&EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park NC 27711 EMB Report 80-BRK-5 October 1980 Air Building Brick and Structural Clay Wood Fired Brick Kiln Emission Test Report Chatham Brick and Tile Company Gulf, North Carolina ------- PARTICLE SIZING OF EMISSIONS FROM A SAWDUST-FIRED BRICK KILN, CHATHAM BRICK AND TILE COMPANY, GULF, NORTH CAROLINA by Mark D. Hansen FINAL REPORT October 1980 EPA Contract No. 68-02-2814, Work Assignment No. 42 MRI Project No. 4468-L(42) For Environmental Protection Agency Emission Measurement Branch Emission Standards and Engineering Division MD-13 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 Attn: Mr. J. E. McCarley ------- PREFACE The work reported herein was conducted by personnel from Midwest Research Institute (MRI), Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. (EEA), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The scope of work issued under EPA Contract No. 68-02-2814, Work As- signment No. 42, was under the supervision of Dr. H. Kendall Wilcox, MRI Manager, Field Programs Section. Mr. Mark D. Hansen served as Field Task Leader and was assisted in the field by Mr. George R. Cobb. Messrs. Mark D. Hansen and George R. Cobb were responsible for summarizing the test data in this report. Mr. Armando Sarasua of EEA was responsible for monitoring the process operations during the testing program. EEA personnel were also responsible for writing the Process Description and Operation Section (Section 3) of this report. Members of the Chatham Brick and Tile Company, Gulf, North Carolina, whose assistance and guidance contributed greatly to the success of the test program, include Mr. Harold Stewart, Plant Manager, and Mr. Leonard Gunter, Assistant Plant Manager. Mr. Frank R. Clay, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emis- sion Measurement Branch, EPA, served as Technical Manager and was responsi- ble for coordinating the emission test program. Sincerely, Ken Wilcox, Head Field Programs Section Approved for: MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE M. P. Schrag, Director Environmental Systems Department October 1980 111 ------- CONTENTS Figures vi Tables vii 1. Introduction 1 2. Summary of Test Results 4 Carbon dioxide emission test data 4 Particle size distribution test data 4 3. Process Description and Operation 10 Process Description 10 Process Operations 12 4. Location of Sampling Points 13 Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack sampling locations 13 Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) kiln exhaust stack sampling locations 19 Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) and Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) waste heat exhaust stack sampling locations 19 5. Sampling and Analytical Procedures 20 Federal Register methods 20 EPA Method 1 - sample and velocity traverses for stationary sources 20 EPA Method 2 - determination of stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate (type S pitot tube).... 20 EPA Method 3 - gas analysis for carbon dioxide, oxygen, excess air, and dry molecular weight. ... 20 EPA Method 4 - determination of moisture content in stack gases 21 Particle size distribution tests 21 6. Appendices 24 A. Andersen Cascade Impactor particle size distribution test data A-l B. Carbon dioxide, oxygen, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen emission test data B-l C. Project participants C-l D. Field sampling task logs D-l E. Sampling train calibration data E-l F. Scope of work F-l ------- FIGURES Number Page 2-1 Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor particle size results: particulate diameter versus percent weight less/greater than stated size - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack, run Nos. 1 and 2 8 2-2 Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor particle size results: differential mass-loading (dM/d Log D) versus particulate diameter - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack, run Nos. 1 and 2 9 3-1 Chatham Brick and Tile Company, process flow diagram 11 4-1 Overview of the Chatham Brick and Tile Company's Gulf, North Carolina, kiln building complex 14 4-2 Chatham Brick and Tile Company flowsheet 15 4-3 Schematic of sampling port locations used to sample the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack 16 4-4 Sampling point locations at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack 17 5-1 Schematic illustration of the Andersen Sampling System in sampling position 22 VI ------- TABLES Number Page 1-1 Summary Log for Sampling, August 19, 1980 3 2-1 Average Net Volume (Percent) CO , 0 , CO, and N Determined by Orsat Analysis from Harrop Kilns Nos. 1 and 2 5 2-2 Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor Sampling Parameters and Results - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (East) Kiln Exhaust Stack, Run No. 1 2-3 Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor Sampling Parameters and Results - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (East) Kiln Exhaust Stack, Run No. 2 4-1 Harrop Kiln No. 2 (East) Kiln Exhaust Stack Sampling Point Locations 18 vn ------- SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION Section III of the Clean Air Act of 1970 charges the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the responsibility of establishing federal standards of performance for new stationary sources which may significantly contribute to air pollution. When promulgated, these standards of performance for new stationary sources are to reflect the degree of emission limitation achievable through application of the best demonstrated emission control technology. EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) selected the Chatham Brick and Tile Company at Gulf, North Carolina, as a site for an emission test program. The test program was designed to provide a por- tion of the emission data base required for new source performance standards (NSPS) for the process associated with the production of clay bricks. The Chatham Brick and Tile Company's manufacturing plant produces clay bricks for the building brick industry. The clay bricks are fired in two sawdust- fired kilns (Harrop Kilns Nos. 1 and 2). The two kilns are operated 24-hr a day and 7 days a week. The two kilns are located in one building and are parallel to each other. The purpose of the testing program was to obtain particle size distribu- tion data and C0_ measurements of the kiln emissions. Results of measurements contained in this report were performed during times of normal operation of the production process. Emissions sampling was conducted on the kiln exhaust stack and waste heat exhaust stack associated with each of the two Harrop Kilns. The pro- duction rate of fired bricks from each of the two kilns during sampling was approximately 5 tons/hr; or 10 tons/hr total. Midwest Research Institute's (MRI's) Work Assignment No. 42 from EPA required one particle size distribution test from each of the two kiln ex- haust stacks. Information from Chatham Brick and Tile Company personnel prior to the initiation of testing indicated that one of the two kilns was not fired exclusively with sawdust. The Harrop Kiln No. 1 on the west side of the kiln building was periodically "flashed" with natural gas in conjunc- tion with the sawdust fuel. The east kiln (Harrop Kiln No. 2) was exclusively sawdust-fired during the field test. In concurrence with the EPA technical manager, the particle size distribution test on the Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west side) kiln exhaust stack was omitted. Instead, two particle size distribu- tion tests were conducted on the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east side) kiln exhaust stack. Each test was conducted at a different traverse point location. ------- The measurement program was conducted August 19, 1980. A copy of MRI's Work Assignmnt and Technical Directives is included in Appendix F. The sequence of events performed during this sampling program are pre- sented in Table 1-1 (Summary Log for Sampling Matrix). The following sections of this report cover the summary of results (Sec- tion 2), process description and operation (Section 3), location of sampling points (Section 4), sampling and analytical procedures (Section 5), and ap- pendices (Section 6). The appendices present copies of all field and labora- tory data sheets, computer reduction of test data, and results of laboratory analyses. ------- TABLE 1-1. SUMMARY LOG FOR SAMPLING, AUGUST 19, 1980 Andersen particle size Production distribution - Harrop CO, emissions CO. emissions CO, emissions CO, emissions Time rate . Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) (24-hr clock) (tons/hr) exhaust stack kiln exhaust stack kiln exhaust stack waste heat exhaust stack waste heat exhaust stack 1630 NAb Begin Test No. 1 1645 1700 1730 1830 1940 2015 2030 2045 2110 2200 2215 2230 1 Stop Test No. 1 Begin Test No. 2 Stop Test No. 2 Begin Test No. 1 Stop Test No. 1 Begin Test No. 2 Begin Test No. 1 Begin Test No. 1 Stop Test No. 1 Stop Test No. 1 Begin Test No. 2 Begin Test No. 2 Stop Test No. 2 Stop Test No. 2 Stop Test No. 2 Begin Test No. 1 Stop Test No. 1 Begin Test No. 2 Stop Test No. 2 Production rate includes only the east kiln. Data not available. ------- SECTION 2 SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS The results of the testing program conducted at Chatham Brick and Tile Company are presented in Tables 2-1 through 2-3. CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSION TEST DATA The results of the eight C0? emission tests are presented in Table 2-1. The percent 0_, CO, and N_, and 3ry molecular weight (Ib/lb-mole) of the stack gas are also presented. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST DATA The results of the two particle size distribution tests at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack have been summarized in Tables 2-2 and 2-3. The results are shown graphically in Figures 2-1 and 2-2. ------- TABLE 2-1. AVERAGE NET VOLUME (PERCENT) C02, 02, CO, AND N£ DETERMINED BY ORSAT ANALYSIS FROM HARROP KILNS NOS. 1 AND 2 Test location Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) kiln exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) kiln exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) waste heat exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) waste heat exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) waste heat exhaust stack Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) waste heat exhaust stack Run number and time 1 (1630-1645) 2 (1645-1700) 1 (2015-2030) 2 (2030-2045) 1 (2015-2030) 2 (2030-2045) 1 (2200-2215) 2 (2215-2230) Average net volume (percent) Dry molecular weight CO 0 CO N of stack gas (lb/lb-mole) 2.37 17.9 0 79.7 29.087 2.5 17.03 0 80.47 29.082 2.6 14.8 0 82.6 29.008 1.67 16.07 0.6 81.67 28.913 0.7 17.0 0.267 82.07 28.803 0.433 16.97 0.4 82.2 28.749 0.467 16.167 0 83.37 28.722 0.467 17.4 0 82.13 28.773 Percents are an average of three readings. ------- TABLE 2-2. ANDERSEN MARK III CASCADE IMPACTOR SAMPLING PARAMETERS AND RESULTS - HARROP KILN NO. 2 (EAST) KILN EXHAUST STACK, RUN NO. 1 INPUT DATA FOR FILE RUN1 TEST DATE - 8-19-80 % WATER= 7.3 PROJECT * - 4468-1.42 7. CARBON DIOXIDE= 2.37 TEST SITE - CHATHAM BRICK &TILE CO. 7. CARBON MONOXIDE= 0 RUN ID - ONE X OXYGEN= 17.9 ANDERSEN IMPACTOR STACK TEMPERATURE= 315.0 DEGREES F. SAMPLING TIME= 60.0 MIN. BAR. PRESSURE= 29.70 INCHES HG PRESSURE DROP= 0.00 INCHES HG STATIC PRESSURE= -0.34 INCHES H20 SAMPLER TEMP. = 315.0 DEGREES F. AVE. DELTA P= 0.5 INCHES H20 PARTICLE DENS= 1 PITOT COEFF.= .84 METER VDL.= 38.345 CUBIC FEET METER TEMP.= 101.5 DEGREES F. DELTA H= 1.3 INCHES H20 PROBE DIA.= 0.25 INCHES . CALCULATED RESULTS SAMPLE VOL.-DRY STD.= 35.893 CU. FT. DRY MOLECULAR WT.= 29.10 SAMPLE VOL.-WET STD.= 38.719 CU. FT. WET MOLECULAR WT.= 28.29 STACK VELOCITY= 2777.0 FT./MIN. 7. ISOKINETIC= 100.9 NOZZLE VELOCITY= 2802.7 FT./MIN. SAMPLING RATE-ACTUAL= 0.955 CU. FT/MIN LOADING= .004289 GRAIN/SCF WEIGHT CORRECTION= 0.080 MG. LOADING(DRY>= .004626 GRAIN/SCF MASS COLLECTED= 10.760 MG. STAGE * 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FILTER FINAL WT 458.64 446.67 453.96 442.09 452.85 453.66 450.21 437.37 570.05 (MG) TARE WT 456.98 444.55 451.42 440.57 452.39 453.31 449.95 437.04 567.81 (MG) NET WT 1.58 (MG) CORRECTED FRACTION 14.68 •/. OF TOTAL CUH. 7. 14.68 WITH FILTER FRACTION 18.37 7. WITHOUT FILTER CUM. 7. 18.37 WITHOUT FILTER JET VEL. 74 (CM/SEC) D50 SIZE 11.57 (MICRONS) DM/DLOGD (GRAINS/SCF) GEO MEAN (MICRONS) PARTICLE COUNT 2.04 18.96 33.64 23.72 42.09 137 7.21 0.00396 9.13 5.4D+04 2.46 22.86 56.51 28.60 70.70 229 4.87 0.00577 5.93 1.2D+05 1.44 13.38 69.89 16.74 87.44 378 3.31 0.00341 4.02 1.1D+05 i 0.38 3.53 73. .42 4.42 91.86 , 673 2.11 0.00078 2.64 3.6D+04 0.27 2.51 75.93 3.14 95.00 1628 1.04 0.00035 1.48 2.9D+04 0.18 1.67 77.60 2.09 97.09 2966 0.63 0.00033 0.81 5.0D+04 0.25 2.32 79.93 2.91 100.00 5932 0.41 0.00055 0.51 1.3D+05 2.16 20.07 100.00 <0.41 <0.51 ------- TABLE 2-3. ANDERSEN MARK III CASCADE IMPACTOR SAMPLING PARAMETERS AND RESULTS - HARROP KILN NO. 2 (EAST) KILN EXHAUST STACK, RUN NO. 2 INPUT DATA FOR FILE RUN2 TEST DATE - 8-19-80 PROJECT * - 4468-L42 TEST SITE - CHATHAM BRICK &TILE CO. RUN ID - TWO % WATER= . 7.3 7. CARBON DIOXIDE= 2.37 % CARBON MONOXIDE" 0 X OXYGEN= 17.9 ANDERSEN IMPACTOR STACK TEMPERATURE= 317.0 DEGREES F. BAR, PRESSURE= STATIC PRESSURE= AVE. DELTA f= PITOT COEFF.= METER TEMP,= PROBE DIA.= 29.70 INCHES HG -0.34 INCHES HZC 0.5 INCHES H20 .84 100.5 DEGREES F. 0.25 INCHES SAMPLING TIME= PRESSURE DROP= SAMPLER TEMP. = PARTICLE DENS= METER VOL.= DELTA H= 90.0 MIN. 0.00 INCHES HG 317.0 DEGREES F. 1 58.230 CUBIC FEET 1.1 INCHES H20 SAMPLE VOL.-DRY STD.= SAMPLE VOL.-WET STD.= STACK VELOCITY= NOZZLE VELOCITY= CALCULATED RESULTS 54.614 CU. FT. DRY MOLECULAR WT.= 29.10 58.915 CU. FT. WET MOLECULAR WT.= 28.29 2841.7 FT./MIN. 7. ISOKINETIC= 100.3 2850.4 FT./MIN. SAMPLING RATE-ACTUAL= 0,972 CU. FT/MIN LOADING= LOADING ( DRY )= STAGE * 0 FINAL WT 443.53 (MG) TARE WT 441.40 (MG) NET WT 2.05 (MG) CORRECTED FRACTION 11.49 X OF TOTAL CUM. % 11.49 WITH FILTER FRACTION 15.48 '/. WITHOUT FILTER CUM. X 15.48 WITHOUT FILTER JET VEL. 75 (CM/SEC) DSC SIZE 11.48 (MICRONS) DM/DLOGD (GRAINS/SCF) GEO MEAN (MICRONS) PARTICLE COUNT .004673 GRAIN/SCF WEIGHT CORRECTION= 0. .005041 GRAIN/SCF MASS COLLECTED= 1 425.11 423.01 2, 02 11.32 22.81 15.26 30.74 140 7.15 0.00258 9.06 3.5D+04 2 ' 447.49 443.45 3.96 22.20 45.01 29.91 60.65 233 4.84 0.00611 5.88 1.3D+05 3 429.15 427.18 1.89 10.59 55.61 14.28 74.92 385 3.28 0.00294 3.99 9.1D+04 4 438.70 438.02 0.60 3.36 58.97 4.53 79.46 684 2.10 0.00081 2.62 3.8D+04 5 424.36 423.31 0.97 5.44 64.41 7.33 86.78 1655 1.03 0.00082 1.47 6.9D+04 17. 6 443.39 442.55 0.76 4.26 68.67 5.74 92.52 3017 0.62 0.00090 0.80 1.4D+05 080 MG. 840 MG. 7 424.54 423.47 0.99 5.55 74.22 7.48 100.00 6033 0.41 0.00144 0.50 3.5D+05 FILTER 543.73 539.05 4.60 25. 7B 100.00 <0.41 <0.50 ------- Weight % Less Than Stated Size 10 so 20 10 o cr o 2 S o UJ cr 2 0.3 0.2 0.1 99.8 99 98 95 90 80 70 60 30 40 30 20 10 5 2 I 0.5 0.20.1 1 I i i Ru kRu .. .. j n 1 n 2 v\ \ \ _.- \ \ A V Run L - ~ ~1 '• S \ \ Tw y \ X o - % i \ i i A \ —+ \ \ \ 1 A 1 \ V I \ V \ ^ 4- i i 1 I 1 I , i -Run One 100 90 20 10 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 02 0.5 I 2 5 10 20 30 4O SO 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 993 99.9 Weight % Greater Than Stated Size Figure 2-1. Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor particle size results: particulate diameter versus percent weight less/greater than stated size - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln ex- haust stack, run Nos. 1 and 2. 8 ------- u.viv Of\f\7 . UUO . UUO M_ U -< 0 n nn? -^ 0 . 002 O TJ \ 5 U.UUI 0) _c "§ -1 0 . 0007 VI 0 . 0005 0 . 0004 .0003 0.0002. A nnAl . Al ton 1- ton 2- I 'X, \ ^ X \ ">( \ ._ ™ " ^^ • — — A__ / / ^s 1 a jjj / / I I / •7 $ \ x\ \ \ k s \ s^ ^ ^ .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7.8.910 2 3 4 56789 10 Geometric Mean of Particle Diameter (Microns) Figure 2-2. Andersen Mark III Cascade Impactor particle size re- sults: differential mass-loading (dM/d Log D) versus particulate diameter - Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack, run Nos. 1 and 2. ------- SECTION 3 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION Chatham Brick and Tile operates two building brick kilns which were rebuilt in 1951 and 1954 and have a total production capacity of 61,952 cored bricks per day. The firm produces standard-size cored and solid building brick with various surface finishes and textures as well as custom brick on special order. PROCESS DESCRIPTION Figure 3-1 shows the main steps of the manufacturing process at Chatham Brick and Tile Company and also indicates sampling locations during the test- ing program. A belt conveyor carries the clay from the stockpile to the pug mill where sawdust and water are added until the mix contains about 23% sawdust and 4% water. The mix then moves through the deaerating section of the pug mill to remove any air bubbles and is extruded onto a conveyor in a con- tinuous column through an appropriate die to obtain the desired size and shape. A cutting machine slices the column into individual bricks; odd- sized and otherwise defective bricks are returned by another conveyor to the pug mill for remixing. The unfired (green) bricks continue on a con- veyor to the automatic hacker for stacking onto the kiln cars. Each kiln car holds 2,816 standard (3-1/2 in. x 8 in. x 2-1/4 in.) bricks. The loaded kiln cars are then moved to a holding area to await drying and firing in the kiln. Chatham Brick has two tunnel kilns comprised of a drying section, a firing section, and a cooling section. Both kilns are 111 m (364 ft) long and are each equipped with 64 dual fuel burners which may use either No. 2 fuel oil or natural gas. In addition, a pneumatic system can feed sawdust to 38 alternative burners for firing. Due to rising fuel costs, the firm uses natural gas and oil solely for custom finishes on special orders. Sawdust is trucked in from local mills and stockpiled. Conveyors move the sawdust to a dryer and then to the fuel distribution system for firing at the rate of approximately 10 to 13.5 tons/day per kiln. At full capacity, a kiln car is moved into the kiln drying section every 1-1/2 hr (16 cars per day) for solid brick and every hour and 5 min (22 cars per day) for cored brick. Hot air for drying is drawn from the cooling sec- tion of the kiln and used to reduce the moisture content of the brick to less than 1%. The cars are pushed from the drying section to the firing section, where the bricks are fired at about 1000°C (1830°F); the cars then proceed to the cooling section and from there to an automatic dehacker for restacking the bricks into marketable bundles which are stored outside to await shipment. 10 ------- Water Sawdust CO- Content Common Clay Stockpile Pug Mill- Extruder «-•«-•«--*•. Odd-size Brick Cutter +->->->•-»• 4- Hacker (Brick Stacker) Holding Station 4- — Dryers 4- - Kilns - Dehacker 4- Packaging 4- Outside Storage Particle Size Analysis Moisture Content Figure 3-1. Chatham Brick and Tile Company, process flow diagram. 11 ------- PROCESS OPERATIONS The purpose of this test program was to determine the particle size distribution of emissions from a sawdust-fired building brick kiln. Each kiln has two stacks, one exhausting the drying section (north stack), and one exhausting the firing section (south stack). An Orsat analysis was performed twice on each stack of both kilns. Kiln No. 1 (west kiln) was fired with gas due to a custom order requiring the brick to be manufactured as customary 15 years ago to obtain a special surface finish. Kiln No. 2 (east kiln) was fired exclusively with sawdust; a particle size analysis was performed on the stack from the firing section by means of an Andersen impactor. In addition, the moisture content of the exhaust gas stream from this stack was determined by EPA Method 4. The kilns at Chatham Brick and Tile Company are equipped with flowmeters to monitor oil and gas flows and thermocouples to measure temperature. When firing with sawdust, the temperature reading controls the sawdust feed rate, however, no provisions exist to accurately measure the feed rate. On August 19, 1980, process monitoring began at 10:45 AM; testing began shortly after 10:45 AM and was concluded at 11:00 PM. The kiln operators reported that there had been no process upsets, and the operation had been normal. During the day of the test, kiln No. 2 had a throughput of 16 cars, i.e., production of 45,056 standard cored bricks. This reduced production rate, down from 61,952 cored bricks per day, was due to a slow down in the building industry. The average temperature was 1000°C (1830°F) which is the same as during full production. The reduced production was not believed to significantly affect the particle size distribution since-kiln temperatures, and thus, sawdust firing rates, during the testing were in the normal ranges. 12 ------- SECTION 4 LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS This section presents detailed descriptions of the sampling locations used for the measurement of CO- emissions and particle size distribution. Each test location is discussed separately. A generalized overview of the kiln building complex is presented in Figure 4-1. Figure 4-2 presents a flowsheet of the brick making and kiln firing process at Chatham Brick and Tile Company. Heated air from the brick firing zone in the kilns is recycled back to the brick drying zone. Excess heated air recycled to the drying zone is exhausted to the atmosphere through a waste heat exhaust stack located at the north end of each of the kilns. Heated air from the brick firing zone that is not recycled to the drying zone, is exhausted to the atmosphere through a kiln exhaust stack at the southern end of each of the kilns (Figure 4-1). No emission control equip- ment presently exists on any of the four kiln building exhaust stacks. HARROP KILN NO. 2 (EAST) KILN EXHAUST STACK SAMPLING LOCATIONS This exhaust stack is rectangular in shape. A sheet metal rectangular stack extension with ports was provided by Chatham Brick and Tile Company for sampling purposes. The stack extension was placed on top of the rec- tangular brick exhaust stack. The location of the ports used to sample this exhaust stack is presented in Figure 4-3. View A is from the west side look- ing east. View B is from the south side looking north. The five sampling ports are located in a 32-in. long by 29-in. wide rectangular vertical duct. The distance from the five ports to the nearest downstream disturbance; which is where the duct is reduced in size above the exhaust fan, is 286 cm (112.75 in.), or 3.76 duct diameters. The dis- tance from the five ports to the nearest upstream disturbance; which is the top of the stack extension, is 66 cm (26 in.), or 0.87 duct diameters. This sampling location did not meet the "8 and 2 diameter" criterion for particulate traverses for rectangular stacks as outlined in EPA Refer- ence Method 1 (Federal Register, Vol. 42, No. 160, Thursday, August 18, 1977). Since the stack extension contained five sampling ports, nine sampling point locations were chosen for each port traverse for a total of 45 sampling points, An average stack gas velocity and temperature location was determined by EPA Reference Method 2 procedures for selection of the particle size distri- bution sample point location. Figure 4-4 shows the location of the traverse points and the sampling points selected for the two particle size distribu- tion tests. Test No. 1 was conducted at traverse point No. 2-7, port No. 2. Test No. 2 was conducted at traverse point No. 3-3, port No. 3. The distance of the traverse points from the opening of the sample ports is presented in Table 4-1. 13 ------- KILN BUILDING -TOP VIEW Kiln Exhaust |~~ Stack 1 Harrop Kiln No.l Waste Heat •Exhaust i Stack Kiln Exhaust Stack .| I Harrop Kiln No.2 Waste Heat | H h Exhaust I Stack Steps to Roof MRI Truck Sawdust Storage Building Fuel Oil Storage Tanks W N Figure 4-1. Overview of the Chatham Brick and Tile Company's Gulf, North Carolina, kiln building complex. ------- Exhaust Stream Fuel Stream Sample Point Dryer Exhaust •*- Waste Heat Sawdust — — .Kiln •Kiln Exhaust Storage and Shipment Figure 4-2. Chatham Brick and Tile Company flowsheet. 15 ------- 29" 32" ( Nearest Upstream Disturbance 0.87 Duct Dia's) (Nearest Downstream Disturbance 3.76 Duct Dia's) — I 26" 1 112-: am /4" ^ 29" ooooo 12345 Fk JW \ 45" Height of Sheet Metal Stack Extension 12345 TOP VIEW Sampling Platform Ladder• Equivalent Diameter (E .D.) 2(32)(29) 32 + 29 = 30" \ 45" Height of Sheet Metal Stack Extension _i Kiln Building Roof Figure 4-3. VIEW B Schematic of sampling port locations used to sample the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack. ------- N 2 H KJ 1 2 | 3 ; 4 h*-l- 32' 5 I 6 I 7 I 8 | 9 i Ii i _l. i 29' «« »> 3-1/2' _g_/ Particle Size Test No.l Conducted at Point 2-7. _b/ Particle Size Test No.2 Conducted at Point 3-3. TOP VIEW 5-13/16 Figure 4-4. Sampling point locations at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack. ------- TABLE 4-1. HARROP KILN NO. 2 (EAST) KILN EXHAUST STACK SAM- PLING POINT LOCATIONS Distance from outside edge of sample port Point No. (cm) (in.) 1 4.4 1 3/4 2 13.3 5 1/4 3 22.2 8 3/4 4 31:1 12 1/4 5 40 15 3/4 6 48.9 19 1/4 7 57.8 22 3/4 8 66.7 26 1/4 9 75.6 29 3/4 18 ------- Carbon dioxide emission tests were also conducted at this location and were accomplished using the stack extension and sample ports as described above. No specific sample point location or port was utilized for these tests. HARROP KILN NO. 1 (WEST) KILN EXHAUST STACK SAMPLING LOCATIONS This exhaust stack is rectangular in shape and is similar in dimension to the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack. Therefore, the stack extension used at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack was also utilized at this sampling location. No particle size distribution tests were conducted at this location because this kiln (Harrop Kiln No. 1) was not exclusively fired with saw- dust. Carbon dioxide emission tests were conducted at this location uti- lizing the ports and stack extension. HARROP KILN NO. 1 (WEST) AND HARROP KILN NO. 2 (EAST) WASTE HEAT EXHAUST STACK SAMPLING LOCATIONS Both of these exhaust stacks are rectangular in shape. A sheet metal rectangular stack extension was provided by Chatham Brick and Tile Company for sampling purposes. The stack extension was placed on top of the rec- tangular brick exhaust stacks. This stack extension was 40-in. long by 27-in. wide and contained four sample ports. The stack extension did not fit properly on the Harrop Kiln No. 1 (west) waste heat exhaust stack. The stack extension was slightly narrower (approxi- mately 1 to 2 in.) than the opening of the stack. Since the pressure of the stack was positive, the improper fit of the stack extension was not con- sidered to be a significant problem for use in testing this location. The stack extension did fit properly on the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) waste heat exhaust stack. No particle size distribution tests were conducted on either of the waste heat exhaust stacks. Carbon dioxide emission tests were conducted at each of the waste heat exhaust stacks utilizing the stack extension and sam- ple ports. 19 ------- SECTION 5 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES This section describes the sampling equipment and analytical procedures used by MRI personnel to conduct and analyze data from the C0_ emission and particle size distribution tests. All sampling equipment used during the test was provided by MRI unless otherwise specified. FEDERAL REGISTER METHODS Standard EPA methodologies as described in the Federal Register, Vol. 42, No. 160, Part II, Thursday, August 18, 1977, were used for Methods 1, 2, 3, and 4. EPA METHOD 1 - SAMPLE AND VELOCITY TRAVERSES FOR STATIONARY SOURCES Sample locations at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack were determined using the procedures described in Method 1. The field data are presented in Appendix A. Method 1 determinations were not required for sampling purposes at the other kiln exhaust stack locations. The sample port locations at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack did not meet the Method 1 criteria of eight downstream and two upstream duct diameters. The five sample ports were located 3.76 duct diameters down- stream and 0.87 duct diameters upstream from the nearest disturbances. These measurements did meet the minimum requirements of two downstream and 0.5 upstream duct diameters from the nearest disturbances. EPA METHOD 2 - DETERMINATION OF STACK GAS VELOCITY AND VOLUMETRIC FLOW RATE (TYPE S PITOT TUBE) Velocity measurements were made at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack using standard Method 2 techniques and equipment. The field data are presented in Appendix A. The calibration data for the equipment used for these measurements are presented in Appendix E^ Velocity measure- ments were not conducted at the other kiln exhaust stack locations. Carbon dioxide emission sampling at these locations did not require velocity mea- surements . EPA METHOD 3 - GAS ANALYSIS FOR CARBON DIOXIDE, OXYGEN, EXCESS AIR, AND DRY MOLECULAR WEIGHT All C0~ emission measurements were made using standard Method 3 pro- cedures and equipment. The sample probe was inserted into the stack exten- sion a sufficient distance to obtain a representative sample. An Orsat analyzer was used to determine the percent C02, as well as the percent 0_, 20 ------- CO, N-, and dry molcular weight of the stack gas. The field data are pre- sented in Appendix B. The equipment used to collect and analyze the samples for these tests was provided by the Emission Measurement Branch, Emission Standards and En- gineering Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The equipment provided by EPA included a stainless steel sample probe, diaphragm pumps with flow control and rate meter, inte- grated gas bags, and an Orsat analyzer. The Orsat analyzer had been charged with fresh chemicals just prior to the field test. EPA METHOD 4 - DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE CONTENT IN STACK GASES The moisture content of the stack gas at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack was determined using standard Method 4 equipment and tech- niques. A moisture determination was not required for sampling purposes at the other kiln exhaust stack locations. The field data are presented in Appendix A. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS Testing for particle size distribution at the Harrop Kiln No. 2 (east) kiln exhaust stack was done using Andersen cascade impactors. The Andersen Cascade Impactor (Mark III), classifies particles into eight (8) size ranges. Figure 5-1 presents a schematic illustration of the Andersen sampling system in sampling position. Also shown in Figure 5-1 is the vacuum pump and sam- ple rate indicating manometer used for controlling the sampling. The Andersen impactor was preheated in an oven prior to the sampling run. The impactor and nozzle were preheated to a temperature sufficiently higher than stack temperature to prevent condensation in the sample line. The preheated impactor was transported from the oven to the stack wrapped in insulation material. During sampling the flow was adjusted to the predetermined flow rate as indicated by the manometer monitoring the pressure drop across the im- pactor orifices. Sampling time for test Nos. 1 and 2 were 60 min and 90 min, respectively. At the conclusion of the sampling period, the impactor was withdrawn from the stack with a sample continuing to be drawn until the nozzle cleared the sample port, at which time the vacuum pump was turned off. The time required to perform this "sampling while withdrawing" was typically not more than 10 sec and is a negligible portion of the total sample period. This technique insures that the impacted sample particles remain in place during the withdrawal period. The field data for the two test runs are presented in Appendix A. The collection substrates used for the particle size distribution tests consisted of the standard slotted, circular glass fiber filters manufactured by the cascade impactor manufacturer. The filters were tare-weighed and final-weighed in the field. A portable vacuum desiccation system was used to condition the filters. A digital electrobalance (Cahn Model 27) was used to weigh the filters. 21 ------- Thermometer Impactor to Stack Wall Check Valve Thermometer Vacuum By-Pass Valve Gauge o Main Valve Figure 5-1. Schematic illustration of the Andersen Sampling System in sampling position. ------- Each set of collection substrates included eight slotted filters and one unslotted backup filter. Each filter was placed in a separate, marked square of aluminum foil and folded in half for weighing. The procedures used for weighing the filters are as follows: 1. Complete sets of filters and their numbered aluminum foil container were placed in the vacuum desiccation chamber and conditioned under vacuum for a period of 60 min. A mercury manometer was used to monitor the vacuum in the chamber. A vacuum of less than 1-in. Hg absolute was achieved. 2. The filter sets were removed from the vacuum chamber and placed in another chamber containing silica gel to prevent moisture accumulation dur- ing weighing. 3. A filter and its numbered aluminum foil container was placed on the balance pan. A period of 30 sec was monitored with a stop watch before a weight was recorded. Each filter and its aluminum foil container were weighed one time. 4. The filters and aluminum foil containers were returned to the vac- uum desiccation chamber and placed under vacuum again for a period of 15 min. 5. The filters and aluminum foil containers were removed from the vacuum desiccation chamber and returned to the silica gel desiccation chamber. The filters and foil containers were weighed a second time, allowing 30 sec for the balance to stabilize before a weight was recorded. 6. The filters and aluminum foil containers were returned to the vac- uum desiccation chamber and placed under vacuum for a period of 15 min. 7. The filters and aluminum foil containers were removed from the vacuum chamber and placed in the silica gel desiccation chamber. The filters and aluminum foil containers were weighed a final, third time, allowing 30 sec for the balance to stabilize before a weight was recorded. Upon completion of each particle size test, the Andersen cascade impac- tor was held in an upright, vertical position to prevent movement of impacted particles. Both ends of the impactor were sealed during transportation from the test site to the field laboratory. The impactor was disassembled and the sample recovered according to the operation manual provided by the impac- tor manufacturer. The recovered filter stages were placed in their numbered aluminum foil containers. Upon completion of the sample recovery, the filters were final weighed in the field laboratory according to the procedures previously described in this section. The results of the weighings are presented in Appendix A. 23 ------- SECTION 6 APPENDICES This section of the report presents copies of all field and laboratory data sheets, computer reduction of test data, results of laboratory analyses, and sampling equipment calibration data. 24 ------- |