United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Repon 80-GYP-5
December 1980
Air
v>EPA Gypsum Industry
Emission Test Report
Gold Bond Building
Prod ucts
Richmond, California
-------
Environmental Consultants
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT BRANCH
MAIL DROP 13
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711
FINAL REPORT
for an
EMISSION TEST PROGRAM
conducted at
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
1040 CANAL BLVD.
RICHMOND, CA 94804
Prepared by
YORK RESEARCH CORPORATION
ONE RESEARCH DRIVE
STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT 06906
CONTRACT NUMBER 68-02-2819
WORK ASSIGNMENT 29
EPA PROJECT NUMBER 80-GYP-5
YRC PROJECT NUMBER 01-9517-29
March 30, 1981 .
York Research Corporation
One Research Drive, Stamford, Connecticut 06906 Telephone: C203) 325-1371 «TWX: 710-474-3947
-------
FINAL REPORT
for an
EMISSION TEST PROGRAM
conducted at
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
1040 Canal Blvd.
Richmond, California 94804
CONTRACT NO. 68-02-2819
WORK ASSIGNMENT 29
EPA PROJECT NO. 80-GYP-5
YRC PROJECT NO. 01-9517-29
MARCH 30, 1981
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE . i
LIST OF TABLES ii
LIST OF FIGURES iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS 2
2.1 Particulate Tests 2
2.2 Particle Size Distribution Tests 2
2.3 Observations of Emissions 2
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION 17
3.1 Plant Description 17
3.2 Process Equipment Tested 17
3.3 Emission Controls 21
3.4 Process Conditions During Testing 21
4.0 TESTING LOCATIONS 25
4.1 Sampling Locations 25
4.2 Emission Observation Locations 28
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 28
5.1 Sampling Apparatus 28
5.2 Preliminary Measurements 33
5.3 Particulate Sampling 33
5.4 Gas Composition 37
5.5 Particle Size Distribution 37
6.0 APPENDICES 43
6.1 Computer Data Printouts
6.2 Calculation Formulae
6.3 Field Data Sheets
6.4 Calibration Data
6.5 Laboratory Data
6.6 Project Participants
-------
PREFACE
The work reported herein was conducted by personnel from York
Research Corporation (YRC), Radian Corporation and the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
The scope of the work, issued under EPA Contract Number 68-02-2819,
Work Assignment Number 29, was under the supervision of YRC
Project Director, Mr. James W. Davison. Mr. Roger A. Kniskern,
YRC Project Manager, was responsible for summarizing the test
and analytical data contained in this report. Analyses of the
samples were performed at the YRC laboratory in Stamford,
Connecticut under the direction of Mr. Robert Q. Bradley.
Mr. Michael Palazzolo of Radian Corporation was responsible for
monitoring the process operations during the testing program.
*
Personnel from Radian Corporation will provide the Process
Description and Operations section of this report.
Plant Manager, Robert Britt and Plant Superintendent, Michael Ward
of Gold Bond were very helpful and cooperative throughout the
test program. Their assistance is greatly appreciated.
Mr. Dennis Holzschuh of the Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Emission Measurement Branch, USEPA, served as Tech-
nical Manager and was responsible for coordinating the emission
test program.
-------
LIST OF TABLES
1 - Summary of Emission Test Results - Baghouse Inlet-
English Units
2 - Summary of Emission Test Results - Baghouse Inlet -
Metric Units
3 - Summary of Emission Test Results - Baghouse Outlet-
English Units
4 - Summary of Emission Test Results - Baghouse Outlet-
Metric Units
5 - Comparison of Inlet and Outlet Gas Stream and
Particulate Data - English Units
6 - Comparison of Inlet and Outlet Gas Stream and
Particulate Data - Metric Units
7 - Particle Size Distribution - Baghouse Inlet
8 - Particle Size Distribution - Baghouse Outlet
9 - Summary o*f Visible Emissions Observations - #1
Calciner Baghouse Outlet
10 - Summary of Visible Emissions Observations -
Storage Bin Area - Stucco Silo
11 - Summary of Fugitive Emissions Observations -
Storage Bin Area - Conveyor
12 - Summary of Emission Tests Conducted
13 - Control Equipment Parameters
14 - Bag Replacement Schedules
-11-
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
2.1 Particle Size Distribution - Baghouse Inlet
2.2 Particle Size Distribution - Baghouse Outlet
3.1 Block Flow Diagram
3.2 Calcidyne Flash Calciner
4.1 Test Port and Sampling Point Locations - Baghouse Inlet
4.2 Test Port and Sampling Point Locations - Baghouse Outlet
4.4 Position of Observer - Stucco Silo
4.5 Position of Observer - Conveyor
5.1 Modified Particulate Sampling Train
5.2 Andersen Stack Sampler
5.3 Andersen Sampling Train
-111-
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Section III of the Clean Air Act of 1970 charges the Adminis-
trator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) with the responsibility of establishing federal stan-
dards of. performance for new stationary sources which may sig-
nificantly contribute to air pollution. When promulgated,
these standards of performance for new stationary sources
(NSPS) will reflect the degree of emission limitation achiev-
able through application of the best demonstrated emission
control technology. To assemble this background information,
the USEPA utilizes emission data obtained from controlled sources
involved in the particular industry under consideration, in
this case, the gypsum industry.
Based on the above criteria, the USEPA's Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) selected Gold Bond Building
Products in Richmond, California as a site to conduct an emission
test program. York Research Corporation (YRC), under EPA
Contract Number 68-02-2819, Work Assignment 29, was requested
to conduct the test program. The results of this program are
to provide a portion of the emission data required for establish-
ing the NSPS for the gypsum industry.
The #1 flash calciner at Gold Bond was tested. Emissions from
the calciner are controlled by a baghouse.
f
Emission sampling was conducted during the week of July 14,
1980 at the baghouse inlet and outlet using USEPA Reference
Methods. Emissions from the #1 calciner were observed during
sampling to determine opacity.
Emissions observations were also conducted at the storage
bin area.
-1-
-------
2.0 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS
2.1 Particulate Tests
The gas stream and particulate data and results are summarized
in Tables 1 through 4. Due to technical problems (see 5.0
Sampling and Analytical Procedures) only two tests were run
simultaneously at the inlet and outlet. The sequence of testing
is shown below:
Date:
Inlet
Test
Times
Outlet
Test
Times
7/15
Test 1
1524-1526*
1709-2016
Test run
was voided
7/16
Test 2
0916-1057
Test 1
0926-1044
7/16
Test 3
1248-1412
Test 2
1327-1517
7/16
Test 3
1612-175'
replaces the
first outlet
test run
* Unit shut down
Results of these two tests are presented for comparison in
Tables 5 and 6. The baghouse removal efficiencies were calculated
from the particulate concentration. The average removal
efficiency was 99.97%.
2.2 Particle Size Distribution Tests
The results of the particle size distribution tests are presented
in Tables 7 and 8 and Figures 2-1 and 2-2.Three test runs were
conducted at the inlet and one test run was conducted at the
outlet.
2.3 Observations of Emissions
Throughout the particulate testing, a certified observer con-
ducted visual tests to determine the opacity of the emissions
at the baghouse outlet. Average opacity readings for six
-2-
-------
Table 1
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
BAGHOUSE INLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF) a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total. Particulate -
Filter
Catch and Front Half
Acetone
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Test
1
7/15/80
1524-2016
33.37
52.6
300.2
1217
109.7
46237.20
21.33599
222.56
Test
2
7/16/80
0913-1057
35.81
45.2
297.7
1414
101.3
49279.90
21.19546
256.86
Test
3
7/16/80
1248-1412
34.66
50.0
305.8
1283
108.1
51424.60
22.84855
251.25
Average
-
34.61
49.3
301.3
1305
106.4
48980.57
21.79333
243.55
a Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
b Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-3-
-------
Table 2
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
BAGHOUSE INLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA '
.METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas Sampled
(DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate - Filter
Catch and Front Half
Acetone
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
i
Test
1
7/15/80
1524-2016
0.95
52.6
149
34
109.7
46237.20
48824.80
100.95
Test
2
7/16/80
0913-1057
1.01
45.2
147.6
40'
101.3
49.279.90
48503.23
116.51
Test
3
7/16/80
1248-1412
0.98
50.0
152.1
36
108.1
51424.60
52286.13
113.97
Average
-
0.98
49.3
149.6
37
106.4
48980.57
49871.39
110.48
a Dry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20 C, 760 mm Hg.
b Dry Normalized Cubic.Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-4-
-------
Table 3
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
BAGHOUSE OUTLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA '
ENGLISH UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate -
Filter catch and
Front Half Acetone
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
i
Test
1
7/16/80
0926-1044
51.47
46.2
329.4
1522
109.3
30.56
0.00914
0.12
Test
2
7/16/80
1327-1517
58.92
47.6
330.2
1423
108.5
19.68
0.00514
0.06
Test
3
7/16/80
1612-1754
53.73
49.3
330.0
1371
102.7
15.62
0.00448
0.05
Average
54.71
47.7
329.9
1439
106.9
21.95
0.00625
0.08
Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68 F, 29.92 inches Hg.
Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg,
-5-
-------
Table 4
SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
BAGHOUSE OUTLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA '
.METRIC UNITS
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate, (DNM3/Min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate - Filter
Catch and Front Half
Acetone
mg
mg/DNM3
Kg/Hr
t
Test
1
7/16/80
0926-1044
1.46
46.2
165.2
43
109.3
30.56
20.93
0.05
Test
2
7/16/80
1327-1517
1.67
47.6
165.7
'40
108.5
19.68
11.77
0.03
Test
3
7/16/80
1612-1754
1.52
49.3
165.6
39
102.7
15.62
10.24
0.02
Average
-
1.55
47.7
165.5
41
106.9
21.95
14.31
0.04
a Dry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
Dry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
-6-
-------
TABLE 5
COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
GAS STREAM AND PARTICULATE DATA
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
(ENGLISH UNITS)
Test No.
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture
by Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric
Flow Rate (DSCFM) b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate -
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Baghouse Removal
Efficiency (%)c
Inlet Outlet
2
7/16/80
0913-1057
35.81
45.2
297.7
1414
101.3
49279.90
21.19546
256.86
1
7/16/80
0926-1044
51.47
46.2
329.4
1522
109.3
30.56
0.00914
0.12
99.96
Inlet Outlet
3
7/16/80
1248-1412
34.66
50.0
305.8
1283
108.1
51424.60
22.84855
251.25
2
7/16/80
1327-1517
58.92
47.6
330.2
1423
108.5
19.68
0.00514
0.06
99.98
Average
Inlet Outlet
35.23
47.6
301.8
1348
104.7
50354.95
22.02200
254.06
55.20
46.9
329.8
1472
108.9
25.12
0.00714
0.09
99.97
a Dry Standard Cubic Feet at 68OF, 29.92 inches Hg.
b Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
-7-
-------
TABLE 6
COMPARISON OF INLET AND OUTLET
GAS STREAM AND PARTICULATE DATA
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
(METRIC UNITS)
Test No.
Date
Time
Volume of Gas
Sampled (DNM3)a
Percent Moisture by
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, C
Stack Volumetric
Flow Rate,
(DNM3/Min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate-
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
mg
mg/DNM
Kg/Hr
Baghouse Removal
Efficiency (%)c
Inlet Outlet
2
7/16/80
0913-1057
1.01
45.2
147.6
40
101.3
49279.90
48503.23
116.51
1
7/16/80
0926-1044
1.46
46.2
165.2
43
109.3
30.56
20.93
0.05
99.96
Inlet Outlet
3
7/16/80
1248-1412
0.98
50.0
152.1
36
108.1
51924.60
52286.13
113.97
2
7/16/80
1327-1517
1.67
47.6
165.7
40
108.5
19.68
11.77
0.03
99.98
Average
Inlet
1.00
47.6
149.8
38
104.7
50352.25
50394.68
115.24
Outlet
1.56
45.1
165.4
42
108.9
25.12
16.35
0.04
99.97
a Dry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
Dry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760 mm Hg.
Based on mg/DNM3
-8-
-------
TABLE 7
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
BAGHOUSE INLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
Particulate Particle
Test Concentra- Size
Test Time tion - Total Range
# Date (sec) qr/DSCF (Microns)
1 7/15/80 30 11.9678 >7.05
7.05-4.37
4.37-2.94
2.94-1.98
1.98-1.25
1.25-0.60
0.60-0.35
0.35-0.20
<0.20
2 7/16/80 20 8.90561 >8.30
8.30-5.16
5.16-3.48
3.48-2.35
2.35-1.49
1.49-0.72
0.72-0.42
0.42-0.26
<0.26
3 7/16/80 20 6.80113 >8.90
8.90-5.54
5.54-3.73
3.73-2.53
2.53-1.60
1.60-0.78
0.78-0.46
0.46-0.28
<0.28
Mass in size
range
(% of Total)
58.51
10.27
11.65
6.92
6.35
4.55
1.06
0.29
0.39
44.49
15.26
17.43
8.53
11.40
5.88
2.09
0.24
1.46
23.89 '
17.44
20.23
16.33
11.49
5.65
1.93
0.86
2.18
-9-
-------
TABLE 8
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
BAGHOUSE OUTLET
GOLD BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA
Test Particulate Particle Size Mass in size
Test . Time Concentration- Range range
# Date (min) Total gr/DSCF (microns) (%)
1
7/16/80
120
0.02168
>8.03
8.03-4.99
4.99-3.36
3.36-2.27
2.27-1.44
1.44-0.69
0.69-0.41
0.41-0.25
<0.25
10.96
9.93
10.98
9.67
11.19
9.86
10.38
17.44
9.58
-10-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
IOO.O
99.99 99.999.8 99 98 95 90 80 70
BAGHOUSE INLET
Test 1
Q Q Test 2
& Test 3
o.e
0.1
0.0 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 2.1
-11-
-------
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
100.0
90.0
99.99 99.9 99.8
9998 95 90 80706050
BAGHOUSE OUTLET
Test 1
20 30 40 50 60 70
100.0
0.1
0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10
99.8 99.9
99.99
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
FIGURE 2.2
-12-
-------
minute intervals are presented in Table 9. The visual tests
were conducted for varying lengths of time, but in all cases
they included the outlet particulate test period.
Visual tests were also conducted at the storage bin area.
Three hours of opacity readings were conducted by a certified
observer at the stucco silo. The frequency of fugitive
emissions from a conveyor was also determined. This test was
also conducted for three hours. The results of these tests
are presented in Tables 10 and 11.
-13-
-------
'TABLE 9.
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
#1 CALCINER BAGHOUSE OUTLET
Gold Bond Building Products
Richmond, Calif.
TEST
DATE
TIME
-
SIX MINUTE
INTERVAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
la
7/15/80
1655-2017b
A V E R A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0*
2
7/16/80
0926-1056
G E 0 P A C
0C
Oc
Oc
Oc
Oc
0
0C
0
0
0
0
oc
QC
oc
0
0*
3
7/16/80
1250-1516
I T Y (%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0*
4d
7/16/80
1620-1754
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0*
r
Outlet particulate test run subsequently voided.
Unit shut down for approx. 1 hour.
During this 6 minute interval vision obscured by steam plume,
Some readings were assumed to remain zero.
Outlet particulate testing only.
Interval less than 6 minutes.
-14-
-------
TABLE 10
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
STORAGE BIN AREA - STUCCO SILO
Gold Bond Building Products
Richmond, Calif.
Test
Date
Time
-
Six Minute
Interval
1
2
3
4 .
5
6
7
8
9
10
12 3
7/15/80 7/16/80 7/16/80
1130-1230 1100-1200 1520-1620
AVERAGE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OPACITY
0
0
1.25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.25
2.08
0
-15-
-------
'TABLE 11
SUMMARY OF FUGITIVE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
STORAGE BIN AREA - CONVEYOR
Gold Bond Building Products
Richmond, Calif.
Date: July 16, 1980
Observation
Period
Fugitive Emissions
Observed (min)
Accumulated
Observation Time (min)
1400-1420
1425-1445
1450-1510
1515-1535
1540-1600
1605-1625
1630-1650
1655-1715
1720-1740
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Total Emission Time (min) = 0
Total Observation Time (min) = 180
Fugitive Emission Frequency = 0%
-16-
-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND "OPERATION
3.1 Plant Description
The Gold Bond Building Products Richmond, California plant produces
wallboard from gypsum ore mined in Mexico. The ore is shipped to the
plant by ocean-going freighter. A simplified flow diagram for the
process used at the Richmond plant is shown in Figure 3;,!. Ore stockpiled
at the plant is crushed to about minus 5 cm (2 inches) and then dried
and ground to about 90 percent minus 100 mesh in a grinding mill. The
ground crude gypsum, primarily calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO,«2H20),
is heated to around 571K (300°F) to remove 75 percent of its water of
hydration and thus form calcium sulfate hemihydrate (CaSO. ^H-O). This
process is known as calcining. The calcined gypsum or stucco is mixed
with starch, water, and other additives to form a slurry. The slurry is
spread between two paper sheets and formed into wet wall board. The
wallboard is subsequently dried in a multi-deck kiln, trimmed to the
correct size, and shipped to distributors.
3.2 Process Equipment Tested
The emission tests conducted at the Richmond plant are shown in
Table 12. A brief description of the major processing equipment tested
at the plant is provided in the following sections.
Calcidyne Unit
The calciner used at the Richmond plant is a direct contact flash
calciner of National Gypsum's own patented design. The Calcidyne unit
is a continuous calciner in which gypsum is calcined through direct
contact with hot gases. A schematic diagram of the unit is shown in
Figure ,;3.2.
Stucco Storage
The stucco storage and transfer system used at the plant employs
conventional screw conveyors and bucket elevators to transfer stucco
from the Calcidyne units to a 318 Mg (350 ton) stucco storage silo and
from the storage silo to the board forming line.
-17-
-------
TABLE 12
EMISSION TESTS CONDUCTED AT GOLD BOND
RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA PLANT
Process Tested
Direct contact
calciner
Direct contact
calciner
Stucco storage
silo
Stucco transfer
system (bucket
elevator and screw
conveyor)
Date
7/15/80
7/16/80
7/16/80
7/16/80
Control
Method
Fabric
Filter
Fabric
Filter
Fabric
Filter
Capture
head/
Fabric
Filter
Test Type
Particulate
loading
Particle size
Visible
emissions
Visible
emissions
Visible
emissions
Inlet
Test
3 EPA- 5
3 Andersen
EPA- 2 2
Outlet
Test
3 EPA- 5
1 Andersen
EPA- 9
EPA- 9
-18-
-------
Mexican
Ship
^
/
Covered
Stockpile
^
/
Grinding &
Dryi ng
>
/
Flash
Calciners
V
/
Stucco
Transfer
r . J Baghouse
^ Air Flov\
^ Process
Vent ^
Vent
Vent
^Vent Ver
x*s
...... - J ^^
Stucco
) otorage
Silo
/
Flow
LJ
tr.
f
\
. _ j
V
?
Warehouse
)
\
Sawing
and
Bundling
/'
V
Board
Drying
Kiln
y
X
Knife
^
\
Board
Mixing and
Forming
Block flow diagram for Richmond board plant.
Figure 3-1
-19-
-------
'Feed spout
Calcidyne
Product discharge
to conveyor
Inlet to fabric
niter dust collector
urner
ecircu-
lation
fan
Calcidyne flash calciner.
Figure 3.2
-20-
-------
3.3 Emission Controls
Fabric filter dust collectors are used at the Richmond plant to
control gypsum particulate emissions. Dust laden gases exiting the
direct contact calciners are vented to separate baghouses. Emissions
from screw conveyors and bucket elevators are also vented to fabric
filter dust collectors. Emissions from the stucco storage silo are
vented to a separate baghouse.
Design and operating parameters for the baghouses tested at the
Richmond plant are given in Table 12. Normal replacement frequencies and
most recent replacement dates for bags in the dust collectors tested are
shown in Table 13.
3.4 Process Conditions During Testing
In order to ensure that the calciner and the transfer and storage
operations were operating at representative, steady-state conditions
during the testing, various process parameters were monitored.
All processes operated normally during the emission testing. The
operating conditions of each of the processes is discus'sed separately in
the following sections.
Direct Contact Calciner
During the emission testing of the direct contact calciner, or
Calcidyne unit, the calciner was operated at full design capacity,
producing 7.0 tons per hour of calcined gypsum or stucco. The unit was,
burning natural gas during the tests.
Various process parameters, including inlet and outlet gas temperatures,
stucco dust temperatures and fuel usage rates, were monitored during the .
testing. The data show that the process was running under representative
steady state conditions during all of the outlet test runs. During the
first baghouse inlet test, the temperature of the process unit increased
slightly. However, this slight temperature variation is not significant.
The baghouse outlet test that was run simultaneously with this first
inlet test was discarded because the filter was improperly inserted into
tlie filter holder. Trie baghouse pressure drop during all test runs was
constant at 1.3 inches of water.
-21-
-------
TABLE 13
CONTROL EQUIPMENT PARAMETERS
Process
lln 1 1
Ndnic
Olrect
Contact
Calclner
Stucco
Silo
Dayhouse
Manufacturer
Flex-Kleen
(reverse pulse)
Sly (mechanical)
Nunber of
Bags
96
12
Dag Dimensions
((Ham x length
In Inches)
6 x 84
36 x 36
Clolli Area
(square feet)
960
336
Fabric
Ty|*
Homex
Cotton
Design
Air flow
(ACFH)
4100
H34h
Air to
Cloth
Ratio
5:1
3.4:,b
Oil rat Ion of
Pulse*
(sec)
0.1
N/A
Frequency
of Cleaning
(sec)
10
Pressure
of Pulse
(pslQ)
90
1 every 4 hrs. N/A
'these values are approximate; they are varled-aut
-------
TABLE 14
BAG REPLACEMENT SCHEDULES
Process Unit
Name
Last Date of
Bag Replacement
Normal Replacement
Frequency
(Months)
Direct Contact Calciner
Stucco Silo
Early May 1980
July 12, 1980
4-6
12
-23-
-------
Stucco Storage Silo
The stucco storage baghouse and silo were operated normally during
the testing.
Stucco Transfer
The stucco transfer system was operating normally during the testing,
The system tested was transferring stucco from three calciners to the
stucco cilo. The bucket elevator and screw conveyor tested for visible
emissions were vented to a fabric filter baghouse.
-24-
-------
4.0 TESTING LOCATIONS
4.1 Sampling Locations
Particulate testing was conducted at the baghouse inlet and
outlet. The inlet duct to the baghouse is 12.5 inches ID.
Upstream and downstream disturbances are greater than 2 and 8
duct diameters, respectively, away from the test ports, so
only 12 sampling points were required (Figure 4.1) per EPA
Method 1 (Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources)
Each point was sampled for 5 minutes giving a total test time
of 1 hour.
The outlet duct from the baghouse is also 12.5 inches ID. The
test ports are located >8 duct diameters from a downstream
disturbance and >2 duct diameters from the duct exit to the
atmosphere. Twelve sampling points were used as required by
EPA Method 1. For Test 1 each point was sampled for 6 minutes,
the test time was increased to 8 minutes per point for Tests 2
and 3 in order to increase the gas sample volume. (Figure 4.2)
-25-
-------
TRAVERSE
POINT
JflHLnBf
1
2
3
4
5
e
1.0
1.82
3.70
8.80
10.88
11.5
> 2 DUCT
DIAMETERS
> 8 DUCT DIAMETERS
TO DISTURBANCE
FLOOR
BAGHOUSE INLET DUCT
TEST PORT AND SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
BAGHOUSE INLET
figure 4.1
-------
' 8 DUCT DIAMETERS^
TO DISTURBANCE
> 2 DUCT
DIAMETERS
flow from baghouse
o
OUTSIDE WALL
OF BUILDING
TRAVERSE
POINT
1
2
3
4
6
6
DISTANCE FROM BAGHOUSE OUTLET DUG
DUCT WALL (In.)
1.10
2.04
3.39
7.11
8.46
9.40
«
TEST PORT AND SAMPLING POINT LOCATIONS
BAGHOUSE OUTLET
figure 4.2
-------
4.2 Emission Observation Locations
Calciner Baghouse Outlet
A certified observer conducted visible emissions tests per
EPA Method 9 (Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions
from Stationary Sources). The tests were conducted during the
particulate test runs. Readings were taken beyond the attached
steam plume, when it existed. The observer's location is shown
in Figure 4.3.
Storage Bin Area
Three hours of Method 9 testing was conducted by a certified
observer on emissions from the stucco silo.
Three hours of observations were also conducted inside the
building at a conveyor. The observers' locations for testing
are shown in Figures 4.4 and 4.5.
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
5.1 Sampling Apparatus
Nozzle
The nozzle, of appropriate diameter, was calibrated according
to procedures outlined in EPA Method 5. The button-hook nozzle
was made of 316 stainless steel.
Probe
The liner for the sample probe was made of 316 stainless steel.
A heating system, capable of maintaining a gas temperature of
248 + 25°F at the exit end, was built into the probe. A
thermocouple, used to monitor gas temperatures, was attached
to the probe. A precalibrated Type S pitot tube was attached
to the probe to allow constant monitoring of the stack gas
velocity. The pitot tube was constructed in accordance with
EPA Method 2.
-28-
-------
c oo V~TO
POSITION OF OBSERVER - BAGHOUSE OUTLET
figure 4.3
-29-
-------
W
A./
POSITION OF OBSERVER - STUCCO SILO
figure 4.4
-------
-T,
op
conveyor enclosed
in ductwork
hood
emissions possible
through top edge
of ductwork
observer on stairs
POSITION OF OBSERVER - CONVEYOR
figure 4.5
-31-
-------
Filter Holder
A tared fiberglass filter was encased in a borosilicate glass
filter holder. A glass frit supported the filter. A silicone
rubber gasket was used to provide a positive seal against
leakage from around the filter. The filter holder was contained
in a heated box capable of maintaining a temperature of 248 + 25°F,
A thermocouple, attached to a pyrometer was used to monitor the
temperature inside the sample box.
Impinger Train
The train consisted of a series of four impingers connected
with leak-free ground glass fittings. The first, third and
fourth impingers were of the Greenburg-Smith design, modified
by replacing the tip with 1.3 cm ID glass tube. The tube
extends to approximately 1.3 cm from the bottom of the flask.
The second impinger was of the Greenburg-Smith design with the
standard tip. The impinger train was contained in an ice bath
to cool the sample gas stream. A dial type thermometer, capable
of measuring temperatures to within 2°F was placed at the
outlet of the fourth impinger for monitoring purposes.
Metering System
A R.A.C. Train stacksamplr was used for the metering system.
The system consists of the following:
Calibrated orifice
Vertical, inclined, dual manometer
Dry gas meter (capable of measuring volume within 2
percent)
Vacuum gauge
Leak-free pump
Thermometers (capable of measuring temperatures
within 5.4°F)
Electrical controls for sampling
Research Appliance Company, Gibsonia, PA
-32-
-------
The orifice and dry gas meter were calibrated in accordance
with APTD-05762.
5.2 Preliminary Measurements
Gas velocity and temperature were measured at each sampling
location, in accordance with guidelines outlined in EPA Method 2
(Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate).
The velocity pressure was measured on an inclined, dual mano-
meter and the temperature was measured on a pyrometer. Measure-
ments were recorded at each traverse point.
An ititial determination of the moisture in the gas at each
location was also made. The moisture train was similar to the
particulate sampling train, except that a filter was not used.
The volume of water collected after sampling at a constant
rate for 20 minutes was measured.
5.3 Particulate Sampling
The particulate emissions from the baghouse were determined in
accordance with guidelines outlined in EPA Method 5 (Determina-
tion of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources).
Sampling
The sampling train at each test location consisted of the
nozzle, probe, filter holder, impinger train and metering
system. The sampling train is shown schematically in Figure 5.1.
All connections were leak-free.
The nozzle size was determined using data obtained from the
preliminary measurements. The first and second impingers were
each initially filled with 100 ml of distilled water. The third
impinger was left empty. The fourth impinger was filled with
300 g of dry, indicating type silica gel.
2
Rom, J.J., Maintenance, Calibration, and Operation of Iso-
kinetic Source Sampling Equipment, Publ. No. APTD-0576, Office
of Air Programs, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 1972.
-------
MODIFIED PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN
STACK WALL
NOZZLI
THERMOCOUPLE
INCLINED
MANOMETER
CAP)
VACUUM GAUGE
THERMOMETER
IMPINGER TRAIN
BY-PASS
:VALVE
FILTER
HOLDER
HEATED
BOX
THERMOMETERS
A
COARSE
CONTROL
VALVE
ORIFICE
\**^.
AIR-TIGHT
PUMP
DRY GAS
METER
PYROMETER
ICE BATH
INCLINED
MANOMETER
(AH)
Figure 5 .1
-34-
ES-093
-------
During each test, the following data were recorded at each
traverse point:
Point designation
Clock time (24-hour clock)
Dry gas meter reading (V , ft )
Velocity pressure (Ap, in. H_0)
Desired pressure drop across orifice (AH, in. H-0)
Actual pressure drop across orifice (AH, in. H_0)
Stack temperature (T , °F)
s
Dry gas meter temperature at inlet and outlet (T , F)
Vacuum gauge reading (in. Hg)
Sample box temperature ( F)
Dry gas temperature at exit of last impinger (°F)
The relationship of the Ap reading with the AH reading is a
function of the following variables:
Orifice calibration factor
Gas meter temperature
Moisture content of flue gas
Ratio of flue gas pressure to barometric pressure
Stack temperature
Sampling nozzle diameter
A nomograph was used to correlate all of the above variables
such that a direct relationship between Ap and AH could be
determined by the test technician and isokinetic conditions ,
could be maintained. Initial and final leak checks were per-
formed on each sampling train prior to and upon completion of
each test to confirm the existence of a leak-free system
(leakage rates did not exceed 0.02 cfm per EPA standards). All
measurements were recorded on the data sheets.
Sampling at the inlet location was complicated by the extremely
high particulate concentration in the gas stream. The filters
quickly became laden with particulate matter. At least two
filters were used for each test and the probe was frequently
-35-
-------
removed from the stack and shaken to dislodge the accumulated
dust-cake from the filter. Although the sampling time was
only 1 hour, the inlet tests took approximately 2 hours to
complete.
Some-technical problems caused the first (7/15/80) outlet test
run to be voided. Three test runs were made on the following
day. Only two outlet test runs coincide with inlet tests.
Sample Recovery
Upon completion of each test, the sampling trains were dis-
assembled to permit sample recovery. The samples were recovered
in the following manner:
Filter - the filter was removed from the filter
holder and placed in its original
container.
*
Front-half Acetone - the nozzle, probe and front half of the
filter holder were rinsed with acetone
three times. The wash was collected in
a glass sample jar which had a teflon-
lined lid.
Silica Gel - the silica gel was returned to its
original container.
Acetone Blank - a sample of acetone from the field
supply was collected in a glass jar,
which had a teflon-lined lid.
Each sample container was labeled with the date, contents and
test number and sealed with tape. The volume of water in the
first three impingers was measured and recorded on the data
sheets. The water was discarded.
Sample Analysis
Each sample was analyzed in the following manner:
-36-
-------
Filter
Front-half Acetone
Silica Gel
Acetone Blank
the filter was removed from its sealed
container and placed on a tared watch
glass. The filter and watch glass were
dessicated over anhydrous CaSO. for
24 hours and weighed to a constant weight.
The weight was recorded to the nearest
0.01 mg.
The acetone washings were transferred to
a tared beaker. The acetone was evaporated
at ambient temperature and pressure. The
beaker was dessicated for 24 hours and
weighed to a constant weight. The weight
was recorded to the nearest 0.01 mg.
The silica gel was weighed on a beam balance
and the weight was recorded to the nearest
0.1 gram.
The acetone blank was transferred to a
tared beaker. The acetone was evaporated
at ambient temperature and pressure. The
beaker was dessicated for 24 hours and
weighed to a constant weight. The weight
was recorded to the nearest 0.01 mg. This
weight was subtracted from the final weight
of the front-half acetone residue to obtain
the net weight of particulate in the front
half wash.
5.4 Gas Composition
The flue gas was analyzed for 02 and CO- content with a Fyrite
analyzer.
5.5 Particle Size Distribution
The particle size distribution samples were collected using an
Andersen Cascade Impactor. The impactor aerodynamically classifies
particles into multiple size ranges. It consists of eight stages
-37-
-------
and a back-up filter (Figure 5.2). Each stage consists of a
configuration of orifices of specific diameters above a
collection plate. Tared glass fiber substrates were used on
each stage as collection media.
Different sized particles are impacted on each stage correspond-
ing to the size of the orifices on the plate above the collection
substrates. The range of particle sizes retained on each
substrate varies according to the velocity of the gas (as
determined by the sample rate), the gas viscosity and the
particle density. Since the orifices are arranged in descending
diameters, the gas velocity increases and the particle size
collected on each stage decreases.
Sampling
The sampling apparatus consisted of an Andersen impactor, eight
pre-tared substrates and a pre-tared backup filter, nozzle,
drying tube, vacuum pump, dry gas meter, "calibrated orifice and
manometer (Figure 5.3).
The sample train was checked for leaks at the completion of
each sample run. Any leak rate above 0.02 cfm was considered
unacceptable.
Using data obtained from the velocity traverse, a sampling
rate (AH) was calculated. (Refer to Appendix 6.2 for
calculations).
During each test the following data were recorded:
Point designation
Clock time (24-hour clock)
Dry gas meter readings (Vm, ft )
Actual pressure drop across orifice (AH, in H20)
Dry gas meter temperatures (Tm, F)
Pressure drop, in stack (in. Hg)
Vacuum (in. Hg)
-38-
-------
ANDERSEN STACK SAMPLER
BACKUP
FILTER
PLATE.»
HOLDER
JET STAGE (9 TOTAL)
SPACERS
GLASS FIBER
COLLECTION
SUBSTRATE
NOZZLE
INLET
\
CORE
ES-095
Figure 5.2
-39-
-------
ANDERSEN SAMPLING TRAIN
ANOERSfiN
SAMPLER
STACK
'WALL
OAS METER
ORIFICE
MANOMETER
Figure 5.3
ES-094
-40-
-------
Sample Recovery
The Andersen impactor was disconnected from the probe and
brought to the Gold Bond Laboratory for clean-up. Starting
with stage 1, the fiberglass substrates were removed from the
impactor and returned to their original containers. There
were a total of 8 substrates and one backup filter for each
sample.
Sample Analysis
The fiberglass substrates and the backup filters were dessicated
and weighed to a constant weight. The net weight gain was
recorded to the nearest 0.01 mg.
-41-
-------
YRC PROJECT NO. 01-9517-29
Prepared by:
M. Denaro
Project Scientist
Reviewed by:
(J,,
R./A. Kniskefrl
Project Manager
Emissions Measurement Dept.
Approved by:
(W. Davison
e President
-42-
------- |