&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
------- |