume
Average stack temp. - °C
Stack volumetric flow rate
Im3/mln
Percent Isokinetic-
Run Time - Minutes
-articulates - Front half
mg
~.g/Nm3
Kg/hr
Partlculates - Total
=
-------
Table 2, SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM THE BAGHOUSE (ENGLISH)
Run lumber
Date
Volume of gas sampled - dscf
Percent moisture by volume
Average stack temp. - °F
Stack volumetric flow rate
dscfm
Percent Isoklnetic
Run time - minutes
Partlculates - front half
rag
grains/dscf
Ib/hr
Particulates - total
rag
grains/dscf
Ib/hr
Percent impinger catch
Process Emission Rate
Ib/ton Peed
.a
1-1
9-9-75
67.00
1.15
267
9809
96.3
132
12.90
'0.0099
0.829
71.30
0.0171
1.136
2-2
. 9-10-75
82.11
11.87
288
10356
112.2
132
21.2
0.001
0.351
39-7
0.0071
0.658
1-2
9-10-75
78.82
11.60
261
10379
111.2
132
31.1
0.0061
0.516
51.2
0.0106
0.912
3-1
9-10-75
85.75
11.71
' 291
10619
117.9
132
27.1
0.0019
0.11°
63.6
0.0123
1.121
3-2 .
9-11-75
85-75
11.22
/
273
11115
115.6
132
io:s
0.0072
0.632
72. 1
0.0127
1.210 '
2-3
9-12-75
70.51'
9.25
233
9513
10.8.5
132
15-2
0.0033
0.271
33-3
0.0073
0.593
Average
89.5
0.0177
1.561
171.3
0.0337
2.982
12.3
o.nlis
16.7
0.0176
12..0
0.0273
60.1
0.0236
13-6
0.0311
51.3
0.0131
17.6
0.0811
Dry standard cubic feet ? 70°P, 29.92 In Kp;
The average is for all 3 stacks combined
-------
runs were performed on Stacks 1 and 2 (Run 2-2 and Run 1-2).
Later that day, Run 3-1 performed after the sampling equip-
ment was transferred to Stack 3- One Method 5 run was per-
formed 'on the baghouse each of the next two days, one on
Stack 2 and one on Stack 3- Runs 3-2 and 2-3 were not per-
formed simultaneously because.of some question on September 11
as to whether 5 or 6 Method- 5 runs would be required.
As can be seen on Table A-l in Appendix A, four of the six
Method 5 runs were not .isokinetic.. The.most probable cause
for this was that adjustments made to the C factor on the
nomograph were not enough to allow totally for the difference
between the'actual Cp's of the pitot tubes and the theoretical
value of 0.85 for which the nomographs are designed.
The Method 6 sulfur dioxide results are given in Table 3. The
inlet -testing was.performed before the gases were manifolded
to the various compartments in the baghouse.. The outlet
testing was done on Stacks 1 & 2 for the 6 runs. The table
lists the 12 runs that were performed and gives the inlet and
outlet-average emissions of S02. The flow rate used to con-
vert the concentration to mass emissions was 875 NmVmin
(30911 dscf/min), which was determined by adding the six
Method 5 runs and dividing by 2. The averages, do not include
Runs 1-1 and 1-0 since -there was some doubt if the process
was at steady-state. The steady-state problem arose because
the plant was in the process of switching the fuel from natu-
ral gas to pulverized coal.
The zero emission results at the outlet create numerous ques-
tions 'for which there are no readily available answers. The
runs were all performed with the same equipment and done
simultaneously .with the inlet sampling. Run 5-0.gives the
-------
Table 3- SUMMARY OF S02 EMISSIONS '
Run Dumber
Date
Run Length, rain.
Volume of gas sampled
Ifcl
dscf
SOj Concentration
ppm
IS/N-l"1
Ib/dscf x 10-5
SOj Emissions
KK/hra
lb/hrb
1-1
9-9
15
0.0226
0.797
0
0
0
0
0
1-0
9-9
27
0.0297
1.050
0
0
0
.0
0
2-1
9-9
16
0.0223
0.787
117
0.386
2.105
50.2
1)1.6
2-0
9-9
20
0.0203
. 0.718
0
0
0
0
0'
3-1
9-10
23
0.0267
0.913
67
0.175
1.039
9.2
20.2
3-0
9-10
16
0.0212
0.717
0
0
0
0
0
1-1
9-10
20
0.0220
0.777
107
0.279
1.713
11.7
32.3
1-0
9-10
15
0.0203
0.717,
. 0
0
0
0
0
5-1
9-11
21
0.0238
0.839
186
0.185
3.028
25.5
56.2
5-0
9-11
16
0.0223
0.789
78
0.201
1.271
10.7
23.6
6-1
9-12
22
0.0238
0.811
171 "'
0.156
2.812
23.9
52.7
6-0
9-12
16
0.0232
0.820
0
0
0
'. 0
0
136 16
0.356 0.011
2.221 0.255
18.7 .-2.1
11.2 - 1.7
S02 Emissions - Dynasclence
ppm
a) Plow rate used - "575 irn'/nlr.
b) Flow rate used - 30911 dscf/aln
c) Both Hun 1-1 and 1-0 not' used In average since there was sorae
doubt if process was at steady-state.
96 58
-------
only measurable results, however, the corresponding Inlet run,
5-1, gave the highest S02 values.
In conjunction with the S02 results, Table 4 gives the total
sulfur results on the coal, product, and the baghou.se dust.
The samples were collected during the Method 6 runs and are
referenced to the runs. The results in the table show the
coal being burned had an average sulfur content of 0.92%.
The product had an.average sulfur content of 0.042$. However,-
the baghouse dust had a considerable sulfur content of between
0.9'9 and 1.58$. This result in conjunction with the zero S02
emissions from the baghouse leads one to believe the highly
alkaline dust reacts with the S02 to remove it from the ex-
haust gases. This creates another question .since glass wool
is used as a filter in the Method 6 train and a large amount
of particle is collected in the glass wool. There is no way
to determine if the S02 reacted with the dust in the glass
wool and was removed from the gas being drawn into the -Method
6 train.
While MRC .personnel were performing the Method 6 sampling on
the baghouse,'EPA personnel were attempting to ready a con-
tinuous monitoring system for sulfur dioxide emissions. A
Dynascience monitor was used on September 13, the day after
MRC personnel completed sampling on the baghouse. The reason
the continuous and Method 6 testing were not performed simul-
taneously was that S02 calibration gas was -not available until
late on the 12th. The continuous monitor was used on both
the inlet and the outlet of the baghouse.
A draft report of the testing is included in Appendix B. A
discussion of the sampling operations and the results of the
sampling are included in the draft report. An average S02
'concentration in ppm for the inlet and outlet is included in
-------
Table 4. SUMMARY OP TOTAL SULFUR RESULTS
(Expressed as % Sulfur)
Date
Corresponding EPA 6 Run
% Total Sulfur.
Coal
Product
Baghouse Dust
9-9
1-1
9-9
2-1
9-10
3-1
9-10
9-11
5-1
9-12
6-1
1.02
0.017
1.09
0.72
0.029
1.31
0.95 .
0.037
0.99
1.14
0.040
1.57
0.78
0.070
1.58
0.90
0.060
1.46
-------
Table 3. Comparing the results to Method 6 indicates a lower
inlet, but a higher outlet concentration. It should be noted
that SC>2 results (other than zero) were obtained with the
Dynascience unit using a glass wool filter and unheated probe
as was done in the Method 6 testing.
Table 5 presents the results of the Method 7 nitrogen oxides
sampling. Grab flasks were taken on 3 different days with 12
flasks being used one day and -6 on the other two days for a
total of 24 grab samples. Table 5 gives an average NO emis-
.A.
sion rate for each day and also an average for the 3 days of
sampling. ' A flow rate of 875 NmVmin (30911 dscfm) was used
.to convert the concentration in the grab flask to an emission
rate for the kiln. Of the 24 grab flasks taken, only one,
No. 5 on September 93 seems to be in error. However, there is
no way to determine if the- grab flask leaked or the sample was
mishandled.
'As the deviation from the average of this sample was greater
than four times the average deviation of the remaining results,
the data for this sample was rejected.
The carbon monoxide emissions from the kiln are given in Table
6. The Method 10 testing was done on the exhaust gases col-
lected in a Tedlar bag. The Orsat analysis was performed on
the same gases as was the CO analysis. The integrated sample
was over a time period which was usually one hour. The table
lists the CO concentration in ppm, which was obtained from
the calibration curves that are with the Beckman Infrared in-
strument. The same flow rate as was used to calculate S02
and NO emission rates was also used for CO emission rates.
x
The CO concentration in the Tedlar bags was also determined
by using Drager tubes which involves drawing a small amount'
of gas through a column of indicating material which changes
10
-------
Table 5.
SUMMARY OF NO EMISSIONS
.A
Time,
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
1-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-9-75
9-11-75
9-11-75
9-11-75
9-11-75
9-11-75
9-11-75
9-12-75
9-12-75
9-12-75
9-12-75
9-12-75
9-12-75
Run No.
1
2
3
1
5d
6
. 7
8
9
10 ' .
11
12
1
2
3
' 1
5
6
1
2
3 .
1
5'
6'
Time
1610 '
1611
1612
1613
1657
1658
1659
1659
1700
. 1710
1711
1712
906
907
908
909
910
912
917
918
gig
950
951
952
ppma
255
225
119
218
52
152
227
271 \
270
' 176
178
271
221
133
132
182
236
120
189
166
297
272
298 .
303
323
221
288
grams/Nm3
0.183 ^
0.126
0.282
0.170
0.098
0.289
0.131
0.519
0.511
0.333
0.337
0.521
0.118
0.257
0.250
0.315
0.117
0.228
0.359
0.313
0.562
0.516
0.561
0.576
0.611
0.120
0.512
Ib/dscf x 10"5
3.01
2.66
1.76
2.93 '
0.61
1.80
2.69
3.21
3-19
2.08
2.10
3.25
2.61
1.60
1.56
2.15
2.79
1.12
2.21
1.95
3.51
3.22
3.52
3.59
3-83
2.62
3.38
Kg/hrb
25.36
22.37
11.81
21.68
5.15
15-17
22.63
27.25
26.83
17.18
17.69
27.35
21.97
13.19
13.13
18.11.
23-17
11.97
18.85
16.12
29.51
27.09
29.61
30.21
32.21
22.05
28.15
lb/hr°
55.83
19.33
32.61
51.31
11.31
33.38
19.89
60.09
59-16
38.58
38.95
60.28
iJ8.il
29.67
28.93
38.88
51-75
26.31
11.51
36.19
65. .10
59.72
65.28
66.58
71.03
18.59
62.72
TOTAL AVERAGE
221
0.123
2.61
22.21
18.96
a) Parts per million by volume.
b) Flow rate used was 875 HmVmin which is an average of the EPA Method 5 runs performed.
p) Plow used was 30,911 dscfm which is an average of the EPA Method 5 runs performed.
d) Data deleted from averages (see text)
11
-------
Table 6. SUMMARY OF CO EMISSIONS
Run Number
Average
Sample Time
1130-1215
83-0-930
800-856
830-920
Date
9-9
9-10
9-11
9-12
CO
CO
CO
Concentration
ppm ' 15 113 21 ' 57 -
g/Nm3 0.017 . 0.129 0.024 0.065
. Ib/dscf x 10~6 1.077 8.062 1.498 4.069
Emissions . .
Kg/hra 0.91 6.77 1.26 3. Hi
lb/hrb 2.00 14.95 2.78 7-55
by Drager Tube
irnm n n c on £n
52
0.059
3-677
3-09 -
6.82
a) Flow rate '- 875 Mm3/mi
mm
b) Flow rate - 30911 dscf/min
-------
color to indicate the concentration of CO present. The re-
sults from this method are also listed in Table 6.
Tables 7-A through 7-H presents a summary of the visible emis-
sions. The table gives the opacity readings which correspond
to Method 5 runs'. The two observers, T. Thalman from MRC and
J. Burbank from the EPA, noticed only occasional periods of
light visible emissions. The results in this table are for
the baghouse emissions. Due to the location of the hydrator
stack and the high moisture plume, the EPA personnel.decided
'against attempting to obtain opacity readings while the hy-
drator was being sampled.
Method 5 testing on the hydrator was also 'performed and the
results 'of the test are given in Tables 8 and 9- The first
run was performed on September 12 while the other two took
place on September '17. Due to the high''moisture content, of
the exhaust from the scrubber, a large amount of water was
collected and the impingers had to be emptied frequently.
Maintaining isokinetic sampling during the run was difficult
since the "temperature of the saturated exhaust varied. Due
to the nature of the process, Orsat samples were unnecessary
so the molecular composition of ambient air was used in the
calculations. The results in the tables show a high concen-
tration of particulate, but due to the low flow rate, the
hourly emissions are low. The tables give the results of
each run plus an average for the three runs.
13
-------
TABLE 7A
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Data: 9/9/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Baghouse Outlet #3, Stack #1,
Height of Point of Discharge:
80. ft.
Description of Background:
Sky (Blue background)
Description of Sky:
Clear to Partly Cloudy
Wind Direction:
East
Color of Plume:
Run
White
\
Duration of Observation: 3 hrs.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer #1
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
150 ft.
Height of Observation. Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
East
.Wind Velocity: 2-5 miles/hr
Detached Plume: No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Set Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11 .
12
13 (1)
11 (1)
15
16
17
13
19
20.
Start
1130
1136
1112
1148
1151
1200
1206
1212
1218
1221
1230
1236
1212
1305
1306
1312
1318
1324
1330
1336
End
1135
llll
1117
1153
1159
1205
1211
1217
1223
1229
1235
1211
1215
1305
1311
1317
1323
1329
1335
1311
Opacity
Sum
0
0
0
0
75
0
0
0
0
0
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average
0
0
0
0
3-1
0
0
0
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Set Number
21
22
23
21
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Time Opacity
Start
1312
1313
1351
1100
1106
End Sum
1317 0
1353 0
1359 0 .
1105 0
1108 0
Average
0
0
0
0
0
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50
+J
S /*o
V.
QJ
"30--
>,
'G 20--
fU
c
o
10 -
3 .
Time, hours
-------
Date: 9/9/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack.
Location of Discharge:
Baghouse #3, Run #1,*
Height of'Point of Discharge:
80 feet
Description of Background:
Blue sky
Description of Sky:
Clear
Wind Direction:
SE
Color of Plume:
White \ °
Duration of Observation:
3 hrs.
SUMMARY OF.AVERAGE OPACITY
TABLE 7B
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
\
Observer #2
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
60 ft.
Height of Observation Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:South
*Prom 1131-1357 Stack #2 was read for visible
emissions, however, the particulate run on
Stack 1/2 was voided at the halfway point in
' the run, so observer ,'/2 switched to read
Stack III from 1305-l'!09 hours.
' Wind Veloci ty:
5-10 mph
Detached Plume: No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Opacity
Time
Opacity
Set Number . Start End Sum Average Set Number Start End Sum Average
1(5)
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
. 12
13
14
15(4)
16(1)
17
IB
19
20
1131
1136
1142
1148
1154
1200
1206
1212
1218
1224
1230
1236 '
1242
1248
1254
1305
1306
1312
1318
1324
1135
1141
1147
1153
1159
1205
1211
1217
1223
1229
1235
1241
1247
125.3
1259 -
1305
1311
1317
1323
1329
0
0
0
0
110
0
0
5.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 0
4.6
0
0
0.2
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
.22
23
24
25
26
27 (4)
28 '
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
4H
1330
1336
1342
1348
1354
1400
1406
1335
1341
1347
1353
1359
1405
1409
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
'o
' 0
0
' 0
0.4
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50--
QJ 40
i_
= 30
20-
10-
0-
2 3
'Time, ho.urs
15
-------
TABLE 7C
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date: 9/10/75
Type of Plant:
Lime- and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Outlet Baghouse #3, Stack #1, Run #2
Height of Point of Discharge:
80 -feet
Description of Background:
Sky, blue background t.
Description of Sky:
Clear, 'blue sky
Wind Direction:
East
Color of Plume: v.
. White x
Duration of Observation:
3 hrs.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer #1
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
150 feet
Height of Observation Point:
Ground level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
East
Wind Velocity:
2-5 mph
Detached Plume:
No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Opacity
Time
Opacity
Set Number Start End
Sum
Average Set Number Start End Sum Average
1 (5)
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13.
' 14
15
18
17 (2)
13 (3)
19
20
0819
0824
0830
0836
081)2
0818
0851
0900
0906
0912
0918
0921
0930.'
0936
0912'
0918
O95'l
1015
1018
1021
0823
0829
0835
0811
0817
0853
0859
Q905
0911
0917
0923
0929
0935
0911
09t7
0953
0955
1017
1023
1029
0
0
0
0'
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
0
. o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1030
1036
1012
1018
1051
1100
1106
1112
1118
1035
1011
. 1017
1053
1059
1105
1111
1117
1123
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
o
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50--
10--
30--
20--
10--
0--
Time, hours
16
-------
TABLE ?D
FACILlTY-Martin Marietta' Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date; '9/10/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement ,
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Baghouse i?3 Outlet, Stack HI, Run #2
Height of Point of Discharge:
8-5 ft.
Description of Background:
Blue sky
Description of Sky: .
80/5 clear
Wind Direction:
East
Color of Plume:
White \
Duration of Observation:
3 hrs.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer #2
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
60 ft.
Height of Observation Point:
Ground level
Direction of-Observer from Discharge Point:
Southeast
Wind Velocity:
0-10 mph
Detached Plume:
Mo
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Opacity
Time
Opacity
Set Number Start End Sum Average Set Number Start End . Sum Average
1 (5)
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
. 16
17
13
19
20
0819
0821
0830
0836
0812
0818
0851
0900
0906
0912
0918
0924
0930
0936
0912.
0948
0951
1000
1006
1012
0823
0929
0835'
0811
0817
0853
0859
0905
0911
0917
0923
0929
0935
0911
0917
0953
0959
1005'
1011
1017
0
0
0
0
0
0 '
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
22
23
24'
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 (5)
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1018
1021
1030
1036
10112
1018
1051
1100
1106
1112
1118
1023
1029
1035
1011
1017-
1053
1059
1105
1111
1117
1122
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' 0'
0
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50--
10-
.'30--
20-'
10--
0-
3 1
Time, hours
17
-------
TABLE 7E
FACILITY-Martin Mari.etta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date: 9/10/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Baghouse #3 Outlet, Stack #3, Run #1
Height of Point of Discharge:
80 ft.
Description of Background:
Clear to partly cloudy (Blue to white) sky
Description of Sky: . v
Clear to Partly Cloudy '. ,
Wind Direction:
East
Color of Plume:
White
Duration of Observation:
2 hr. 12 min.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer HI
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
150 ft.
Height of .Observation Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
East
Wind Velocity.
2-5 mph
Detached Plume:
No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY.
Time
Opacity
Time
Opacity
Set Number Start End Sum Average .Set Number Start
End
Sum Average
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13 ...
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
1300
1306
1312
1318
1321
1330
1336
1312
1318
1351
1100
1106
1112
1118
1121
1130
1136
1112
1118
1151
1305
1311
1317
1323 .
1329
1335
13 tl
1317
1353
1359
1105
llll
1117
1123
1129
1135
llll
1117
1153
1159
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 .
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 (1)
29
30
31
32
33
. 34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1500
1506
1512
1518
1521
1530
1536
1512
1505
1511
1517
1523
1529
1535
1511
1517
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50--
-4_>
§10-
QJ
C_
^30-
'S 2°-
Q
O
10--
0-'
Time, hours
18'
-------
TABLE 7F
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date; 9/10/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Outlet Baghouse #3, Stack #3, Run #1
Height of Point of Discharge:
80 ft.
Description of Background:
50$ Clear sky, white and blue background
Description of Sky: .~
Partly cloudy »
Wind Direction:
East
''Color of Plume:
White v
Duration of Observation:
2 hr. 41 min.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer #2
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
90 ft.
Height of Observation Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
Southeast
Wind Velocity:
0-5 mph
Detached Plume:
No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Opacity
Time
Opacity
Set 'Number Start End Sum Average Set Number Start
End
Sum
Average
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
. 3
9
10
IV
12
13 '
14
15
16
17
13
19
20
1300
1306
1312
1318
1324
1330
1336
1312
13^8
1354
1400
1406
1412
1418
1424
1430
1436
1442
1448
1454
1305
1311
1317
1323
1329
1335
13'<1
1347
1353
1359
1405
1411
1417
1423
1429
1435
1441
1447
1453
1459
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 .
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29 .
30
31
32
33 .
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1500
1506
1512
1518
1524
1530
1536
1505
1511
1517
1523
1529
1535
1541
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o.
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50--
30
20-
10--
0--
2 3 4
Time, hours
19
-------
TABLE 70
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Calera, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date: 9/11/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Outlet Baghou.se #3, Stack #3, Run #2
Height of Point of Discharge:
50 ft.
Description of Background:
Blue sky background
Description of Sky: Blue, clear skys;
white background 0908-0951), 1005-
Wind Direction:
. East
Color of Plume:
White
Duration of Observation:
2 hrs. 34 min.
SUMMARY.OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer #1
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
150 ft.
Height of Observation Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
East
1006, 1018-1031
Wind Velocity:
2-5 mph
Detached Plume:
' No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Set Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
n
12 '
13 .
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
Start
0800
0806
0812
0818
0824
0830
0836
0812
0848
0854
0900
0906
0912
0918
0924
0930
0936
0942
0948 '
0954
End
0805
0811
0817
0823
0829
0835
0841
0847
0853
0859
0905
0911
0917
0923
0929
0935
0941
0947
0953
0959
Opaci ty
Sum
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Set Number
21
22
23
24
25
26(5)
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Time Opac
Start
1000
1006
1012
1018
1024
1030
End
1005
1011
1017
1023
1029
1034
Sum
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average
0
0 '
0
0
0
0
Sketch Shovnng How Opacity Varied With Time:
50"
40--
30-
20--
10--
234
Time, hours
20
-------
TABLE 7H
FACILITY-Martin Marietta Lime, Cale'ra, Ala.
Summary of Visible Emissions
Date:, 9/11/75
Type of Plant:
Lime and Cement
Type of Discharge:
Stack
Location of Discharge:
Outlet #3 Baghouse, Stack #3, Run #2
Height of Point of Discharge:
80 ft.
Description of Background:
Blue to White sky.
Description of Sky: .V
95/5 clear
Wind Direction:
East
Color of Plume:
White \
Duration of Observation:
2 hr. 33 min.
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Observer H2
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
90 ft.
.Height of Observation Point:
Ground Level
Direction of Observer from Discharge Point:
Southeast
Wind Velocity:
0-10 mph
Detached Plume:
No
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Time
Set Number
1 (1)
2
3
4
5
6
7
3
9
10
11
12
13 '
14
15
16
17
13
iq
20
Start
0805
0806
0812
0818
0824
0830
0836
0842
0848
08'54
ogoo
0906
0912
0918
0924
0930 .
0936
0942
0948
0954
End
0805
0811
0817
0823
0829
0835
0841
0847
0853
0859
0905
0911
0917
0923
0929
0935
0941
0947
0953
0959
Opacity
Sum
0
0
0
0
35
5
30
0
0
o
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Average
0
0
0
0
1.5
0.2
1.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Set Number
21
22
23
24
25
26(4)
27
28
29
30
31
.32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Time
Start
1000
1006
1012
1018
1024
1030
End
1005
1011
1017
1023
1029
1033
Opacity
Sum
0
0
0
10
0
0
Average
0
0
0
0.4
0
0
Sketch Showing How Opacity Varied With Time:
50-
-t->
§ 40-
30-
20-
10-
0-
-t-
234
Time, hours
21
-------
Table 8. SUMMARY OP PARTICULATE EMISSIONS PROM THE HYDRATOR (METRIC)
rv>
rv>
Run Number
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled - Nm3
Percent Moisture
Average Stack Temp. - °C
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate -
Nm3/min
Percent Isokinetic
Run Time - Minutes
Particulates. - Front half
mg
mg/Nm3
Kg/hr
Particulates - Total
mg
mg/Wm3
Kg/hr
1
9-12-75
1.
79.
-93.
34.
89.
128
278.
260.
0.
322.
301.
0.
07
09
9
18
4
6
4
534
7
6
618
2 .
9-17-75.
1.
75-
93.
44.
99-
128
509.
330.
0.
526.
341.
0.
54
71
3
63
1 .
5
8
886
3
8
915
3
Average
9-17-75
1.
79.
95-
34.
118.
128
980.
680.
1.
. 1025.
711.
1.
4-4
04
0
89
5
4
8
425
2
9
490
1.
77.
94.
37.
'128
589-
424.
0.
624.
451.
1.
35
95
1
90
5
0
948
7
8
008
Percent Impinger Catch
13-6
3-2
4.4
6.0
-------
Table 9- SUMMARY OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM THE HYDRATOR (ENGLISH)
IV)-
OJ
Run Number
Date
Volume of Gas Sampled - dscf
Percent Moisture
Average Stack Temp. - °F
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate -
dscf/min
Percent Isokinetic
Run Time -.Minutes
Particulates - Front half
mg
grains/dscf
Ib/hr
Particulates - Total
mg
grains/dscf
Ib/hr
1
9-12-75
' 37.
79-
201
1207
89.
128
278.
0.
1.
322.
0.
1.
65
09
4
6
1139
179
7
1320
365
2
9-17-75
54
75
200
1576
99
128
509
0
1
526
0
2
52
.71
.- 1
5
.1439
.944
.3
.1487
.008
3
Average
9-17-75
50
79
203
1232
118
128
980
0
3
1025
0
3
.97
.04
5
.4
.2962
.128
.2
.3097
.271
47.
77-
201
1338
128
589-
0.
2.
624.
0.
2.
67
95
5
1847
084
7
1968
215
Percent Impinger Catch
13.6
3-2
4,4
6..0
-------
SECTION III
PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
Limestone consists primarily of calcium carbonate or combina-
tions of.calcium and magnesium carbonate with varying amounts
v
of impurities. 'The most abundant of all sedimentary rocks,
limestone' is found in a variety of consistencies from marble
to chalk. Lime is a calcined or burned form of limestone,
commonly divided into two basic products - quicklime and
hydrated lime. Calcination expels carbon dioxide from the
raw limestone, leaving calcium o.xide (quicklime). With the
addition of water, calcium hydroxide (hydrated lime) is formed.
The basic processes in production are: (1) quarrying the
limestone-raw material; (2) preparing the limestone for kilns
by crushing and sizing; (3) calcining the feed; and (*}) option-
ally processing the.quicklime further by additional crushing .
and sizing and the hydration. The majority of lime is pro-
duced in rotary kilns which can be fired by coal, oil, or gas.
Rotary kilns have the advantages of high production per man-
hour and a uniform product, but require higher capital invest-
ment and have higher unit fuel costs than most vertical kilns.
The Martin Marietta Roberta Lime Plant in Calera, Alabama, was
source tested September 9-12, 1975- The plant has three rotary
kilns. The Number 2 kiln was constructed in 1936, the. Number
1 in 1951, and the Number 3 kiln was constructed in 1955. All '
have nominal design capacities of approximately 528 tons of
. 2 ^
-------
limestone feed per day. Each of 'the kilns is controlled by
an identical baghouse, with the Number 1 and 2 kilns baghouses
built connected. The baghouses went into operation in March
of 1975-
Kiln Number 3, which was source tested by EPA, is 300 feet .
long and 7 feet 6 inches in diameter. There are nine (15 feet
long by 3 feet 9- inches in diameter) planetary coolers at the
product .discharge end' to cool the quicklime and preheat the
combustion gases. There are no stone preheat facilities. The
feed from the limestone crusher is three-fourths to one and
one half inches. At this feed size the capacity of the kiln
is ^80 tons of limestone feed per day. A high-calcium, fairly
hard .stone which has not been washed is used for the limestone
feed.
The plant is run on 100% natural gas when it is available but
during the EPA testing and when natural gas is not available
the fuel used is a low sulfur coal (approximately 1%) which is
ground in a Raymond roller mill and blown into the kiln. Hot
air for the roller mill is taken from the kiln and is further .
preheated by a natural gas flame in the ductwork. The air
preheating makes the coal easier, to grind and ignite. Coal
consumption for the Number 3 kiln is estimated at 0.15 tons
per ton of limestone feed. The sulfur content of .the product
lime is estimated at from 0.0029 to 0.03$.
After leaving the planetary coolers, the lime from the three
'kilns is combined and transported by belt 'conveyor and bucket
elevator to the contact cooler where.it is cooled by direct
air contact. The cooling air is filtered by 'its own baghouse.
The' cooled quicklime is then screened and stored in hoppers
either for- shipment or for use in the hydrator. Shipments are
made both in bulk and in bags. In 197^ one half of the
25
-------
quicklime produced was used for paper and pulp, 19 percent
fo'r steel flux, 10'percent for sewage and-trade waste, and
the rest for water purification, metallurgy, sugar refining.,
and' alkalies.
The exit gas from kiln Number 3 is cooled to 580°F by spraying
atomized water directly Into the end of the kiln. The water
is atomized so that a mud cake will not build up at the
entrance to the kiln. There is a tempering air vent (nor-
mally kept closed) that is used as a backup system for cooling
the'exit gas if .the atomizer fails. A 250 HP fan is located
between the kiln and the baghouse. Any large chips are removed
by dropout upstream for the baghouse fans.
American Air Filer Corporation built the baghouse. It has
six .compartments and is designed so that when maintenance is
necessary it can operate on only five of them without reducing
the kiln production. The bags are made of silicone coated
and graphite finished glass, and are 11 3/4 inches in diameter
and 30 feet 9 inches long. Cleaning of the bags consists of
-/
a 15 second reverse air blast to collapse the bags followed
by a 20 second null period when the dust falls out. The re-
verse air blast occurs every 18 minutes so that it takes 1
hour and 48 minutes for a complete cleaning cycle.
The waste -dust collected from the three baghouses is stored
in a silo and then used in the on site Martin Marietta Cement
Plant.. There is no measure of the waste dust loading from
the Number 3 kiln baghouse, but the total loading for all
three baghouses is approximately 40 tons per day. Any dust
that is spilled, along with spoiled coal, lime and other waste
is disposed of on site in an old quarry.
26-
-------
There -are three ^ foot 3 inch vertical stacks from the bag-
house; each stack serving two compartments. All three stacks
were tested by the EPA contractor with each stack being tested
for particulates twice. Since these tests last at least two
hours and a cleaning cycle takes less than two hours, each
test includes at least one cleaning cycle. During the par-
ticulate tests visible emission data were recorded. Tests
were also performed for sulfur dioxide, carbon mono.xide, and
nitrogen oxides.
Process samples were collected-by the Monsanto test crew.
Samples collected were fuel (coal), product (quicklime), and
baghouse dust. These1 samples are grab samples taken during .
the sulfur dioxide testing.
The operation of the kiln and baghouse was monitored during
the- test and the process data was recorded. These records
are in Appendix F. At 11:05 on Thursday, September 11, 1975,
the Number 3 kiln was shut down. The product elevator came
off its sprocket so that the quicklime could not be trans-
ported to-storage. No testing was underway when the plant
went down. The kiln was put back on line at 12:30 but' testing
was not 'resumed until the next morning. It was discovered
after the first S02 test that the plant was operating on
'natural gas during the night and switching over to coal in the
morning for-the testing. It was unknown whether or not the
kiln sulfur content had stabilized when the field test was
run. For'all other tests, the kiln had been operating on coal
for at. least 3 hours before tests were run.
The process data and conversations with the kiln operator indi-
cate that the kiln and baghouse operated normally during the
tests. The main process data are summarized in Table 10.
27
-------
Table 10. SUMMARY OF LIME KILN OPERATING DATA TAKEN
DURING SAMPLING
Test
1-1
2-2
3-1
3-2
2-3
Date
9/9/75
9/10/75
9/10/75
9/10/75
9/11/75
9/12/75
Limestone.
Feed Rate
(TPH)a .
20
20
20
19
20
-15
Baghouse
Pressure Drop
(iwc)b
1.6-1.8
1.6-1.8
1.6-1.8
1.6
1.4-1.7
1.0-1.1
Baghouse
Inlet
Temp .
op
.395-400
390-400
390-400
400 '
390-395
343-351
Ton per hour
Inches water column
28
-------
The Martin Marietta Lime Hydrator Scrubber was source tested
September 12 and 17, 1975- The test facility.was a clacitic
quicklime atmospheric hydrator. Three 128 minute tests were
performed for particulates in the exit stack. The hydrator
was built in 1955 and the Ducon UW-4 scrubber was added to it
in 1967. The hydrator has a quicklime feed capacity of 18
tons per hour and a 22 ton per hour hydrate production capacity,
Almost 70% of the hydrate produced is sold for use in con-
struction, while 16% is used for sewage and trade waste, 105?
for water purification, and the rest for paper and pulp,
sugar refining, and tanning.
Quicklime of varying sizes is fed to the hydrator. It enters
the pugmill (premixer) and is mixed with water and slurry from
the scrubber by two opposing screws. This mixture then goes
to the seasoning chamber where the .quicklime is hydrated. A
rate retardant is added to the seasoning chamber to control
the high temperatures obtainable in this exothermic reaction.
The offgas from the seasoning chamber is scrubbed in a Ducon
UW-4 dynamic water scrubber with 20 gallons per minute of
water. Gas temperature to. the scrubber is 190-210°F. The
slurry drops directly back into the pugmill.
No visible emission data were recorded. The large steam plume
and the overcast background during particulate testing made it
very difficult to discern visible emissions. Preliminary cal-
culations indicated 78 percent moisture in the exit' gases.
The hydrated lime is taken from the bottom of the reactor to
screens and separators so that the fines and the tailings can
be stored separately. Shipments are made both in bulk and in
bags. Five baghouse collectors and two cyclone collectors
control emissions from loading, sacking, screening, and
29
-------
separating processes in- the lime plant. Visible emissions
were evident from many of these collectors, but no sampling
of these 'emissions was done. On the third particulate test,
the filter had to be changed three times due to excessive
loading, but this did not appear to be abnormal.
According to.the Martin Marietta operator and the EPA process
data, the hydrator was operating normally during the testing.
The process data are given in Appendix F and are summarized
in Table 11. '
Table 11. MARTIN-MARIETTA HYDRATOR PROCESS DATA
Water Water
to to Hydrator
Lime Feedrate Scrubber . Hydrator Temp.
Date (1975) (TPH)a (GPM)b (GPM)b ' (°F)
12 Sept.
17 Sept.
17 Sept..
18
17.. 2
-. 18
20
19
19
13-5
15.2
16.4
206
195
196
Ton per hour
Gallon per minute
30
-------
SECTION IV
LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
Figure 1 is a diagram of the. 3 exhaust stacks' located on the
baghouse which controls the particulate emissions from the
No. 3 lime kiln. There are six compartments in the baghouse
and each stack exhausts two of them. The stacks were arbi-
trarily numbered 1 through 3 with the southern-most stack
being Stack 1. The three identical stacks have a diameter of
1.29 meters {4'3") and-are 3-71 meters (12'2") in length.
The nearest upstream disturbances, which are the ducts from
the compartments forming the stack, are 3-05 meters (2.4 stack
.diameters) from the sampling ports. The nearest downstream
disturbance, the outlet, is 0.66 meter (0.5 stac'k diameter)
from the sampling ports.. The sampling on each stack was per-
formed from a platform which circumscribed one-third of the '
stack. The two 24-point traverses were performed through two
7r6 cm (3 inch) nipples. .
The sampling platforms were 3-4 meters (11 feet) above a walk-
way which extended the length of the baghouse. .The walkway,
which was approximately 80 feet above the ground, could be
reached by using an external stairway. The sampling for
Methods 53 6, 1, and 10 was performed through the ports pro-
vided in each stack.
31
-------
UJ
(V)
r
i-
L
I
I- -
I
0. 66m
3.05m
1.29m
I
I
INLET
Figure 1. Outlets of baghouse' on no. 3 kiln
-------
The inlet to the baghouse is shown in Figure 2. The tapered
rectangular duct, 0.99 meter by 1.52 meters at the sampling
ports, was used to transport the exhaust gases from the fan
to the .manifold system which directed the gases to the various
compartments of the baghouse. A section of scaffold was used
to 'reach the-duct which was 1.83 meters above the floor of
the building which housed the bags. Four 7-6 cm (3 inch)
ports w.ere located in the duct as shown in Figure 2-. -A thermo-
couple and a pressure tap, located in two of the ports, pre-
vented the use of two ports. Since the 2 remaining ports
were.only 3 meters (2.5 stack diameters) from the fan, the
requirements for-Method 1 of the Federal Register could not
be met. The Method 6 testing at the inlet was performed
through one of these ports. An attempt was made to perform
a temperature and velocity traverse on the inlet. The data
from the traverse -was not used to determine flow rates, how-
ever, it is included in Appendix G.
Figure 3 illustrates the exhaust stack of the Ducon wet scrub-
b.er which controls the particulate emissions from the hydrator,
The stack .has a diameter of 0.76 meter (30 inches) and has
5.36 meters (17-6 feet) of straight length. The nearest down-
stream disturbance, a bend in the stack, is 4.2^ meters (5.6
diameters) from the two 10.1 cm (4 inch) ports that were used
for Method 5 sampling. Two 7-6 cm (3 inch) ports were located
0.3 meter (12 inches) below the ports used for the sampling
train. The nearest upstream disturbance, the outlet, was 1.12
meters (1.5 diameters) from the 10.1 cm (*J inch) ports. Two
l6-point traverses were performed during the Method 5 testing
on the hydrator exhaust.. As can be seen in Figure 3, the
sloped roof around the hydrator exhaust caused numerous prob-
lems in preparing a platform to support MRC personnel- and the
sampling equipment.
33
-------
UJ
J=-
t
FROM PAN
RECTANGULAR DUCT 0.99m x I. 52m
t )
o . /
o ' 0.99m \
i )
L
1.
]
ft
83m
BOTTOM OF BAGHOUSE '
r
Figure 2. Inlet to baghouse on no. 3 kiln
-------
e»| o.76m U
Figure 3. Outlet of hydrator
35
-------
SECTION V
SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The sampling of the inlet and outlet of the baghouse and the
hydrator exhaust was done according to the methods of various
Federal Registers (listed in Appendix I). The analyses of
the samples collected were also performed according to Federal
Register methods along with sulfur analysis by ASTM procedures.
The points on each traverse for particulate sampling were
determined from Method 1. For the baghouse, all three stacks
required two 22-point'traverses to meet Method 1 requirements.
The large number of sampling points was a result of the short
length of stack between the sampling ports and the outlet of
the stack. Two l6-point traverses were used on the stack
which exhausted the hydrator emissions. '
The velocity and temperature traverses were performed with
pitot tubes and digital thermometers that -had.been previously
calibrated at the MRC laboratory. The moisture in the bag-
house exhaust was determined by performing a Method 4 test on
Stack 1. For the hydrator, the preliminary moisture, was
determined by assuming the stack gases to be saturated with
water and using a psychrometric chart (wet bulb -. dry bulb
calculation) to find the moisture content of the gas'stream.
These moisture contents were then used in setting the nomograph
for Method 5 testing.
36
-------
The particulate sampling on the kiln exhaust was performed
according to Method 5 requirements. Six runs (2 per stack)
were completed and a seventh was aborted when MRC personnel
discovered a broken U-bend in the impinger system. The' runs
were performed using a nomograph which assumes a pitot tube
coefficient, C , of 0.85- The field isokinetic calculation
was performed using the 0.85 C . However, when the data was
processed in the laboratory, the actual C was used in the
calculations. This resulted in four of the runs being greater
than 110 percent isokinetic.
The particulate sampling on the hydrator exhaust was made
difficult by the high moisture content of the exhaust gases.
The first run was slightly less than isokinetic and an adjust-
ment to the nomograph was made for Run No. 2. "However, during
the third run the moisture content of the gas increased and
resulted in the run being greater than isokinetic. During
all three runs the impingers had to be emptied every 15
minutes and occasionally the silica gel changed because of the
high moisture content of the exhaust gases.
The Method 6 sampling on the exhaust of the lime kiln was per-
formed according to the guidelines of the Federal Register.
The high temperature, positive pressure, and high particulate
concentration at the inlet to the baghouse made sampling .diffi-
cult. The hydrogen peroxide used in the impingers was re-
turned to the laboratory for titration to determine the S02
concentration.
*
The nitrogen oxides sampling was performed over a span of
3 days. Twelve flasks were used the first day with 6 being
used the other 2 days. The absorbing solution was returned
to the laboratory for analysis of nitrogen oxides/
37
-------
The carbon monoxide samples were taken from the Tedlar bag
of exhaust gas used for determining the dry molecular weight
of the stack gas. The bags of integrated stack gas were col-
lected during the Method 5 sampling and analyzed later in the
day with a Beckman Model 86>4 Infrared Analyzer. Calibration
gases of 302, 610, and 913 ppm were used to standardize the
instrument. A small portion of the stack gas was'pulled
through a Drager tube to determine if there was any correlation
between Method 10 and the simple Drager tube method.
The opacity readings were taken according to Method 9 of the
Federal Register. One of the readers was from MRC while the
other was from the EPA. The first two simultaneous runs were
started with one reader observing each stack. .The one Method
5 run was aborted and the two readers continued observing on
the o.ne stack. The two men would read the emissions from the
same stack even when simultaneous Method 5 runs were performed.
No opacity readings were taken on the last Method 5 run on the
baghouse since the readings were low on the previous runs and
there was a shortage of personnel available. No. opacity
readings were taken on the hydrator exhaust because of the
high moisture content of the,exhaust gases and the location
of the stack which was surrounded by taller structures.
Total sulfur "analysis was performed on the lime product and
baghouse dust according to ASTM C25-72. A copy of the method
has been included in Appendix I. The Standard Bromine Method
was used to find the sulfur content of 'the materials which
were collected during each of the sulfur dioxide runs on the
lime kiln.
The sulfur analysis - of the coal was done according to the
procedures of ASTM D271-70. The coal was pulverized and
ignited using the Parr bomb calorimeter method without regard
38
-------
to the heat content. The sulfur content was determined by
the' barium chloride gravimetric method.
39
------- |