REPORT NO. 77-SPP-17
AIR POLLUTION
EMISSION TEST
O
[_H ^H ADOLPH-COORS BREWERY
GOLDEN,/COLORADO
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
-------
EMISSION TESTS
AT
ADOLPH COORS COMPANY
NO. 4 COAL-FIRED STEAM GENERATOR
Project No. 77-SPP-17
Contract No. 68-02-1401
Task No. 33
Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Measurement Branch
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711
Prepared by
York Research Corporation
Western Regional Facility
7100 N. Broadway, Bldg 3A
Denver, Colorado 80221
YRC No. 7-8479-33
July 26, 1977
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES i
ABBREVIATIONS ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 2
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS 2
4.0 PROCEDURES 6
4.1 LOCATION OF SAMPLING PORTS 6
4.2 SAMPLING PROCEDURES 6
4.3 CALIBRATION 11
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 12
APPENDIX
A. CALCULATIONS
B. COMPUTER PRINTOUTS
C. CALCULATION-TABLES
D. FIELD DATA
E. LAB RESULTS
F. CALIBRATION
-------
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table
Description
2-1
2-2
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
Summary of Emission Tests
Percent by Weight
Particulate Summary in English Units
Particulate Summary in Metric Units
Particulate Results Out-of-Stack Plus
In-Stack
Elemental Analysis
Coal Analysis
3
4
13
14
15
16
17
Figure
Description
3-1 Schematic of Process
4.1-1 Location of Sampling Ports
4.2.1-1 EPA Particulate Sampling Train
5
7
8
-------
ABBREVIATIONS
acf Actual Cubic Feet
acfm Actual Cubic Feet per Minute
dcf Dry Cubic Feet
dscf Dry Standard Cubic Feet
dscfm Dry Standard Cubic Feet per Minute
°F Degrees Farenheit
fps Feet per Second
in. Hg Inches of Mercury
in. H20 Inches of Water
Ib Pound
mBTU Million British Thermal Unit
mg Milligram
min Minute
ml Milliliter
ppm Parts per Million
scf Standard Cubic Feet
scfd Standard Cubic Feet Dry
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
York Research Corporation (YRC), at the request of the Emission
Measurement Branch of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), conducted stack testing at the Adolph Coors Company,
Golden, Colorado.
The purpose of the task was twofold. First, emission infor-
mation was desired on a baghouse control system for a low
sulfur coal boiler. Secondly, a comparison was desired be-
tween the proposed in-stack filter sampling, Method 17; and
the out-of-stack filter train, Method 5, upon which emission
regulations are currently based. The facility selected for
this testing is a coal fired boiler equipped with a baghouse
dust control system to remove the particulate from a corner
fired coal burning boiler.
Field testing was performed June 6, 7, and 8, 1977. The
project was coordinated through the following Coors personnel:
Mr. Mike Wallace, Environmental Engineer; Mr. Bob Lang,
Manager of Engineering; and Mr. Dennis Capps, Power Plant
Manager.
Mr. Dennis Holzschuh, Emission Measurement Branch (EMB),
coordinated and observed the field test program. Mr. Reid
Iverson, Industrial Studies Branch (ISB), and Ms. Carol Specht
(ISB) obtained boiler operating data during testing. Mr.
Roger Johnson (YRC) directed the sampling activities. The
following York personnel obtained the field data:
Mr. Paul Wade Test Engineer, Console Operator
Mr. Louis Clark Technical Assistant, Assistant to
Console Operator
Mr. Jim Olsen Test Engineer, Opacity Observer
Mr. Bill Cesearo Technical Assistant, Coal Sampling
-------
Samples were also obtained by Coors test personnel throughout
the sampling program. The Coors testing did not interfere in
any way with the purpose of this project. The Coors tests
were for compliance purposes of the Adolph Coors Company.
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Table 2-1 summarizes the results of the particulate tests and
opacity observations. The "in-stack" refers to the in-stack
filter as per EPA Method 17. The "total" refers to in-stack
plus out-of-stack filter catch and probe wash. The out-of-
stack weight gain fluctuated from 2.1 to 20.3 milligrams.
The -effect of this fluctuation on the resultant emission rate
was an increase of an average of 0.004 Ib/mBTU. This increase
ranged from 0.0007 to 0.0071 Ib/mBTU or 0.7 to 7.1 percent of
the new source performance standard of 0.1 Ib/mBTU.
The emission rates were calculated by "F" factor computations.
The integrated Orsat train for test one developed a leak which
invalidated the oxygen value for test one. The average oxygen
content for tests two and three was used for this computation.
Opacity data was obtained by a certified opacity observer.
No visible emissions were recorded as "N", and less than 5%
opacity was recorded as zero. This data was averaged for
six minute intervals (24 observations), and the resulting
data sets were averaged and reported in Table 2-1. With
the exception of occassional readings of 10%, all readings
were zero (<5%) or N.
The particulate samples were analyzed by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry. Table 2-2 summarizes the percent by weight
of each of six elements and sulfates for the in-stack and out-
of -stack samples. For the elements analyzed, the composition
of the sample appears similar with the exception of magnesium,
sodium, and sulfates. The sodium fraction of the out-of-stack
sample is consistently larger, and the magnesium fraction of
the in-stack sample is consistently larger. The percent sulfate
content of the out-of-stack sample was consistently larger than
the in-stack sample.
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS
Process parameters were monitored by Mr. Reid Iverson and Ms.
Carol Specht of the Industrial Studies Branch. This data is
not included in this report. The process, in general, is a
pulverized coal-fired boiler equipped with a fabric filter
dust collector. Figure 3-1 schematically describes the pro-
cess. Coal is loaded into dual hoppers for subsequent
-------
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TESTS
U)
Test Number
Sample Description
Sample Weight (mg)
In-Stack Total
In-Stack Total
94.6
96.7
70.2
90.5
In-Stack Total
110.1
122.1
Average
In-Stack Total
91.6
103.1
Particulate Concentration
gr/scfd 0.01889 0.01931 0.01376 0.01774 0.02228 0.02871 0.01830 0.02192
rag/nm3 43.22 44.18 31.49 40.60 50.96 65.70 41.89 50.16
Particulate Emission Rate
Ib/mBTU 0.0329 0.0336
g/106 Calories 0.0593 0.0606
0.0245 0.0316
0.0442 0.0569
0.0386 0.0428
0.0695 0.0771
0.0320 0.0360
0.05765 0.0649
Opacity (%)
.6
1.1
.2
-------
TABLE 2-2
PERCENT BY WEIGHT
Test Number
Sodium Potassium Magnesium jEron Titanium Copper Sulfate
1 In-Stack
1 Out-of-Stack
2 In-Stack
2 Out-of-Stack
3 In-Stack
3 Out-of-Stack
0
55
0
5
0
43
.61
.6
.8
.2
.7
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.37
.71
.5
.3
.4
.2
5
3
4
1
3
0
.0
.2
.2
.1
.4
.2
5
8
6
2
7
1
.2
.7
.0
.5
.3
.6
0.2
0.0
- 0.4
0.2
0.3
0.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.04
.4
.03
.07
.03
.007
1.01
12.3
1.03
3.10
1.18
2.32
-------
Stack
Figure 3-1
SCHEMATIC OF PROCESS
Sample
Station
Roof
ID Fan
Baghouse
Bins
Boiler Exhaust
Air Intake
Air
Preheater
Coal Conveyor
Pulverizers
Boiler
-------
pulverization and transportation to the burners. The boiler
is tangentially fired boiler with pulverized coal being fed
into each of four burners. The rated capacity of the boiler
is 250,000 pounds of steam per hour.
The tests were run during normal boiler operations. Soot
blowing was incorporated into the testing cycle during test
three.
4.0 PROCEDURES
The methodology for this sampling program was designed to
meet the specifications in the task order.
4.1 Location of Sampling Ports
Particulate samples were extracted at the outlet of
the fabric filter dust collector. The location of the
sampling ports along with the disturbances upstream
and downstream are described in Figure 4.1-1. The
sampling location is 4.6 diameters downstream from a
bend in the duct (dimension "A" in EPA Method 1), and
1.6 diameters upstream from a bend in the duct (dimension
"B" in EPA Method 1).
4.2 Sampling Procedures
4.2.1 Particulate
The particulate emissions were measured according
to proposed EPA Reference Method 17 modified to
include an EPA Method 5 filter configuration as a
backup filter. In this method, a preliminary
velocity profile was conducted so that a sampling
nozzle of an appropriate diameter could be selected,
The sampling equipment was Research Appliance
Company's STAKSAMPLR as described schematically
in Figure 4.2.1-1.
The in-stack filter was a glass fiber filter
followed by a stainless steel probe and backed up
by a glass fiber filter in a heated sample box.
The gas sample was drawn in through the nozzle,
particulate was removed at the in-stack filter
with the gas stream then passing through the heated
sample probe to a heated filter box. The filter
-------
Figure 4.1-1
LOCATION OF SAMPLING PORTS
14'
('l.7 diameters)
3" ports ,
2.5
1.25^
\/
Sample ports
Floor level
40'
(4.6 diameters)
3" Insulation
H
7'
\/
-
)
\
./
0"
)
\
/
\ A '
-
1
A
10
CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW
ID Fan
SIDE VIEW
-------
EPA PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN
FIGURE 4.2.1-1
14
15
20
CD
1. Sampling Nozzle
2. Sampling Probe
3. Umbilical
4. Thermometer
5. Filter Holder
6. Heater Box
7. Ice Bath
8- In-Stack Filter Holder
9. Untipped Impinger
10. Tipped .Impinger
11. Unitpped Impinger
12. Untipped Impinger
13. Check Valve
14. Vacuum Gauge
16
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
18
Line Shut-off Valve
Vacuum Pump
Pump Adjustment
Dry Gas Meter
Inclined Manometer
Calibrated Orifice
Pitot Tube
Pyrometer
Thermocouple
19
-------
out of the stack was maintained at a temperature
of 320°F, +20°F, to remove any remaining particulate
matter from the gas sample. The gas then flowed
through an ice-cooled impinger train and silica
gel which quantitatively removed all water from
the gas stream. The gas then flowed through a
leakless pump, dry test meter, and calibrated
orifice. The dry test meter integrated the total
volume sampled while the orifice pressure differ-
ential was monitored and adjusted to maintain
isokinetic sampling.
At the conclusion of the test, the sampling train
was leak checked at the nozzle with a 15 inch
mercury vacuum. The probe and filter assembly
were carefully removed to the sample recovery
area. The weight gain in the first three impingers
was measured, and the contents of the impingers
discarded. The silica gel was weighed on a triple
beam balance with the weight gain recorded. The
filter was removed from the in-stack filter holder,
placed in a petri dish, sealed with plastic tape,
and labeled. All loose particulate matter and
acetone washings prior to the in-stack filter were
collected and placed in a glass sample bottle with
a Teflon liner in the cap. The out-of-stack filter
was also removed from the holder, placed in a petri
dish, sealed with plastic tape, and labeled. A
probe brush and/or rubber policeman was used to
remove particulates which adhered to the walls of
the probe and glassware. The particulate matter
which was collected after the in-stack filter was
placed in a separate sample bottle, sealed with
plastic tape, labeled, and placed with the other
samples.
Samples were labeled with York three part labels
as well as labels provided by the Emission Measure-
ment Branch of the EPA. Coal samples were analyzed
and forwarded to the Emission Measurement Branch.
Particulate samples were analyzed gravimetrically,
then analyzed by AA spectrophotometry. The AA
procedure consumes the sample in the analysis.
4.2.2 Laboratory Analysis
In the laboratory the filter was transferred from
the sample container, desiccated and dried to a
constant weight. The acetone washings were trans-
ferred to a tared beaker, evaporated to dryness
-------
desiccated and dried to a constant weight. An
acetone blank, obtained from the wash containers
during sample recovery in the field, was analyzed
as the acetone wash samples.
After the gravimetric determination had been made,
the particulate matter was digested with hydro-
chloric acid and analyzed by atomic absorption
spectroscopy. The in-stack and out-of-stack
particulate samples plus a blank in-stack and out-
of-stack filter and an acetone blank were analyzed
for sodium, potassium, magnesium, iron, titanium,
and copper. Sulfates were determined colorimetrically,
4.2.3 Traversing
A preliminary traverse of the duct for velocity and
temperature was conducted before particulate sampling
began. Additional traverses of velocity and
temperature were conducted during the particulate
sampling as required by the EPA Reference Method 17.
Samples were extracted from four ports with eight
points per port for a total of 32 points. Sampling
time was four minutes per point for a total sample
time of 128 minutes. The Appendix contains the
field data.
4.2.4 Molecular Weight Determination
Stack gas samples were withdrawn through a stain-
less steel tube attached to the particulate sampling
probe, through a condenser, diaphragm pump, rotameter,
and into a tedlar bag. An integrated sample over
the entire test was collected by adjusting the
rotameter to extract a proportional volume of gas
at each point tested. At the conclusion of the
test, three Orsat determinations were run on each
bag to determine the carbon dioxide and oxygen
content of the gas stream. The gas analysis data
sheets are included in the Appendix.
4.2.5 Moisture
Moisture was measured during each of the particulate
runs according to the EPA Reference Method 17. The
preliminary moisture was estimated. The results of
each particulate run was used for subsequent moisture
estimates.
10
-------
4.2.6 Opacity
Opacity was read according to EPA Reference Method 9
Mr. James Olsen read the opacity during each run.
Observations began at least one half hour prior to
the test and continued one half hour after each
test. Mr. Olsen was recertified on April 5, 1977,
by the Colorado Department of Health.
4.2.7 Coal Sampling
Pulverized coal samples were obtained ten minutes
before the start of the test run and at half hour
intervals until the test run was completed. The
individual samples were combined to obtain a
composite sample for thecoal burned during the
test. A coal sampling device provided by Coors
was used to collect the samples out of two ports
on each of four pulverized coal streams. An
ultimate analysis was conducted on the coal for
moisture, ash, sulfur, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen,
nitrogen, and the gross heat value for each test
run. ASTM Method D3176-74 was used for the
ultimate analysis of the coal.
4.3 Calibration
4.3.1 Pitot Tube
The "S"-type pitot tube used for the test was
calibrated against a standard type pitot tube
in a wind tunnel prior to the test. The calibra-
tion data is included in the Appendix.
4.3.2 Particulate Sampling Equipment
The orifice and dry test meter were calibrated
prior to the field test with documentation available
at the time of testing. The dry test meter and
orifice calibration data are included in the
Appendix.
4.3.3 Temperature Sensor
The thermocouple used for measuring the stack
temperature was calibrated in boiling water and
in the ambient air against a liquid thermometer.
The calibration data are included in the Appendix.
11
-------
5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Tables 5-1 and 5-2 summarize the results of in-stack particulate
tests in English and Metric units respectively. The "partial"
refers to in-stack filter only. "Total" refers to in-stack
filter plus acetone washes. Table 5-3 summarizes the out-of-
stack plus in-stack results. Table 5-4 summarizes the mass in
milligrams per sample of six elements and sulfates. Table 5-5
summarizes the ultimate analysis of the coal samples.
In general, testing went smoothly with the exception of a leak
in the integrated Orsat sample train during test one. The
cause of the leak was determined and repaired, and subsequent
runs proceeded without difficulty. The average of test two
and test three was used for computational purposes whenever
Orsat data was needed.
The temperature of the out-of-stack filter was maintained at
32QOF, +20°F, for all tests. The temperature was monitored
at a temperature well in a 90° elbow immediately following
the filter holder.
Visually, the particulate samples appeared very similar.
Analytically, the results point out a tenfold increase of
weight on the out-of-stack filter from test one to test two.
The out-of-stack filter catch for test three is equal to the
average of the first two tests. There were no deviations from
standard sampling and sample recovery procedures to account for
this difference of in-stack vs. out-of-stack particulate con-
centrations. Soot blowing occurred during test three for the
first hour of the test. Test three reflects an overall increase
of particulate sample weight of about 25%. The emission rate
for test three was still well below the new source performance
standard for particulate material.
The Appendix to this report contains the computational formulas
as well as the calculation forms for non-computerized calcula-
tions. Point isokinetics were computed and are included in
the Appendix of this report.
12
-------
.'TABLE 5-1
''. '
.YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION.
3NE RESEARCH DRIVE, STAMFORD, C3NNECTICUT 06906
CLIENT: EPA . ' '^ ' ' ' \
HNIT TESTED: 33ILER 4 -.-.'
J03 NUMBER: 7-3479-23
"ARTICULATE SUMMARY- 'IN- ENGLISH -.UNITS
)ESCRIPT I3N
UNITS
GENERAL-' dATA - ".' . :-
DATE .'3F. RU-N '. ' , . -
3AR3METRIC PRESSURE" I'M- KG- "
STACK ^RESSURE," A3S- IN-HG
STACK AREA ' . ' 'SO.. FT
NET TIME' 3F RU'N -'MIM-
^ SRC ENT IS 3 X I NET 1C, . '
GAS DATA - . ^ ^
A''G STACK GAS VELOCITY FPS "
A7G STACK T SMPERATURE" DEG . F
ACTUAL STACK FL3WRATE ACFM '
3TK FLSURA'I'E, DRY, STD. DSCFM
H3LECULAR './T-DRY 5TX GAS -
MOLECULAR UT-STK GAS
>13LE FRACTIJ.N DRY GAS ; '
GAS 'AHALYS IS '(DRY PERCENT 3A5 I
CAR33N DI3KIDE. x ~"~~ ; .
^ . '. ,: H. '.'"}
1 . CAR' 3 ON M^mxiDE
NITP.SGEN "
MOISTURE 3Y -73L ' , -
SAMPLE COLLECT I3N DATA
T3TAL H23 COLLECTED ' L3 2
GRAINS f*?* ACF ' \
BOUNDS ^ER HOUR
"'OUNDS °ER MBTU
'JUN 7,- 7 7
---. --24-55
24". 60
70-00
' 123.0
100.1
"
.43.007,
355.0'
130529.
' 35877..
30'. 4 4
29.06
0.389'
S) . '
- - 14-1
4-5
'J
31-4
1 1% 1
) 202.5^
-? - 6 0
104.71
77. 14
133-5 '
1-363
72-30.
94.50
0-01443
>. 0 1 223
0-00635
10-62
0-0251
,
0.01 339
0-01507
0-'0039'3'
. 13-90
0-0329
'
JUN 3,77
.24 .91'
"24V95
70.00
125-0.
- 100-7
1 43.060
: 35£-0;
. 130350.
'35945.
30.46
2 9-- 04
0 - 33-6
1 4 2
4.6
0.
81'i'2
11.4
21,2. 6
1 0 -'0 3
'105.34
. 73-57
133-7
' 1--3S3
50 -40
70 -SO
0-01 134
0-01000
0-00559
-3-32
0-0211
2.01376'
t .0.01 I 53
0-00551
- - 10-25
0-0245
JVN >3,77
2 4 - 9 1
24.96
70-00
,128.0
'101.3
'
'- 4 1 - 3,0 3
^ '355.0
175574.
-S3716.
33.42
'-23-91
0- 379
24.0
4 . 4
0-
' ' ' 3 I 3
12-1
221 .3
10-45
103-93
75--- 14
145-3
1- . 7 5 5
' ' S2tSO
1 1 0 . '! 0
.
,Q.O'l575
0.01435
0-00799
12 -02
0-0277
'.
0-0222 7
0-01909
0-01062
'15-98
-0386
*
100-7.
4 2 - S.2.3
355-0
>7901S.
.- '05512.
-
14-1.
'-= * 3
6-
31-4
11.5
<
. -
-
7! .33
91-63
0-31434
- . 0- Jl 22 1
0. » u 3 5 :J o
, 10-4.9
3-0246
3-01330
0-01560
3-00374
13-38
0-0320
13
-------
. TABLE 5-2 ,
' Y3RK RESEARCH, C3RP3RATI3N - " J03 NUM3E7.: 7-34 79-33
2NE .RESEARCH DRIVE*- STAMFORD* CONNECT ICUT 05906. ^ '\ . , '
CLI.EMT: EPA ' - " . ' . ' ' . \- .- '
PLANT L3CATI3.M: C00R3 ' . .,-''"
UMIT TESTED: 33ILER ,4 ' - . - ' ' _
s: . -- v. ..; -. , .. x , ~- : . A
?{ARTICULATE" SUMMARY. I.NI 'METRIC UNITS' '
" . " .1 '
t "
DESCRIPT I3°-I .-- UMITS. '.
GEMERAL DATA
'DATE 0F RUM . '. . / " -
3AR3METRIC PRESSURE MM-HG -
; STACK oRE.StSURE* A33'.. MM.HGr. \.
STACK AREA : - ' -M2
MET' TIME, >3F' RUN . ' ' MIM
PERCENT IS3KIMETIC . '' ' .. ' ''. "
GAS DATA ' - '.'.
A7G) STACK GAS 7EL0CITY.' M/3 !" .
A7G STACK "T EMPERATURE DEG-C-
ACTUAL STACK~.FL2UR.ATE AM3/M
STK FL3I-.'RATE*b?.Y*STD DMM3/M
M3LECULAR WT-DRY'STX JG'AS
MOLECULAR' WT-STK GAS - "
M'3L£ _FRACT I 3M DRY . GAS ' .
GAS ANAL YS -IS CD?~Y P'ERCEMT 3AS'I3
CAR30M DIOXIDE/-" '
3XYGEN .'.''
- CAR3 G M M 3 M 3X I D E' '" ^ -!
;JITR3,GE>J- , . '
M3ISTURE 3Y 73L ; '
SAMPLE C3LLECTI.3W DATA
TOTAL H23 COLLECTED ML
73L H23 7APOR-STD C-3MD MM3
/3L DRV GAS -METER C3ND .DM3
,73L DRY'GAS-STD C3M-D DMM3 "" -
A7G GAS METER TEMP DEG.C
A7G Q'RIF' P^ES D30P MM.H20.1
? ARTICULATE U E IGHT DATA
MET './EIGHT PARTIAL. ' :MG
.NET 7EIGHT-T3T^L ' _ MG
P ARTICULATE E MISS! 3 MS
"J-"5'r IAL
MG/ .iJRMALIZSD CU-METERS
. MG/;M3RM. CU-^,312^ C02
.MG/ ACTUAL' CU-. METERS
I' I LOGRAMS /H3UR
- "G/106 CALORIES '" " .
T3TAL '. ------
MG/M'3RM:^LIZED C'U .INTERS '
I'j/:j'3RM. CU.M 312" C32
MG /ACT UAL CU- METERS
' G/106 CALORIES
/
[.i
'" ,1
JUM 77.77
623.57
5'24..88
" 6.503
Iv2 P « 0
100. i
13. 108.
179.4
51 15.
. 2432.
3t>.44.
29.06 -
"0.859"
)
1'4 . 1
4.5
- '' . 0 .
' 81-4
M.I -.
"2 Q? 5 ^
0-27 .
P.. 97
2 - 1, 3
55-4
- 47. '3 15
72. .30
94.50
33.03-
23.11
. 15-.70
4.32
0- 04529
1 r
' 43-22
35-73
20-5 5
5-31
0. 05926
2 ^
N.
'JUM. 3*77
632.71'
- 634.02
5.503'
1.23-0
'. : .100.7
13. 125.
17 9» -4
5 f 2 1
, 2452-
" . -30.46
. 29.04
0.336
14.2-
- 4.6
o. .
S 1 . 2
11.4
21 2- 5
0-29
'3. 00
2-22
59.3
. 47-323.
. . 60.40
70.2'i
' '7 0-9
22 . 3«
. . 13-02
4.- 00
; 0.^03800'
31.49'
.^ / f «
i O . Q 1
15.1/4
_ii» 35
'0.04416
- ^' i
3 '
"j
' JUil 8-* 77
532.71
' ' 534.02
V6'.503'
123-0
ION 3.
1 2 « 74 2
179.4
4972- '
. ' - 2371 -
-' -30-42
' - 28-91-
^ 0.579'
1; 4 . 0
4.4
- 0
S 1 . 5
- " 1 2 ... 1
221 0
0.30
2-94
.2.15
-53.1.
44-902
?2 « 30
1 1 O^i 1 0
33-33
32-35
15.27
5.45
."0.05228
53-95
43 53 -
2 .'4 . 3 3
7. .25
0.06952
A7ERAGE ^
rop.7 -
' V
12.992 -
' -179.4 '
5069. '
. ' 2421.
*'
"^
.14-1 .
.4 .^5
. o. .
31 -4-
' 11.5
V
X
7 1 . 63
'91- 5'3
32.3 2
- 27.75
15-57
4- 75
2. 045/19_
x .-';!."'?'
35 59
i "j . O C
O.'057?5
.14
-------
TABLE 5-3
PARTICULATE RESULTS
OUT-OF-STACK PLUS IN-STACK
sst Number
i-Stack Total Wt.
i-Stack + Out-of-
Stack Total Wt.
i-Stack + Out-of-Stack
English:
Grains/scfd 0
Grains/acf 0
Ib/hour
Ib/mBTU
Metric:
mg/nrn^
rng/am-^
kilogram/hour
1
94.6
96.7
Results
.01931
.00918
14.21
0.0336
44.18
21.01
6.45
2
70.2
90.5
0.01774
0.00852
13.21
0.0316
40.60
19.51
5.99
3
110.1
122.1
0.02470
0.01178
20.60
0.0428
56.51
26.95
8.04
Avg.
91.63
.103.1
0.0206
0.00983
16.01
0.0360
47.10
22.49
6.83
kilogram/106
calorie
0.0606
0.0569
0.0771
0.0649
15
-------
TABLE 5-4
ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS
TEST
NO.
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
Blank
Blank
YRC
SAMPLE SAMPLE
TYPE
In-Stack Filter
Acetone Wash
In-Stack
Out-of-Stack
Filter
Acetone Probe
Wash
In-Stack Filter
Acetone Wash
In-Stack
Out-of-Stack
Filter
. Acetone Probe
Wash
In-Stack Filter
Acetone Wash
In-Stack
Out-of-Stack
Filter
Acetone Probe
Wash
In-Stack Filter
Out-of-Stack
NO.
14011
14012
14014
14013
14016
14017
14018
14019
14021
14022
14023
14024
60673
60674
WT.GAIN
TOTAL
72.3
22.3
1.9
2.5
60.4
9.8
2.5
20.1
82.8
27.3
5.5
9.3
0.0
0.0
SODIUM
MG
0.750
0.135
2.775
0.110
0.775
0.093
2.625
0.155
0.950
0.165
2.175
0.078
0.258
1.650
POTASSIUM
MG
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
375
035
058
028
375
025
080
043
450
060
065
025
048
053
MAGNESIUM
MG
4.
0.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
3.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
160
563
206
005
690
294
156
213
313
463
106
063
094
094
IRON TITANIUM
MG MG
4
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
.190 0.230
.730
.043 0.025
.213
.810 0.275
.356 0.038
.056
.525 0.038
.000 0.338
.940
.069
.200
.031 0.025
.030
COPPER
MG
0.008
0.034
-
0.009
0.008
0.015
-
0.014
0.010
0.028
0.005
0.004
0.003
-
SULFATE
MG
0.88
0.30
0.25
0.09
0.86
0.09
0.40
0.31
1.21
0.31
0.23
0.14
0.17
Filter
Blank Acetone
14015
2.3
0.068
0.018
0.050
0.044
0.08
Note: "-" Means non-detectable.
-------
TABLE 5-5
COAL ANALYSIS
TEST COAL ANALYSIS, DRY BASIS
NO. %H %C_ %S_ %N %0 %ASH BTU/LBM
1 4.32 64.00 0.57 1.46 17.89 11.76 11,058
2 4.69 62.96 0.54 1.45 19.58 10.78 10,771
3 4.56 65.02 0.47 1.45 20.40 8.10 11,290
17
-------
Prepared by:
R. Roger
Project Director^
Approved by:
Arthur E. Hudson
Manager, Western Operations
------- |