United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-CHR-1
August 1980
Air
Charcoal

Emission Test Report
Kingsford Charcoal
Burnside, Kentucky

-------
                  CHARCOAL
            Emission Test Report

             Kingsford Charcoal
             Burnside, Kentucky

                May 1-6,  1980

           Project No.:  80-CHR-l
                Prepared for

       Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
         Emission Measurement Branch
      Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
                     by

   James A. Peters and M. Timothy Thalman
 Contract 68-02-2818, Work Assignment No.  28

                 August 1980
        MONSANTO RESEARCH CORPORATION
              DAYTON LABORATORY
              1515 Nicholas Road
             Dayton, Ohio  45407

-------
                            CONTENTS
Figures	    iv
Tables	    v
   1      Introduction	    1
   2      Summary of Results	    2
   3      Process Description 	    8
   4      Location of Sampling Points 	    13
   5      Sampling and Analytical Methods 	    15
APPENDICES
   A      Complete Emission Results 	   A-l
   B      Project Participants	B-l
                               111

-------
                             FIGURES


Figures                                                      Page

    1     Exhaust gas velocity and temperature over the
            charcoal burn cycle,  Kiln #8,  Kingsford Char-
            coal, Burnside, Kentucky, May 2-6, 1980	    3

    2     Carbon monoxide concentration in the exhaust
            gas of Kiln #8 over the burn cycle, Kingsford
            Charcoal, Burnside, Kentucky,  May 2-6,  1980.  .  .    4

    3     Total hydrocarbon concentration in the exhaust
            gas of Kiln #8 over the burn cycle, Kingsford
            Charcoal, Burnside, Kentucky,  May 2-6,  1980.  .  .    6

    4     "Missouri-type" charcoal kiln	    9

    5     Plot plan of Kingsford Charcoal-Burnside Plant,
            batch kiln area	11

    6     Schematic diagram of afterburner emission control
            on set of four charcoal kilns, Kingsford-
            Burnside Plant 	   12

    7     Sampling port location in exhaust duct from char-
            coal Kiln #8, Kingsford Charcoal, Burnside,
            Kentucky	14

    8     Total hydrocarbon analyzer sampling assembly ...   16

    9     Carbon monoxide analyzer sampling assembly ....   18

   10     Final continuous monitoring equipment assembly
            for THC and CO, Kingsford Charcoal,
            Burnside, Kentucky 	   20
                               IV

-------
                             TABLES


Table                                                        Page

  1    Summary of Integrated Gas Analysis Results,
         Kingsford Charcoal, Burnside, Kentucky,
         May 3-5, 1980	7
       Summary of Stack Gas Moisture Determinations,
         Kingsford Charcoal, Burnside, Kentucky,
         May 3-5, 1980	

-------
                            SECTION 1

                          INTRODUCTION


The Kingsford Charcoal Plant in Burnside, Kentucky,  was emission
tested by Monsanto Research Corporation (MRC) for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Contract 68-02-2818,
Work Assignment Number 28.  The objective of the sampling program
was to collect background information on charcoal kiln emissions
which may lead to the development of source performance standards.

The field test was monitored by Frank Clay, Field Testing Section,
Emission Measurement Branch, EPA.  The sampling conducted by MRC
was directed by Tim Thalman as team leader.  Carbon monoxide (CO)
and total hydrocarbons (THC) were continuously monitored in the
exhaust duct leading to an afterburner control device over the
entire charcoal production cycle.  Exhaust gas temperature,
velocity, and moisture were determined on a periodic basis.

Sampling at the Burnside Plant was conducted by MRC during
May 1-6, 1980.  The monitoring techniques employed were non-
dispersive infrared (NDIR) analysis for CO, and flame-
ionization detection (FID) for THC.  Moisture was determined
by EPA Method 4.

Quality assurance/quality control in the sampling area covered
such activities as instrument calibration, using standard or
approved sampling methods, chain-of-custpdy procedures, and
protocols for the recording and calculation of data.  QA/QC in
the analysis area involved using only validated analysis methods,
periodic operator QC checking and training, and sample QC by the
use of NBS traceable reference standards.

-------
                            SECTION 2

                       SUMMARY OF RESULTS


Pollutants which were measured for this emission test were total
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, both determined by continuous
monitoring instrumentation.  In addition, gas velocity and
temperature were recorded every 15 minutes and moisture was
determined about every 12 hours.

The Kingsford Charcoal Plant in Burnside operates twenty batch
kilns.  Kiln #8 was emission tested over the burn cycle of the
process.  Although emissions are controlled by an afterburner,
samples were taken before the control device to characterize
uncontrolled emissions during the burn cycle of charcoal
production.

Kiln #8 was loaded with dry wood in the form of lumbermill ends
in bundles on May 2.  The burn was initiated by a fuel oil torch,
the doors and vents closed and sealed with wet mortar, and
sampling began at about 1 p.m. that day.

Kiln exhaust gas velocity and temperature are shown in Figure 1
over the duration of the burn cycle.  Gas velocity is not induced
by a fan or other air mover, but allowed to draught naturally.
Kiln operators slow and speed the burn progress by limiting inlet
air, much like a domestic wood stove operates.  Consequently, gas
velocity fluctuates over a factor of two throughout the cycle.
Exhaust gas temperature, however, climbs slowly from about 100F
initially to nearly 500F near the end of the burn, with a sharp
rise at the end of day 3.

Carbon monoxide concentration as a function of time over the burn
cycle is illustrated in Figure 2.  The CO values reported in ppm
represent the concentration as seen by the CO analyzer, i.e.,
after CO2 has been removed.  Thus, actual values are approxi-
mately 10-15% higher.  The drop in CO levels which occurred at
around 12:00 Noon on May 4 may be related to a slowdown in the
burn, since the gas velocity and temperature also dropped at
this time.

-------
             15
U)
         u
         a
o

UJ
             10
                                     GAS VELOCITY AND TEMPERATURE
                               I
                                                  I
I
I
I
I
                                                                                            I
          TIME   1400 1800  2400  600  1200  1800  2400  600  1200  1800 2400   600  1200  1800  2400  600  1200


          DATE     5/2/80   I        5/3/80       I        5/4/80       I        5/5/80      I     5/6/80
                                                                                       600
                                                                                               500
                                                                                      400
                                                                                               300
                                                                                               200
                                                                                               100
             Figure  1.
                  Exhaust gas  velocity and temperature over  the charcoal  burn

                  cycle,  Kiln  #8, Kingsford Charcoal/  Burnside, Kentucky,

                  May  2-6, 1980.
                                                                                                     in
                                                                                                     <
                                                                                                     o

-------
    <
    Of.
    8
    10
    <
    e>
        60.000 -
        50,000 -
    E
    a   40,000
                                      CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATION
        30,000
20,000 -
        10,000 -
         TIME   1400 1800  2400  600   1200 1800  2400  600  1200  1800  2400   600  1200  1800  2400  600  1200


         DATE    5/2/80    |        5/3/80        |       5/4/80        |        5/5/80       |     5/6/80



Figure 2.   Carbon monoxide  concentration in  the exhaust  gas of Kiln  #8 over the burn

             cycle,  Kingsford  Charcoal,  Burnside, Kentucky,  May 2-6, 1980.

-------
A similar trend was observed for total hydrocarbons (THC) over
the burn cycle, as shown in Figure 3.  A decrease in concentra-
tion occurred at the end of May 3 (day 2), before rising to top
earlier concentration levels near the end of the burn.  The two
curves in Figure 3 represent gas concentrations with and without
a condenser in the sample line, used to knock out moisture and
heavier, tarry organics in order to protect the flame ionization
detector of the monitoring instrument and the calibrated flow-
meter.  Complete CO and THC results are furnished in Appendix A.

Integrated gas analysis results are summarized in Table 1.
Levels of C02 rose during the burn, while CO, 02, and N2 changed.
Moisture determinations are summarized in Table 2.  Moisture
levels in the exhaust gas rose from 32% to 48% at day 2 as water
is driven off from the wood, then dropped to 36% near the end of
the cycle.

The charcoal kiln operated normally throughout the emission test.
Thus, the emission results should be representative of uncon-
trolled emissions during normal kiln operation during the burn
cycle.

-------
 E
 o.
 o.
<
O
t

UJ
J
O
     30.000
     25,000
o    20,000
     15,000
     10,000
     5,000
      TIME

      DATE
TOTAL HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATION

  o-oo  CONDENSER OFF
  	CONDENSER ON
                                                                                   A
                                                                         no
                                                                         1
1400 1800  2400  600   1200 1800  2400  600  1200  1800 2400  600  1200  1800 2400  600  1200

 5/2/80    i       5/3/80       I       5/4/80       1       5/5/80        I     5/6/80
         Figure 3.   Total  hydrocarbon concentration  in the exhaust  gas
                      of Kiln #8  over  the burn cycle,  Kingsford  Charcoal,
                      Burnside, Kentucky, May 2-6, 1980.

-------
     TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF INTEGRATED GAS ANALYSIS
               RESULTS, KINGSFORD CHARCOAL, BURN-
               SIDE, KENTUCKY, MAY 3-5, 1980
Date
5/3/80
5/4/80
5/5/80
Time
2210
1700
1800
CO
%
9
11
16
2 '
.5
.0
.2
CO,
V
/o
3
2
1
.5
.5
.4
02,
%
6
3
9
.0
.25
.3
N2 , Molecular weight,
% Ib/lb mole
81
83
73
.0
.25
.1
29
29
30
.78
.89
.97

TABLE 2.  SUMMARY OF STACK GAS MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS,
          KINGSFORD CHARCOAL, BURNSIDE, KENTUCKY,
          MAY 3-5, 1980

Date
5/3/80
5/3/80
5/3/80
5/4/80
5/4/80
5/4/80
5/4/80
5/4/80
5/5/80
5/5/80
5/5/80
Time
0110-0218
1808-1908
1951-2021
0232-0332
0419-0519
0555-0711
1200-1345
1600-1630
0100-0214
1318-1418
1603-1633
Percent
moisture
32.00*
34.00!;
35.00a
41.91
41.43
43.29
48.39
47.04
38.80
41.22
36.08
           Values for saturated air at
            corresponding stack temperature,

-------
                            SECTION 3

                       PROCESS DESCRIPTION


The Kingsford Charcoal Plant in Burnside,  Kentucky,  produces
charcoal in a batch process, using "Missouri-type"  kilns as
shown in Figure 4.  The kilns are constructed of concrete and
process 90-110 tons of wood per batch.   Charcoal is produced
by packing the kiln tightly with split wood (about firewood size)
and lighting the wood with a diesel fuel torch.   The steel doors
are closed on the kiln and air is drawn through side ports from
below the kiln.  During ignition, a large amount of air is
necessary for rapid combustion to insure the heat level needed for
pyrolysis.  A typical cycle may include the following time frame:

                  1/2 day         load,
                  3 to 5 days     burn,
                  3 to 4 days     seal and cool,
                  1/2 day         unload,

for a total turn-around batch time of 7-9 days,  depending on
initial moisture content of the wood.  The emission test was
conducted during the 3-5 day burn period.

For the production of good-quality charcoal, kiln temperatures of
at least 600F are required.  Prolonged higher temperatures will
reduce the yield of charcoal without necessarily upgrading it for
recreational use.  If, on the other hand, pyrolysis temperatures
remain low, the charcoal may be too "smokey" for domestic use, and
larger than normal amounts of brands (partially charred wood) will
be produced.

The direction and rate of spread of the pyrolysis zone are
associated with a number of factors, such as location of air
ports and stacks, volume and velocity of the incoming air, wood
size and moisture content, piling of the charge, and design of
the kiln.  At the Burnside Plant, the rate of burn is controlled
by placing bricks across the air inlet ports and manually
adjusting air intake by brick positioning.  Also, mortar, cement,
or clay mud is packed against the steel door edges and top vents
to further seal the kiln and better control the burn rate.
                              8

-------
                  SEALED VENTS
                                                      TO AFTERBURNER
                                                   EXHAUST
                                                    DUCTS
                                            AIR INLET
                                              PORTS
  AIR INLET
    PORTS
            Figure 4.   "Missouri-type"  charcoal  kiln.

Pyrolysis generally proceeds  at a  faster  rate  at the upper  part
of the charge, where higher temperatures  are available  for  longer
periods of time.  Less  rapid  pyrolysis  takes place  near the kiln
floor, where the  average  temperature  usually is  lowest.   In the
"Missouri-type" kiln, combustion and  carbonization  progress from
the top of the kiln to  the floor.

Burn progress in  kilns  with uncontrolled  emissions  can  be deter-
mined by the color of the smoke from  the  kiln  or by determining
the temperature along the vertical distance of the  steel doors.
The pyrolysis is  completed when fire  has  reached the floor  of the
kiln as determined by view ports (air intake ports) at  the  floor
level.  This may  also be  indicated by a marked decrease in  the
volume of smoke and a color change from muddy  white on  day  3 to
muddy gray on day 4.  Opacity is about  80% on  the last  day  due to
the high concentration  of tars in  the exhaust.  At  Kingford-
Burnside the kiln tested  had  an afterburner for  emission control.

When pyrolysis has been completed,  all  air ports are sealed for
the start of the  cooling  cycle.  After  the ports are sealed, the
stacks remain open until  smoking has  practically stopped to pre-
vent the development of gas pressure  in the kiln.  Stacks can
usually be sealed from  1  hr to 2 hr after the  air ports are

-------
closed.  This is done with slide plates in a junction box
located near the bottom of each exhaust duct.

At Burnside the kilns are allowed to cool for about 1 day before
removing the charcoal.  Water is sprayed on top of the kiln to
facilitate cooling.  Yields of about 20-25 tons of charcoal are
achieved.

At Burnside, charcoal is batch-produced in 20 separate "Missouri-
type" kilns.  A plot plan of the batch kiln area of the Kingsford
Plant is depicted in Figure 5.  Emissions during pyrolysis are
controlled by an afterburner which services a set of four kilns,
as shown in Figure 6.  Two 16-inch circular ducts exit near the
bottom of the kiln end and then join a common 25-inch diameter
duct leading to the afterburner, which is centrally placed with
two kilns on each side.  Sampling was conducted in the common
duct, before the afterburner.

Each afterburner is equipped with two fuel oil burners and one
blower for combustion air.  No. 2 fuel oil is used as auxiliary
fuel for the afterburners, although plant personnel usually
schedule kiln rotation so that three out of four kilns are running
(either in the pyrolysis or cooling stage) in order to minimize
auxiliary fuel usage.
                              10

-------
              FUEL
            OIL TANK
              o
 AFTERBURNER
CONTROL DEVICE.
EMISSION
TEST POINT
4 .
3
*8

fcnvJh

ribMnidl

^4
                                      WOOD BUNDLE
                                     '  AREAS
                                                               SAWDUST
                                                                AREA
           Figure 5.  Plot plan of Kingsford Charcoal-
                       Burnside Plant, batch kiln area,
                                 11

-------
                                                                     SAMPLING
KJ
9
r

 

X
*






X




m lurvuumiLrv





i
X
/POINT

m

18 KILN
 

X
V
                 Figure 6.
                       I
                       JUNCTION BOX WITH
                            SLIDE PLATE TO
                            SEAL EXHAUST
                            STACKS DURING
                            COOLING

Schematic diagram of afterburner emission control on
of four charcoal kilns, Kingsford-Burnside Plant.
                                                           J
                                                              8'
                                                             1

-------
                            SECTION 4

                   LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINT


The location sampled was the #8 kiln exhaust, before the after-
burner control device, in order to obtain uncontrolled emissions
data.  Figure 7 illustrates the sampling port location.

As a result of the presurvey visit and preliminary traverse, it
was found that the exhaust velocity was very low (about 6 ft/sec)
in each of the twin ducts.  Also, because the sampling program
involved continuous monitoring, frequent switching between ducts
would have been necessary.  Thus, in order to counter these diffi-
culties, a pair of sampling ports were installed in the common
duct downstream from the twin exhaust ducts to allow for a higher
flow rate and elimination of duct switching.  The location of the
new ports is shown in Figure 7, their position as far downstream
(2.3 diameters) from the elbow joint disturbance as feasible.  Two
4-inch diameter ports were installed at the 12 o'clock and 9
o'clock positions in the 25-1/4 inch duct as one faces downstream.

Inside the common duct was found 11 inches of solidified tars
(creosote), up to the lower lip of the horizontal sampling port.
                               13

-------
   UPPER WELD
      SEAM
LOWER WELD
  SEAM
             C3VCD
                         COMMON DUCT
                                                58"-
25-1/4"
  i
        CDC:>
                        EXISTING
                         PORTS
                           JUNCTION
                                             FLOW
         16"
         *-
\
      10'-^
                                             8'
                      END VIEW KILN
                                                          SAMPLING
                                                          LOCATION
         I   4"s|
                                                        NEW PORTS
    Figure 7.  Sampling port location in exhaust duct  from
               charcoal Kiln #8, Kingsford-Charcoal,
               Burnside,  Kentucky.
                               14

-------
                             SECTION  5

                SAMPLING AND  ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES


The Kingsford  Charcoal Burnside Plant was emission tested for
total hydrocarbons,  CO, and  integrated gas analysis.  The follow-
ing describes  the methods  used.

TOTAL HYDROCARBONS

Total hydrocarbons were measured using a Beckman 402 Hydrocarbon
Analyzer.  The analysis is based on  flame ionization, a highly
sensitive detection  method.   Figure  8 illustrates the filter/probe
and instrument assembly that was originally set up for sampling at
the start of the charcoal  burn.

Two in-stack stainless steel small mesh screen filters were pro-
tected by an outer stainless steel sheath with the inlet holes
pointing away  from the gas flow.  The sheath allowed any tars or
creosote to adhere to its  walls rather than the inner screen filter
and prevented  screen plugging.  The  filters were also protected by
a 100 psi air  pump which was used to blow back any condensed
organics/particulate matter.  An electrical three-way valve was
connected to each filter and a timer was set to actuate the three-
way valve every 15 minutes to discontinue sampling and blow out
the filters.   The blow-back  lasted 3.75 minutes and the sampling
11.25 minutes.  Of the two in-stack  filters, one filter was for
the THC sample line  and one  filter was for the CO sample line.
However, blow-back and sampling occurred simultaneous on both
filters to eliminate any possible dilution air contamination of
either sample  line during  the blow-back cycle.  From each separate
three-way valve a heated teflon-lined flexible tube directed the
sample gas to  the THC analyzer, and  an unheated teflon-lined tube
went to the CO analyzer.

For the THC analyzer, the  sample gas was originally directed to
the analyzer with no sample  conditioning other than maintaining
a 375F gas temperature.   However, as anticipated, after about 20
hours of sampling, the increase in moisture and organics in the
sample gas caused the unheated flowmeter on the THC analyzer to
operate inefficiently because of condensation.  Since the flow-
meter provided one basis for accurate calibration of the analysis
system, a coil condenser was added between the heated flexline
and the electrical three-way valve.


                              15

-------
CTv
                                              _  COWWBO w> rat rom
                                               .  ,"" 
                                              v   I --
                                               .    !     1
                                                      MOISniRC AND HEAVY
                                                       HVDftOCAfflONSI
                                          ILV2H  JL

                                          "<"  &
                                             USCDFM
                                             HOD (MX
                                             OF IN S1ACT
                                              Fiinns
                                                                                      Tc
     I
                                                                          551
                                                                           nwnuniH carnatn wn
V  nauwd oa 
JT1
                                                                                                 IBUATOI  nomm
                         Figure  8.   Total  hydrocarbon analyzer  sampling  assembly.

-------
At this point, the instrument was purged with ambient air for
about one hour to clean/evaporate the water/organics out of the
flowmeter.  From then on, all water and heavier (condensable)
organics were condensed out of the sample gas before it reached
the heated flexline.  Periodically (about every 8 hours) the con-
denser was removed to allow analysis of the combined condensable
and non-condensable organics in the gas stream.  This non-
conditioned sample gas was analyzed for only a short period (about
1/2 hour) to prevent degradation of the FID and plugging of the
instrument flowmeter.

As Figure 8 shows, the zero gas (breathing air) and span gas (9970
ppm methane) were also controlled by another three-way valve, so
that sampling or calibration could occur by means of the operation
of only one valve.

CARBON MONOXIDE

Carbon monoxide was measured using a Beckman 864 Nondispersive
Infrared Analyzer, which automatically and continuously deter-
mines the concentration of CO in a flowing mixture.  The analysis
is based on a differential measurement of the absorption of
infrared energy.  Figure 9 illustrates the equipment set-up used
for continuous CO monitoring of the charcoal burn cycle.

The CO sample gas was drawn through a filter and unheated flexline
similar to that described for the THC instrumentation.  However,
the gas had to be conditioned by passing through impingers, one
containing silica gel (to remove moisture) and the other con-
taining ascarite (to remove C02, a positive interference in NDIR
analysis).  The impingers were installed in reverse to prevent
solids from being blown into the sample line.

Since the maximum detection limit on the NDIR was 5,000 ppm and
concentrations of over 10,000 ppm were expected, a diluter with
a 10:1 dilution ratio was used to bring the sample gas within the
instrument detection range.  Because gas dilution is both pres-
sure and temperature dependent, the sample gas as well as the
2,995 ppm CO calibration gas was brought to ambient temperature
and pressure before passing through the diluter.  This allowed a
constant dilution ratio to be maintained over the five day samp-
ling period, and served two purposes:  (1) no pressure or
temperature measurements were necessary, and (2) no elaborate
calculations were needed to determine the dilution ratio during
sampling using temperature and pressure data.  The gases were
brought to ambient conditions by passing them through a 2L side-
arm flask, sending the excess gas to the atmosphere, and pulling
the sample (charcoal exhaust or calibration) at the desired flow-
rate through the diluter.
                              17

-------
oo

rn^pJ-
i"""i i-
wanmglPMIKll

IUII






I



!
 moo
( / 10 SWCI
mi)ifigi
1





Ml

n
MM
ISUF




QIC
A H
~^

SI
vju J
.
USD
noo-
(urn
mr



me
nv
LVt

1
nwr
KM
MOt
STMX
US




W W SBS
$ *
i 
MPIMKK
mnicnsian>
wwammsi
raeu.
*'
CMIIUIIO* /
CO /
US IN /|
, 	 	 j j 	 	 	  	 
swu M j >> foccu SSi 1 3 	 1"
nili ic vmvt VN.VC *" L-l !
: ip L-OJ  ^
. 	 W ML >-AL 1
1 M i WT art MI cuaai unt
IMMMD. I 1 ucBiwoBiiniowoioiiimmt
""" i f*ISS """TIDl
-- ,. I  .   njMm
oium / 1 *! "pi
srsm n utiMunn
/ \
/ \iuuiiiDnniMnMwwrBsiwiiBai '
(  |  > miKWcnainimMDiunui *
''^SIi NHCuMiiMWTiiinmig
mosnen
iuni
s
MUlMNCMn
1
jjjTwovw*
\ mmm
                                                              _
                                                       ntssiMf urn imiowaia
                                                       mm nf Diunui
                      Figure 9.   Carbon monoxide  analyzer  sampling assembly.

-------
The sample gas passes from the diluter through a three-way
valve, pump, needle valve, flowmeter, and to the CO analyzer.
The last three-way valve was switched to calibrate using 581 ppm
or 273 ppm CO gas.  These gases were not diluted or conditioned;
thus then passed only through the needle valve and flowmeter
(to set all gases at the same flowrate) before entering the CO
analyzer.

Problems developed soon with the in-stack filter on the CO gas
line.  The filter plugged several times during the night shift
(11 p.m. - 7 a.m.) of May 2-3.  When the plugging problem could
not be corrected, the filter and sample line were removed and
the sample line for moisture analysis was used temporarily for
pulling gas for CO measurement.  During the day shift (7 a.m. -
3 p.m.) on May 3, the sample extraction set-up was changed to
that shown in Figure 10.

Since only a small portion (about 10%) of the gas passing through
the THC analyzer is actually burned in the FID and the excess gas
is vented to the atmosphere, this excess gas was used for the CO
analysis.  As shown in Figure 10, the set-up of the THC analyzer
is basically identical to that of Figure 8 except (1) only one
filter and sample line is used for both instruments, and (2) the
excess gas from the THC analyzer is not vented but sent to the
diluter and CO analyzer.  As before, the gas leaving the THC
analyzer passed through the side-arm flask to set the gas at
ambient conditions before being pulled through the diluter.
From the diluter to the CO analyzer, the set-up is the same as
in Figure 9.  This entire system shown in Figure 10 was used for
the remainder of the sampling period.

INTEGRATED GAS ANALYSIS

Exhaust gas analysis was performed using the method outlined in
the Federal Register, Method 3, "Gas Analysis for Carbon Dioxide,
Oxygen, Excess Air, and Dry Molecular Weight."
                               19

-------
                                      	1.
                                       lull inn










to
o
OKI
ATM


f-



m *' MIDCO
H^'Q" m
i^mggg^g^^ -. yipK-WKK'.K^fl Vj 5 SAMPLING FHOil
FLOW 101

i



-] ^ VINT TO
[1 ATMOSPmE
III

/ \ ' ' M ff v"1"
FLASK 1 TO PUt CAS ATAMHENt 3 5
PRESSURE on INTRODUCTION 3 S
INTO TK OIIUTUI 2 5
MIST TO UP lAOCWARDSI
SPmrc
mmi VAlVt ADIUSTED TO 	 	 '
FLOHMETER ON FLASK j
TOCCU.
VALVI1

CA1IWAIION /
CO /
CAS IN /

1
rair CONMNSCR WSCO TOR TOTAL SAMPU
AY "*" HHMOCAR10NI j aROCAl*-* SMNCAS INJICTIOK  	
Al i WATIOnmiNt ^^ 
hi , 1  i 	  S ^ fi t \ f~~\ i 1 III
|5I| ! 	  =3 	 \J 	 p 	 1> 	 vJ 	 H 	 ^^ 	 "
laiATH-Ak^L "ll" VAIVI ''^^ """ 1 ""IrtP
cncnsiR ! lyl 
,1, ,1 TOCCU 1 1 DU aUHMIlR
Ji C" L- fi ' y
-------