United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-GYP-6
January 1981
Air
v»EPA Gypsum Industry
Emission Test Report
U.S. Gypsum Company
Fort Dodge, Iowa
-------
PROCESS EMISSION TESTS
AT THE U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
GYPSUM WALLBOARD PLANT
FORT DODGE, IOWA
Mr. George W. Walsh
EPA Project Officer
Mr. Dennis P. Holzschuh
EPA Task Manager
EMB Project 80-GYP-6
ESED Project 80/16
EPA Contract 68-02-3543
Work Assignment 5
TRC Project 1532-E80
Prepared by:
Willard A. Wade III, P.E.
Work Assignment Manager
Leigh A. Gammie
Project Engineer
Eric A. Pearson
Project Scientist
Peter W. Kalika
Program Manager
July 20, 1981
-------
PREFACE
The work reported here was conducted by personnel from TRC - Environmental
Consultants/ Inc., Radian Corporation/ United States Gypsum Company of Fort
Dodge/ Iowa/ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The scope of work, issued under EPA Contract No. 68-02-3543, Work Assign-
ment No. 5, was under the supervision of the TRC Work Assignment Manager,
Mr. Willard A. Wade III. Mr. Leigh Gammie of TRC served as Project Engineer
and, with Mr. Eric A. Pearson/ was responsible for summarizing the test and
analytical data in this report. Analysis of the samples was performed at the
TRC laboratories under the direction of Ms. Margaret Fox of TRC.
Mr. Michael Palazzolo of Radian Corporation was responsible for monitoring
the process operations during the testing program. Radian personnel were also
responsible for preparing Section 3 of this report/ Process Description and
Operations.
Members of U.S. Gypsum Company/ Fort Dodge/ Iowa, whose assistance and
guidance contributed greatly to the success of the test program, include
Mr. Daniel Nootens, Plant Manager.
Mr. Dennis Holzschuh, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emis-
sion Measurement Branch, EPA, served as Task Manager and was responsible for
coordinating the emission test program. His representative on-site for the
tests was Mr. King Wu.
-ii-
-------
TRC-Environnve'rftal Consultants,/ Inc.,
Peter W. KaliKa
Project Manager
July 20, 1981
NOTE: Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication does
not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency. .
-iii-
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Measurement Program 1
1.2.1 Continuous and Batch Kettle Calciner No. 5 ... 2
1.2.2 Board End Saw and Paper Scoring 2
1.2.3 Mixing and Bagging Baghouse 3
1.3 Description of Report Sections 3
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 4
2.1 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Particulate Emissions .... 4
2.2 Comparison of Inlet Run 3 Batch Particulate
Mass Emission Rates Calculated by Sample
Concentration and Area Ratio Methods 7
2.3 Board End Saw and Paper Scoring
Baghouse Emissions 10
2.4 Board End Saw Particle Size Test 12
2.5 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse Inlet Particle
Size Tests ' 12
2.6 Visible Emissions 12
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATIONS 22
3.1 General Plant Description 22
3.2 Process Equipment Description 22
3.3 Emission Controls 25
3.4 Process Conditions During the Emission Tests. ... 28
4.0 LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS 36
4.1 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse 36
4.1.1 Baghouse Inlet 36
4.1.2 Baghouse Outlet 36
4.2 Board End Saw Baghouse Outlet 40
4.3 Visible Emission Observation Locations 40
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS 43
5.1 EPA Reference Methods Used 43
5.2 Particulate Emissions Sampling and Analysis .... 44
5.2.1 Sampling Methods 44
5.2.2 Sample Recovery and Preparation 46
5.2.3 Sample Analysis .46
5.3 Sampling and Analysis Problems During Particulate
Emissions Tests 47
5.4 Particle Size Distribution Tests 48
5.4.1 Board End Saw Baghouse Outlet 43
5.4.2' Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse Inlet 50
5.5 Visible Emission Observations 50
-iv-
-------
APPENDICES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
A FIELD DATA SHEETS FOR PARTICULATE EMISSION TESTS
B PARTICLE SIZE TESTS
B.I Anderson Cascade Impactor Test
B.2 Banco Centrifugal Separator Tests
C VISIBLE EMISSIONS
C.I Daily Summary Logs
C.2 EPA Method 9 and Method 22
C.3 Field Data Sheets
D DAILY SAMPLING LOGS
D.I Daily Summary Log
D.2 Field Notebook
E SAMPLING TRAIN CALIBRATION DATA
F SAMPLING PROCEDURE AND ANALYTICAL DATA
F.I EPA Method 5
F.2 Laboratory Data Summaries
G PROJECT PARTICIPANTS
H SCOPE OF WORK
Work Assignment
Technical Directives
Associated Correspondence
-v-
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES PAGE
2-1 CUMULATIVE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE IN BOARD
END SAW BAGHOUSE OUTLET AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY,
FORT DODGE, IOWA 13
2-2 CUMULATIVE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE IN
KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET DURING
BATCH OPERATIONS AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA 15
2-3 CUMULATIVE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE IN
KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET DURING
CONTINUOUS OPERATIONS AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA 16
'•'h :-
2-4 SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OPACITY ON OCTOBER 30, 1980 OF
STUCCO CONVEYOR BAGHOUSE PLUME AT U.S. GYPSUM
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 20
3-1 GYPSUM WALLBOARD PRODUCTION PROCESS
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 23
3-2 CALCINING KETTLE AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY,
FORT DODGE, IOWA 25
3-3 WEST STUCCO DUST TEMPERATURE DURING BATCH KETTLE
TEST RUNS 1 AND 2 AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY,
FORT DODGE, IOWA 33
4-1 PLANT LAYOUT AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 37
4-2 KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET SAMPLING
LOCATION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA . 38
4-3 KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE OUTLET SAMPLING
LOCATION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA . .. 39
4-4 BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE OUTLET SAMPLING LOCATION
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 41
5-1 MODIFIED EPA PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN, AUGUST 18,
1977, FEDERAL REGISTER 45
5-2 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION SAMPLING TRAIN 49
-vi-
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
2-1 AVERAGE VALUES FROM PARTICIPATE TESTS ON THE KETTLE
CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET AND OUTLET AT U.S.
GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 5
2-2 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PARTICULATE TESTS ON GASES
ENTERING AND EXITING THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
BAGHOUSE DURING BATCH OPERATION AT U.S. GYPSUM
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA .
2-3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PARTICULATE TESTS ON GASES
ENTERING AND EXITING THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
BAGHOUSE DURING CONTINUOUS OPERATION AT U.S. GYPSUM
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
2-4 COMPARISON OF PARTICULATE EMISSION CALCULATIONS
FOR RUN 3 AT THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE
INLET DURING BATCH OPERATION AT U.S. GYPSUM
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
2-5 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PARTICULATE TESTS ON GASES
EXITING THE BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE AT U.S. GYPSUM
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 11
2-6 SUMMARY OF BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE OUTLET PARTICLE
SIZING TEST RESULTS AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA ' 14
2-7 SUMMARY OF KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET BAHCO
PARTICLE SIZE TEST RESULTS AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA 17
2-8 SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OPACITIES OF THE STUCCO CONVEYOR
BAGHOUSE PLUME AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT
DODGE, IOWA 19
2-9 VISIBLE FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM THE BOARD END SAW
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 21
3-1 EMISSION CONTROL EQUIPMENT PARAMETERS AT
U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 26
3-2 BAGHOUSE BAG REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 27
3-3 PROCESS DATA FROM BATCH KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA . . . .\ 29
3-4 PROCESS DATA FROM CONTINUOUS KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 32
4-1 VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION LOCATIONS AT
U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA 42
-vii-
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act of 1970 charges the Administrator of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the responsibility of estab-
lishing 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 (SPNSS) are to reflect the degree of
emission limitation achievable through application of the best demonstrated
emission control technology. EPA uses emission data/ obtained from controlled
sources in the particular industry under consideration, as a partial basis for
SPNSS.
EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) selected the
U.S. Gypsum Company gypsum wallboard manufacturing plant at Fort Dodge, Iowa
as a site for an emission test program. The test program was designed to pro-
vide a portion of the emission database required for SPNSS for the processes
associated with the production of gypsum wallboard. EPA engaged TRC to mea-
sure particulate emissions, particle size distributions, and plume opacities
at a continuous and batch-kettle calciner, the board end sawing and paper
scoring operation, and the mixing and bagging operation.
1.2 Measurement Program
The measurement program was conducted at the U.S. Gypsum Company gypsum
vallboard plant in Fort Dodge, Iowa, from October 27 to 31, 1980. The emis-
sion tests were designed to characterize and quantify uncontrolled and con-
trolled particulate emissions from the gypsum wallboard production process and
to determine control equipment efficiency.
-1-
-------
TRC personnel were responsible for sampling and analyzing process emis-
sions. Concurrently Radian was responsible for monitoring pertinent process
operation parameters. The chronology of the emission tests is contained in
Appendix D. The components of the measurement program are as follows:
1.2.1 Continuous and Batch Kettle Calciner No. 5
• Particulate Emissions
Three runs of concurrent emission tests were performed in the bag-
house inlet and outlet during continuous operation and during batch
operation•
• Visible Emissions
The opacity of the calciner baghouse plume was monitored during the
particulate emission tests.
• Particle Size Distribution
Filter particulate catches from the six baghouse inlet emission tests
were analyzed for particle size distribution using a Bahco centri-
fugal separator.
1.2.2 Board End Saw and Paper Scoring
• Particulate Emissions
Three emission test runs were performed at the baghouse outlet•
• Visible Emissions and Fugitive Emissions
The opacity of the baghouse plume and fugitive emissions from the
sawing operation were monitored during the particulate emission tests.
• Particle Size Distribution
One test run was performed at the baghouse outlet between the second
and third emission tests/ using an in-train impactor.
-2-
-------
1.2.3 Mixing and Bagging Baghouse
The opacities of the stucco conveyor baghouse outlet plume and the bagging
operation baghouse plume were monitored during the particulate emission tests
at the board end saw.
1.3 Description of Report Sections
The remaining sections of this report present the Summary of Results
(Section 2)/ Process Description and Operations (Section 3), Location of Sam-
pling Points (Section 4), and the Sampling and Analytical Methods (Sec-
tion 5). Detailed descriptions of methods and procedures, field laboratory
data and calculations are presented in the various appendices/ as noted in the
Table of Contents.
-3-
-------
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
This section presents summary tables of the results of the emission
tests. EPA Method 5 particulate emission tests were performed on the gas
stream entering and exiting the kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse during batch
and continuous gypsum production, and on the gas stream exiting the board end
saw and paper scoring baghouse. Visible emissions from these two baghouses
and from the mixing and bagging operation baghouses were monitored during the
particulate emission tests-
2.1 Kettle Calciri'e'r No. 5 Particulate Emissions
A summary of the baghouse inlet and outlet test results for the batch and
continuous production modes is shown in Table 2-1. These data show a baghouse
particulate removal 1'efficiency of 99.9 percent and 99-8 percent for batch and
continuous production modes, respectively.
Table 2-2 shows the results for the kettle calciner No. 5 batch mode tests
alone. The data on the first two tests show similar air flow, temperature and
moisture conditions, but the inlet grain loading of Run 2 was 34 percent lower
than that of Run 1. For inlet Run 3 the air flow decreased by 12 percent
while the moisture and temperature increased significantly, which affected the
isokinetic sampling rate unfavorably. Nozzle and probe plugging were a per-
sistent problem at the .' inlet, requiring reduced sampling times. Because of
anisokinetic sampling conditions on October 29, outlet Run 3 was repeated on
October 31. The latter test results are presented here. The low grain
loading for outlet Run 2 is due to the fact that no particulate was caught on
the in-train filter; the particulate catch for this run was all in the probe
wash. The reason for the lack of particulate on the filter is not evident.
-4-
-------
TABLE 2-1
AVERAGE VALUES FROM PARTICIPATE TESTS ON THE
KETTLE' CALCINER NO. 5 INLET AND OUTLET
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
Production Mode
Sampling^ Location
Volume of Gas Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture by Volume
Average Gas Temperature (°F)
Stack Flow Rate, ACFM
(DSCFM)b
Production Rate (tons/he)
Percent Isokinetic
Net Sampling Time (minutes)
X
Concentration
Gr/ACFc
Gr/DSCFd
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
Ib/ton
Collection Efficiency
Batch
inlet
16.92
37.55
168
2825
(1510)
4.9
115.4
25.8
12.29
22.62
303.6
61.96
99
Outlet
98.88
25.95
161
2900
(1820)
4.9
103.6
160.0
0.0152
0.0245
0.380
0.08
.9
Continuous
Inlet
9.72
59.77
261
3070
(920)
11.0
98.5
20.0
16.26
54.42
428.2
39.92
99.
Outlet
41.96
51.72
232
2830
(1050)
11.0
102.2
69.0
0.0345
0.0935
0.840
0.08
8
a dry standard cubic feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
k dry standard cubic feet per minute
c grains per actual cubic foot
^ grains per dry standard cubic foot
-5-
-------
TABLE 2-2
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PARTICULATE TESTS ON GASES ENTERING AND EXITING
THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE DURING BATCH OPERATION AT
cn
I
Run Number
Sampling Location
Date
Time
Production Mode
Vol. of Gas Sampled ( DSCF)a
Percent Moisture by Volume
Average Gas Temperature (°F)
Stack Flow Rate, ACFM
(DSCFM)b
Production Rate (tons/he)
Percent Isokinetic
Net Sampling Time (minutes)
Concentration
Gr/ACF0
Gr/DSCF*1
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
Ib/ton
U.
Run
Inlet
10-28-60
1400-1600
Batch
27.70
32.72
166
2927
(1675)
109.4
40.0
18.16
31.73
455.6
S. GYPSUM
1
Outlet
10-28-80
1400-1600
Batch
95.43
25.12
154
2911
(1860)
97.8
160.0
0.0253
0.0393
0.628
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
Run
Inlet
10-28-80
1640-1940
Batch
11.69
33.02
161
2988
(1716)
98.1
18.5
11.18
20.58
303.1
2
Outlet
10-28-80
1730-2015
Batch
101.50
23.60
154
2852
(1881)
102.9
160.0
0.0026
0.0040
0.065
Run
Inlet
10-29-80
0940-1210
Batch
11.37
46.91
176
2560
(1140)
138.8
19.0
6.92
15.54
152.1
3
Outlet
10-31-80
0945-1233
Batch
99.70
29.14
176
2922
(1724)
110.0
160.0
0.0178
0.0302
0.446
Average
Inlet Outlet
16.92 98.88
37.55 25.95
168 161
2825 2895
(1510) (1821)
115.4 103.6
25.8 160.0
12.29 0.0152
22.62 0.0245
303.6 0.380
a dry standard cubic feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
dry standard cubic feet per minute
c grains per actual cubic foot
™ grains per dry standard cubic foot
-------
The test data for the kettle calciner No. 5 continuous mode tests alone
are shown in Table 2-3. These data show a much higher gas stream moisture
content and temperature than do the batch mode data/ while air flow rates are
very similar to those measured in the batch mode tests. Inlet Run 4 was re-
peated late in the day on October 30 because of the anisokinetic sampling con-
ditions experienced earlier. The data from the repeat run are presented
here.
2.2 Comparison of Inlet Run 3 Batch Particulate Mass Emission Rates Calculated
by Sample Concentration and Area Ratio Methods
Table 2-4 shows a comparison of the emission rates for batch inlet Run 3
as calculated by two methods. The sample concentration method of calculating
the mass emission rate uses Equation 2-1 as follows:
MER = ^ * Q * k (2-1)
where: MER = mass emission rate, pounds/hour
M = mass of particulate captured, mg
V = sample volume, dry standard cubic feet
Q = volumetric flow rate, dry standard cubic feet/minute
K = units correction factor = 1.32 x 10~4
This equation is valid only for isokinetic sampling; that is, when the veloc-
ity of gas entering the nozzle (U ) is within 90 percent of the velocity of
the gas stream (U ). Under conditions of anisokinetic sampling (U
S > n
<0.9U or U >1.1U ), particle inertia causes sampling biases that
s n s
produce nonrepresentative emission rate values if the sample concentration
calculation method is used. In cases like batch Run 3, where the sampling
rate was super-isokinetic, the gas stream around the nozzle is drawn into the
nozzle but the large particles do not follow because of their inertia. Thus,
-7-
-------
• TABLE 2-3
SUMMARY OP RESULTS OF PARTICIPATE TESTS ON GASES ENTERING AND EXITING
THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGIIOUSE DURING CONTINUOUS OPERATION
" AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE,
Run Number
Sampling Location
Date
Time
Production Mode
Vol. of Gas Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By Volume
Average Gas Temperature (°F)
Stack Flow Rate, ACFM
(DSCFM)b
Production Rate (tons/hr)
Percent Isokinetic
Net Sampling Time (minutes)
Concentration
Gr/ACF°
Gr/DSCF*1
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
Ib/ton
Run
Inlet
10-30-80
0930-1018
Continuous
10.0
59.1
258
3156
(963)
96.5
20.0
15.11
49.50
408.6
4
Outlet
10-30-80
1704-1810
Continuous
38.10
53.03
235
2801
(1004)
106.1 '
63.0
0.0344
0.0961
0.827
Run
Inlet
' 10-30-80
1312-1404
Continuous
9.96
58.8
| 268
3L82
^967)
95.6
20.0
17.65
58.07
481.9
5
Outlet
10-30-80
1230-1350
Continuous
48.72
51.08
230
2845
(1072)
100.0
80.0
0.0356
0.0950
0.872
IOHA
Run 6
Inlet
10-30-80
1523-1603
Continuous
/
9.19
61.4
256
2865
(825)
103.4
20.0
16.03
55.68
394.2
Outlet
10-30-80
1452-1559
Continuous
39.05
51.05
232
2851
(1070)
100.4
64.0
0.0336
0.0895
0.821
x
Average
Inlet Outlet
9.72 41.96
59.77 51.72
261 232
3068 2832
(918) (1049)
98.5 102.2
20.0 69.0
16.26 0.0345
54.42 0.0935
428.2 0.840
a dry standard cubic feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
dry standard cubic feet per minute
c grains per actual cubic foot
grains per dry standard cubic foot
-------
TABLE 2-4
COMPARISON OF PAPTICULATE EMISSION CALCULATIONS FOR RUN 3
AT THE KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET
DURING BATCH PRODUCTION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
(Calculated by the Sample Concentration
and Area Ratio Methods)
Sample Volume, V, (DSCF)a
Particulate Captured, M (mg)
Stack Volumetric Flow Rate, Q, (DSCFM)b
Sampling Time, t (hours)
Area of Stack, AS (ft2)
Area of Nozzle, A (ft2)
11.37
11460.84
2560
0.3167
0.99
0.000374
Calculation Method
Mass Emission Rate, MER
(Lb/Hr)
Sample Area
Concentration Ratio Average
152.1 211.0 181.6
a dry standard cubic feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
k dry standard cubic feet per minute
-9-
-------
the particulate concentration is less than the true value and the emission
rate calculated by the sample concentration method is too low.
The area ratio method of calculating emission rates is based on
Equation 2-2 as follows:
MER = - * — (2-2)
t A
n
where: MER = mass emission rate, pounds per hour
t = sampling time/ hours
AS = cross-sectional area of stack, ft^
AJJ = cross-sectional area of nozzle, ft^
Since the mass of collected particulate is accurate, (that is, only particles
in the plane of the nozzle enter the nozzle), the area ratio technique pro-
vides a correct emission rate value for super-isokinetic conditions.
As predicted by these theoretical considerations, the batch inlet Run 3
MER calculated by the latter method is in fact greater than the MER calculated
by the sample concentration method (shown in Table 2-2). An examination of
batch Runs 1 and 2 inlet particulate MERs calculated by the area ratio method
will show agreement within 10 percent of the values calculated by the sample
concentration technique. .Both of these runs were within the acceptable iso-
kinetic range.
2.3 Board End Sawing and Paper Scoring (BES/PS) Baghouse Emissions
A summary of the results of the BES/PS outlet emission tests is shown in
Table 2-5. These data show that over the three test runs, air flow rates
varied by less than 2.5 percent and emission rates varied by less than 40 per-
cent. Moisture and temperature values are within expected ranges for ambient
air. This air is drawn from the saw area through the baghouse in order to
reduce dust levels in the vicinity of the saw.
-10-
-------
TABLE 2-5
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF PARTICULATE TESTS ON GASES
EXITING THE BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE AT
U.S. GYPSUM
Run Number
Date
Time
Volume of Gas Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By Volume
Average Gas Temperature (°F)
Stack Flow Rate, ACFM
(DSCFM)b
Production Rate (tons/hr)
Percent Isokinetic
Net Sampling Time (minutes)
Concentration
Gr/ACFc
Gr/DSCFd
Mass Rate
Ib/hr
Ib/ton
COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
Run 7
10-31-80
1115-1200
45.4
1.17
71
4026
(4029)
30.7
96.8
40
0.0090
0.0092
0.318
0.010
Run 8
10-31-80
1310-1415
43.8
1.48
75
3930
(3897)
30.7
93.6
40
0.0079
0.0084
0.280
0.009
Run 9
10-31-80
16.07-1655
45.1
0.716
70
3951
(3982)
30.7
97.3
40
0.0135
0.0136
0.466
0.015
Average
44.7
1.12
72
3969
(3969)
30.7
95.9
40
0.0101
0.0104
0.354
0.011
a dry standard cubic feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
b dry standard cubic feet per minute
c grains per actual cubic foot
d grains per dry standard cubic foot
-11-
-------
2.4 Board End Saw Particle Size Test
One particle size sampling test run was performed in the board end saw
baghouse outlet. A frequency distribution of the particle size measurements
is shown in Figure 2-1. The values used to construct this distribution are
shown in Table 2-6. The Dpl-n f°r tne particulate matter captured during
this one test is approximately 2.5 microns.
2.5 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse Inlet Particle Size Tests
The in-train filter particulate catches from the three batch and three
continuous emission test runs performed at the kettle calciner baghouse inlet
were analyzed for particle size distribution. These analyses were performed
with a Bahco centrifugal separator. Use of an in-train cascade impactor was
impractical because of high grain loadings and moisture content. The particle
size frequency distributions for the three batch test runs and the three con-
tinuous test runs are shown in Figures 2-2 and 2-3, respectively. The data
used to construct these distributions are shown in Table 2-7. The Dp(-0 is
approximately 7.0 microns for batch operations and approximately 5.7 microns
for continuous operations.
2.6 Visible Emissions
The opacities of the kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse outlet plume, the
BES/PS baghouse plume, the stucco conveyor baghouse plume and the bagging
operation baghouse plume were monitored during the particulate emission tests
by a certified visible emission observer. All observation locations conform
to the guidelines of EPA Method 9.
The kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse outlet plume was monitored for approxi-
mately 9.5 hours over 4 days, and all 15-second observations were zero (clean
-12-
-------
100.0
MICRONS
i— •
0
•
O
UJ
<:
»-*
o
o
-------
TABLE 2-6
SUMMARY OF BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE OUTLET
PARTICLE SIZING TEST RESULTS
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
Test Date
Time
10-31-80
1710-1840
Particulate
Concentration
(grains/DSCF*)
0.000413
Aerodynamic
Size Range
(microns)
>7.96
5.47-7.96
3.69-5.47
2.51-3.69
1.61-2.51
0.33-1.61
<0.33
Mass
Fraction in
Size Range (%)
17.4
11.6
6.5
14.1
21.0
17.0
12.3
Cumulative
Percent
99.9
82.5
70.9
64.4
50.3
29. j-
12.3
* Grains per dry standard cubic foot at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg
-14-
-------
01
i
o
o
UJ
fc
a:
Q.
I—
LU
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
'8
8
7
6
5
4
• RUN
D RUN
A RUN
1
0.01 0.1 0.51 2 5 10 20304050607080 90 95 989999.899.9.99.99
PERCENT OF MASS LESS' THAN INDICATED DIAMETER
FIGURE 2-2: CUMULATIVE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE IN KETTLE CALCINER NO.5
BAGHOUSE INLET DURING BATCH OPERATIONS AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-------
en
I
crons
oc
UJ
UJ
-JOOvOO
• RUN
DRUM
A RUN
0.01 0.1 0.5 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 5060 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
PERCENT OF MASS 1ESS THAN INDICATED DIAMETER
FIGURE 2-3:
CUMULATIVE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE IN KETTLE CALCINER NO.5
BAGHOUSE INLET DURING CONTINUOUS OPERATIONS AT U.S. GYPSUM
FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-------
TABLE 2-7
SUMMARY OF KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5 BAGHOUSE INLET
BAHCO PARTICLE SIZE TEST RESULTS
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOHA
Equivalent
Operation
Run No. Test Date Mode
1 10-28-80 batch
2 10-28-80 batch
3 10-29-80 batch
4 10-30-80 continuous
E 10-30-80 continuous
i
6 10-30-80 continuous
a
b
a
b
a
h
a
b
a
>•
a
b
<-
11.
11.
21.
21 .
6.
6.
6.
F.
5.
5.
8.
8.
20
6
6
a
4
6
6
0
0
1
1
0
P
1.20-
1.95
9.2
20.8
6.2
27.6
7.3
13.9
9.7
15.7
8.6
13.7
11.8
20.6
1.95-
3.30
12.6
33.4
8.7
36.3
12.6
26.5
17.4
33.1
11.6
25.3
14.5
35.1
Particle Size Range (microns)
3.30-
7.15
19.7
53.1
16.7
53.0
21.2
47.7
26.0
59.1
31 .7
57.0
22.4
57.5
7.15-
11.60
24.3
77.4
19.7
72.7
29.3
77.0
24.2
83.3
24.6
81-6
16.7
84.2
11.60-
21 .32
17.7
95.1
17.2
89.9
18.4
95.4
14.4
97.7
15.9
97.5
14.6
98.8
21.32-
27.00
3.5
98.6
3.5
93.4
3.2
98.6
1 .8
99.5
2.0
99.5
O.B
99.6
27.00-
31.01
0.5
99.9
1.6
95.0
0.6
99.2
0.4
99.9
0.4
99.9
0.2
99.8
>31.01
0.1
100.0
5.0
100.0
0.8
100.0
0.1
100.0
0.1
100.0
0.2
100.0
a Mass fraction in size range (%)
b Cuwuletive percent
-------
steam plume). The board end saw baghouse plume was monitored for approxi-
mately 5. hours during 1 day, and all 15-second observations were zero. The
data for these two baghouse plume observations are shown in Appendix C.
The stucco conveyor baghouse plume was monitored for 3 hours over 2 days.
The 6-minute average opacities ranged from zero to 4 percent. These 6-minute
averages are shown in Table 2-8 and are plotted in Figure 2-4.
The bagging operation baghouse plume was monitored for approximately 3.5
hours over 3 days during the operation of baggers No. 2 and No. 3. All
15-second observations were zero. These data are shown in Appendix C.
Visible fugitive emissions originating directly from the board end saw
were monitored for approximately 3 hours during 1 day. Observations were made
by certified visible emission observers following the guidelines of EPA Method
22. Visible emissions occurred during approximately 17 minutes of the moni-
toring period. These data are shown in Table 2-9.
-18-
-------
TABLE 2-8
SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OPACITIES OF THE
STUCCO CONVEYOR BAGHOUSE PLUME
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
6 -Minute
Day Time Period
10-29-80 1400-1405
1406-1411
1412-1417
1418-1423
1424-1429
1430-1435
1436-1441
1442-1447
1448-1453
1454-1459
10-30-80 0903-0908
0909-0914
0915-0920
0921-0926
0927-0932
0933-0938
0939-0944
0945-0950
0951-0956
0957-1002
1003-1009
1009-1014
1015-1020
1021-1026
1027-1032
1033-1038
1039-1044
1045-1050
1051-1056
1057-1102
Average
Opacity {%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.0
0.6
1.0
1.0
0
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.8
1.9
1.7
1.3
4.0
1.7
-19-
-------
I
to
o
I
a.
O
0830
0900
0930 1000
TIME OF DAY
1030
1100
1130
FIGURE 2-4: SIX-MINUTE AVERAGE OPACITY ON OCTOBER 30, 1980 OF STUCCO CONVEYOR
BAGHOUSE PLUME AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-------
TABLE 2-9
VISIBLE FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM BOARD END SAW
AT U.S.. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
Observation Observation
Start Period
Date Time . (minutes )
10-31-80 1415
1430
1600
1620
1640
1700
1725
1750
20
15
20
20
20
20
20
40
Accumulated Emissions Time
During Observation Period
(minutes : seconds )
2:20
1:41
3:20
2:57
3:16
1:16
0:32
1:42
.5
.5
.5
.5
TOTAL
175
17:06
-21-
-------
3.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATIONS
3.1 General Plant Description
The United States Gypsum Company plant at Fort Dodge, Iowa, produces wall-
board and plaster products from gypsum ore mined about 1 mile from the plant.
A simplified flow diagram for the process used at the Fort Dodge plant is
shown in Figure 3-1. Ore stockpiled at the plant is crushed to about 5 cm (2
inches) and then dried to remove surface moisture. The dry ore is further
ground to about 90 percent 100 mesh in a grinding mill. The ground crude gyp-
sum, primarily calcium sulfate dihydrate (CaSO " 2H 0), is heated to
about 150C (300 F) to remove 75 percent of its water of hydration in a pro-
cess known as calcining, thus forming calcium sulfate hemihydrate
(CaSO ' 1/2 H.O), or stucco. The 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 wallboard. The wallboard is subsequently dried in
a multideck kiln, trimmed to the correct size, and shipped to distributors.
^
3.2 Process Equipment Description
Kettle Calciner
The calciner tested at the Fort Dodge plant is a kettle calciner that has
been modified to operate in both batch or continuous modes. In continuous
calcining, as finely ground gypsum (land plaster) is fed to the kettle, hot
combustion gases are passed through the flues inside the kettle to provide an
indirect transfer of heat to the land plaster. This heating causes the re-
lease of chemically-bound water, producing stucco. In batch calcining, the
kettle is filled and heated through a cycle to remove this water, producing a
stucco more suitable for use as a plaster product. A schematic diagram of the
calcining kettle is shown in Figure 3-2.
-22-
-------
Vent
Vent
FIGURE 3-1: JiYPSUM WALLBOARD. PRODUCTION PROCESS AT
U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-23-
-------
Feed Spout
Kettle Shell
Vent to top
of kettle
A
Horizontal Hue
Horizontal Flue
Horizontal Flue
Sweep Arms
Kettle Bottom
Combustion Chamber
BOTTOM DISCHARGE
CLOSED DURING
CONTINUOUS OPERATION
FIGURE 3-2:
CALCINING KETTLE AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY,
FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-24-
-------
Land Plaster and Stucco Conveying
The land plaster and stucco conveying system tested at the plant includes
5 land plaster screw conveyors/ 2 stucco screw conveyors, and 2 stucco bucket
elevators.
Board End Sawing and Paper Scoring
The boardline tested at the Fort Dodge plant is capable of producing ap-
proximately 26.6 million square meters (286 million square feet) of 1/2-inch
wallboard annually. The board end sawing and paper scoring operations tested
on this boardline are typical of those operating in the gypsum industry.
Mixing and Bagging
The plaster mixing and bagging unit tested at the Fort Dodge plant is
typical of those found throughout the gypsum industry. The mixer capacity is
1,500 pounds per batch.
s
3.3 Emission Controls
Baghouse dust collectors are used at the Fort Dodge plant to control gyp-
sum particulate emissions. Dust-laden gases exiting the kettle calciner are
vented to a pulse-jet baghouse. Emissions from conveyors and bucket elevators
are vented to baghouse dust collectors. Boardline emissions from paper
«
scoring and board end sawing are also controlled by baghouses. Emissions from
each plaster mixing and bagging operation are vented to a single, separate'
baghouse.
Design and operating parameters for the baghouses tested at the Fort Dodge
plant are given in Table 3-1. The bag replacement schedule and history for
the dust collectors tested are shown in Table 3-2.
-25-
-------
TABLR 3-1
EMISSION CONTROL EQUIPMENT PARAMETERS
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
1
to
CTl
Process
Unit
Name
Batch and
Continuous
Kettle
Calciner
Board End
Sawing and
Paper
Scoring
Mixing and
Bagging
Land
Plaster and
Stucco
Transfer
Baghouse
Manufacturer Number
(Cleaning Type) of Bags
Flex Kleen 80
(reverse
pulse)
Pangborn 288b
(shaker)
Pangborn 210
(shaker)
Flex Kleen 80
(reverse
pulse)
Bag Dimensions Design Design Air to Duration of
(diam x length Cloth Area Fabric Air Flow Cloth Ratio Cleaning Cycle Frequency Pressure OL
in inches) (ft.2) Type (ACFM) (feet/minute) (sec) of cleaning3 pulse (psig)
6 X 60 628 Nomex 4,000 6.4:1 0.1 4.5 sec 105
6 x SO l,872b Cotton 5,000 2.7:1 60 24 min N/A
19 x 48 4,178 Cotton 4,000 1:1 180 60 min N/A
6 x 60 628 Dacron 4,000 6.4:1 0.1 9.6 sec 90
a Frequency at which one row of bags is pulsed.
b This baghouse has two compartments.
-------
TABLE 3-2
BAGHOUSE BAG REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
Estimated Normal
Last Date of Replacement
Process Unit Name Bag Replacement Frequency (months )
Kettle Calciner 9-10-80 6
Board End Sawing and
Paper Scoring 10-6-80 4
Land Plaster and
Stucco Conveying 9-25-80 12
Mixing and Bagging unknown 36
-27-
-------
3-4 Process Conditions During the Emission Tests
While all process equipment operated normally during the emission testing,
the emission control equipment on the calciner operated at less than peak per-
formance during the tests. The operating conditions of the process and emis-
sion control equipment are discussed in this section.
Kettle Calciner
During emission testing of the kettle calciner, full capacity operation
was maintained, with production at 11.8 Mg (13 tons) of stucco for each batch
and at 10 Mg/hr (11 TPH) of stucco when operated continuously. Kettle produc-
tion rates were supplied by plant personnel and were based on previous kettle
production records. The length of each batch cycle was approximately 2 hours
and 40 minutes which is normal for the kettle tested.
The kettle was operated normally during all particulate sampling runs.
Process data collected during batch kettle testing are shown in Table 3-3.
Process data collected during continuous kettle testing are shown in Table
3-4. Batch test Run 3 was initially performed on October 29, 1980. Because
of anisokinetic sampling conditions the outlet portion of this run was re-
peated on October 31, 1980. The outlet portion of continuous test Run 4 was
repeated at the conclusion of the other continuous test runs on October 30,
1980, also because of anisokinetic sampling conditions.
During the calciner testing, the kettle was being fired with natural gas.
The average heat use of the unit during continuous operation was 0.9 kJ/g (0.8
million Btu/ton) and was 1.2 kJ/g (1.0 million Btu/ton) during batch opera-
tion. The temperature of the kettle is varied throughout a batch kettle
cycle. Continuous temperature records for two of the batch test runs are
shown in Figure 3-3.
-28-
-------
TABLE 3-3
PROCESS DATA FROM BATCH KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
I
NJ
Test Local
Run Date Time
1 10-28-80 1350
1357
]«07
1413
1441
1445
1452
1513
1525
1527
1533
1609
1620
1632
1639
Flue Gasa
Temperature
(°F)
455
455
455
460
500
520 ,
510
500
495
490
490
490
485
Stucco Temperature
East
<°F)
235
235
238
242
330
Kettle Dumped
250
245
Kettle Full
245
245
235
235
235
235
West
(°F|
227
230
232
237
320
235
245
238
233
223
226
228
228
Fire Box
Draftb
(Inches of water)
0.39
0.39
0.39
0.34
0.30
0.28
0.31
0.31
—
0.32
0.32
0.36
0.36
Fabric Filter Pressure
Drop (inches of water)
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
a Measured at point where flue gas leaves kettle.
b Static pressure at point where process gas leaves kettle.
-------
TABLE 3-3 (Continued)
PROCESS DATA FROM BATCH KETTLE CALCINER NO.
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
O
I
Test LocaJ
Run Date Time
2 10-28-80 1718
1740
1740
1757
1810
1817
1827
1837
1904
1926
1938
1951
2003
2008
2023
Flue Gasa Stucco Temperature
Temperature East West
(°F) (°F) <°F)
480
500
500
480
470
470
470
470
470
470
480
490
550
295
Kettle Dumped
365
245
Kettle Full
240
245
240
235
235
235
240
245
250
295
274
350
230
236
233
227
223
223
226
230
237
243
285
Fire Box
Draftb
(inches of water)
0.36
0.33
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.37
0.37
0.36
0.32
0.31
0.30
Fabric Filter Pressure
Drop (inches of water)
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
a Measured at point where flue gas leaves kettle.
b Static pressure at point where process gas leaves kettle.
-------
TABLE 3-3 (Continued)
PROCESS DATA FROM BATCH KETTLE CALCINER NO. 5
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA
I
U)
Test Local
Run Date Time
3R* 10-31-80 0932
0935
1016
1026
1127
1140 x
1143
1154
1209
1215
1228
* Repeat of outlet emission
Flue Gasa
Temperature
495
485
483
490
510
515
500
490
test only
Stucco Temperature
East
245
Kettle Full
245
245
290
Kettle Dumped
340
250
246
Kettle Full
245
West
237
235
234
270
287
241
245
230
Fire Box
Draftb
(Inches of water)
0.36
0.37
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.36
0.38
0.37
Fabric Filter Pressure
Drop (inches of water)
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.3
a Measured at point where flue gas leaves kettle.
b Static pressure at point where process gas leaves kettle.
-------
TABLE 3-4
PROCESS DATA FROM CONTINUOUS KETTLE CALCINER NO.
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT, DODGE, IOWA
I
CO
Test
Run
4
5
6
4R*
Local
Date Time
10-30-80 0845
0903
0929
1012
1033
1123
1230
1251
1330
1348
. 1400
144S
1457
1538
1615
1623
1705
1712
1724
1743
1755
1809
1820
Flue Gasa
Temperature
<°F)
620
620
620
620
620
620"
620
620
620
620
620
618
618
618
618
618
620
625
625
628
630
628
Stucco Temperature
East
<°F)
327
327
327
327
327
327
327
327
327
325
325
321
321
321
322
325
Process
325
325
325
325
325
326
West
<°F)
310
310
310
310
310
310
310
310
310
-
-
309
309
309
309
309
fuel rate
309
309
309
309
309
309
Fire Box
Draftb
(inches of water)
0.19
0.18
0.18
—
0.18
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.19
increased slightly
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.18
0.18
0.18
Fabric Filter Pressure
Drop (inches of water)
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
.3
.2
.2
.3
.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
* Repeat of outlet emission test only.
3 Measured at point where flue gas leaves kettle.
b Static pressure at point where process gas leavles kettle.
-------
4:00 p.m.1
RUN #1 10/28/80
I DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
.m.
DEGREES FAHRENHEIT
FIGURE 3-3: WEST STUCCO DUST TEMPERATURE DURING BATCH KETTLE TEST -
RUNS 1 AND 2 AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY, FORT DODGE, IOWA.
-------
During batch kettle testing, condensation occurred in the baghouse dust
collector. The condensation was evident through plugging of the sampling
probes on inlet sampling with a gypsum "paste". At the completion of the mea-
surement program, plant maintenance personnel inspected the baghouse and found
the following:
1. All of the filter bags has become blinded with gypsum and required
laundering.
2. Three of the "cups" to which the bags were attached required re-
caulking.
3. The rachet and clamps on two filter bags had become sufficiently
loosened to allow some inlet gases to pass through the baghouse un-
treated.
The existence of these three problems, in spite of the kettle operating in a
normal manner, indicates that the baghouse was not operating at peak perfor-
mance during the tests•
Uncontrolled emissions from batch kettle calciners vary throughout the
batch cycle, with highest emissions occuring during loading of the kettle,
immediately after loading, and during unloading of the kettle. Due to the
sampling probe pasting problem mentioned above, the sampling time on the inlet
to the collector during batch testing was reduced from 60 minutes to 20 to 40
minutes. Since the normal batch cycle is 2 hours and 40 minutes, the inlet
batch kettle sampling did not characterize the full-batch cycle. Therefore,
these results are not representative of uncontrolled batch kettle calciner
emissions. Results of inlet testing during continuous kettle operation, how-
-ever, are representative of uncontrolled emissions from a continuous kettle
calciner.
During the batch and continuous kettle tests, an undetached steam plume
existed at the outlet of the baghouse stack. Water vapor in the exit gases
condensed on contact with the cool ambient air (30 to 40 F).
-34-
-------
Land Plaster and Stucco Conveying
The transfer system was operating at normal capacity during the emission
testing/ transferring approximately 41 Mg (45 tons) of land plaster and stucco
each hour.
\
Board End Saw and Paper Scoring
During the board end saw testing, the boardline was running regular
1/2-inch board, 12 feet in length. The line was operating at a rate of 143
feet a minute. Emissions from both the board end sawing and paper scoring
operations on this boardline were ducted to the baghouse that was tested. The
baghouse operated normally during the testing.
Mixing and Bagging
The plaster mixing and bagging operation was operating at full capacity
during the testing, producing about 250 80-pound bags of plaster each hour (10
tons an hour).
-35-
-------
4.0 LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
This section presents descriptions of the sampling locations used during
the emission testing program conducted at the U.S. Gypsum Company gypsum wall-
board plant in Fort Dodge, Iowa, in October 1980. An overhead view of the
plant site and pertinent process facilities is shown in Figure 4-1.
4.1 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse
4.1.1 Baghouse Inlet
The kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse inlet sampling location was located in
a 13 1/2-inch i.d. section of metal duct inclined approximately 20 degrees
from the vertical. A schematic diagram of this inlet is shown in Figure 4-2.
Two 3-inch nipples were positioned 90 degrees apart in a plane perpendicular
' \>
to the duct and were located 7 feet 9 inches (6.9 duct diameters) downstream
from a bend in the duct and 18 inches (1.3 duct diameters) upstream from
another bend. This sampling location did not meet the eight-and-two diameters
cri- teria of EPA Method 1, so 10 sampling points were used on each of the two
traverse axes, for a total of 20 sampling points.
4.1.2 Baghouse Outlet
The kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse outlet sampling location was located in
a 11-inch ID vertical section of metal duct, as shown in Figure 4-3. Two
3-inch nipples were positioned 90 degrees apart in a horizontal plane and were
located 80 inches (7.3 diameters) downstream from the fan exit elbow and 52
inches (4.7 diameters) upstream from the top of the stack. This sampling lo-
cation did not meet the eight-and-two diameters criteria of Method 1, so 8
sampling points were used on each of the two traverse axes, for a total of 16
sampling points.
-36-
-------
i
U)
-J
LABORATORY —
STUCCO
CONVEYOR
BAGHOUSE
OUTLET
KETTLE CALCINER
BAGHOUSE OUTL
— *•
NO. 5
FT
t 1
••^^•M
9
mmmmfmmmmt
^
1
*
10 0
0 0
O 0
«
«
•
«
•
*
*
*
*
*
• •
m mi
m mt
m mm
mt •
• •
• •
•• •
• •
• "
M »
• •
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
KC-1
J^
KC-4
» 0
0 O
0 0
}R
"-Ui
-c.'
m
m
•
•
*
:BB:
-i:
&i
KC-
• c"
!~E>I
• •
• •
• *
• •
• •
• i
» i
•
•
!#
Kf
•
•
•
*
•
«
•
•
•
i •
SC-1
a
KC-2
•^•BAGGING
BAGHOUSE
OUTLET
BAGGING
BUILDING
VISIBLE EMISSIONS
* KETTLE
A BAGGINI
a STUCCO
* BOARD i
BOARD END SAW
BAGHOUSE ^
ct
BOARD
STORAGE
OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
CALCINER NO. 5
3 BAGHOUSE
CONVEYOR
:ND SAW
BOARDLINE
BUILDING
FIGURE 4-1: PLANT LAYOUT AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
-------
NO.5 BAGHOUSE
KETTLE CALCINER
NO.5
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS
TRAVERSE POINT
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATION FROM
DUCT WALL
(INCHES)
0.5
1.1
2.0
3.1
4.6
8.9
10.5
11.5
12.4
13.0
FIGURE 4-2:
KETTLE CALCINER NO.5 BAGHOUSE INLET SAMPLING
LOCATION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
-38-
-------
52"
•'• c
NO. 5
BAGHOUSE
80"
H-
-H
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS
TRAVERSE POINT
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATION FROM
DUCT WALL
(INCHES)
0.5
1.2
2.1
3.6
7.4
8.9
9.8
10.5
FIGURE 4-3:
KETTLE CALCINER NO.5 BAGHOUSE OUTLET SAMPLING
LOCATION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
" FORT DODGE, IOWA
-39-
-------
4.2 Board End Saw Baghouse Outlet
The board end saw baghouse outlet sampling location was located in an
11-1/2 inch ID horizontal section of sheet metal duct, as shown in
Figure 4-4. Two 3-inch nipples were positioned 90 degrees apart in a vertical
plane and were located more than eight duct diameters downstream from an elbow
and more than 2 duct diameters from the discharge end of the duct. Six sam-
pling points were used on each traverse axis for a total of 12 sampling
points, in accordance with EPA Method 1.
One particle size test was performed at this location. The sample was
extracted from a single point at the centroid of the duct using an Andersen
cascade impactor with a Method 5 train.
4.3 Visible Emission Observation Locations
The kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse plume was observed from five locations
on the ground and on the roofs of buildings around the baghouse. The board
end saw baghouse plume was observed from one location atop the boardline
building roof. The stucco conveyor baghouse plume was observed from two loca-
tions atop buildings near the baghouse. The bagging operation baghouse plume
was observed from two ground-level locations.
All observation locations were chosen to conform to the guidelines of EPA
Method 9. All locations are shown in Figure 4-1 and are described in
Table 4-1.
Fugitive emission observations at the board end saw were made from a posi-
tion 30 feet from the saw. This location conformed to the guidelines of EPA
Method 22.
-40-
-------
MORE THAN
h—2'—*H-
MORE THAN
STACK EXTENSION
J
- '
-H
I
h-
•11^
•H
BOARD END SAW
BAGHOUSE
TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS
TRAVERSE POINT
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
TRAVERSE POINT
LOCATION FROM
DUCT WALL
(INCHES)
0.8
2.9
8.6
10.7
FIGURE 4-4:
BOARD END SAW BAGHOUSE OUTLET SAMPLING
LOCATION AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
-41-
-------
TABLE 4-1
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
AT U.S. GYPSUM COMPANY
FORT DODGE, IOWA
Observer
Location
Direction From
Discharge Point
Distance From
Discharge Point
(feet)
Height Above
Ground (feet)
Discharge
Description
KC-1
NW
25
62
KC-2
KC-3
KC-4
KC-5
BB-1
BB-2
SC-1
SC-2
NE
SE
SW
SE
SW
SW
NE
NNE
100
200
23
60
60
75
100
30
57
0
60
0
0
0
100
70
Kettle Calciner #5
Baghouse Outlet
Bagging Baghouse
Outlet
Stucco Conveyor
Baghouse Outlet
BS-1
20
30
Board End Saw
Baghouse Outlet
-42-
-------
5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODS
This section presents general descriptions of sampling and analysis proce-
dures employed during the emissions testing program conducted at the U.S. Gyp-
sum Company gypsum wallboard plant in Fort Dodge, Iowa, during October 1980.
Details of sampling and analysis procedures are contained in the appendices.
5.1 EPA Reference Methods Used
The following EPA Reference Methods were used during this emission testing
program. These methods are taken from "Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources", Appendix A, Federal Register, Volume 42, (No. 160),
Thursday, August 18, 1977, pp 41755 ff.
• Method 1 - Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources
This method specifies the number and location of sampling points
within a duct, taking into account duct size and shape and local flow
disturbances.
• Method 2 - Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow
Rate
This method specifies the measurement of gas velocity and flow rate
using a pitot tube, manometer and temperature sensor. The physical
dimensions of the pitot tube and its spatial relationship to the tem-
perature sensor and any sample probe are also specified.
• Method 4 - Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases
This method describes the extraction of a gas sample from a stack and
the removal and measurement of the moisture in that sample by conden-
sation impingers. The assembly and operation of the required sam-
pling train is specified.
• Method 5 - Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary
Sources
This method specifies the isokinetic sampling of particulate matter
from a gas stream using techniques introduced in the above three
methods. Sample collection and recovery, sampling train cleaning and
calibration, and gas stream flow rate calculation procedures are spe-
cified.
-43-
-------
• Method 9 - Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Sta-
tionary Sources
Certified personnel conducted visual tests to determine plume opacity
in accordance with the guidelines of EPA Method 9. (See
Appendix C.2).
• Method 22 - Visual Determination of Fugitive Emissions from Material
Processing Sources
The frequency of occurrence of fugitive emissions was determined in
accordance with the guidelines of EPA Method 22. (See Appendix C.2).
5.2 Particulate Emissions Sampling and Analysis
5.2.1 Sampling Methods
Particulate emissions from the kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse inlet and
outlet and the board end saw baghouse outlet were sampled at points located in
accordance with EPA Method 1. Duct gas velocities were measured using S-type
pitot tubes constructed and calibrated in accordance with EPA Method 2.
The sampling train used on this program is shown in Figure 5-1 and is a
modification of the particulate sampling train specified in EPA Method 5. The
modification consists of the addition of a flexible line between the heated
filter and the impingers. The sampling train consisted of a nozzle, probe,
heated filter holder, four impingers, vacuum pump, dry gas meter, and an ori-
fice flow meter. The nozzle was stainless steel and of buttonhook shape. The
nozzle was connected to a 5/8-inch stainless steel glass-lined probe wrapped
with nichrome heating wire and jacketed. Following the probe, the gas stream
passed through a heated preweighed 4 1/2-inch glass-fiber filter and then into
the ice bath/impinger system. The impinger system consisted of four impingers
in series. The first two impingers each contained 100 milliliters of de-
ionized, distilled water. The third impinger was empty, and the fourth im-
pinger contained 200 grams of indicating silica gel. Leaving the last im-
pinger, the sample stream flowed through flexible tubing, a vacuum gauge,
-44-
-------
THERMOMETER
en
STACK WALL
CHECK VALVE
LEGEND
1 - NOZZLE
2 - PROBE
3 - FILTER HOLDER
4 - FILTER HEATER BOX
5 - ICE BATH/IMPINGER
6 - UMBILICAL CORD
7 - VACUUM GAUGE
8 - MAIN VALVE TO PUMP
9 - PUMP
10 - BY-PASS VALVE
11 - DRY GAS METER
12 - ORFICE AND MANOMETER
13 - PITOT TUBE AND MANOMETER
14 - STACK TEMPERATURE READOUT
15 - FLEXABLE TUBING
FIGURE 5-1: MODIFIED EPA PARTICULATE SAMPLING TRAIN
(AUGUST 18, 1977 FEDERAL REGISTER)
-------
needle valve, pump and a dry gas meter. A calibrated orifice and inclined
manometer completed the train. The stack velocity pressure was measured with
a pitot tube and inclined manometer. Stack temperature was monitored with a
thermocouple attached to the probe and connected to a potentiometer. A nomo-
graph was used to determine the orifice pressure drop required for any pitot
velocity pressure and stack temperature in order to maintain isokinetic sam-
pling conditions.
Test data recorded at each sampling point included test time, sampling
duration at each traverse point, pitot pressure, stack temperature, dry gas
meter volume and inlet-outlet temperature, probe temperature, and orifice
pressure drop.
5.2.2 Sample Recovery and Preparation
At the completion of each test run, the sampling train was leak-checked.
Samples were recovered and placed in containers as follows:
o Container No. 1; Filter from the filter holder.
o Container No. 2; Acetone wash of the nozzle, probe and front half of
filter holder.
o Container No. 3; Silica gel from the fourth impinger.
The volume of the contents of the first three impingers was measured for mois-
ture gain and then the contents were discarded.
5.2.3 Sample Analysis
The sample containers were returned to the TRC laboratory and were ana-
lyzed as follows:
-46-
-------
• Container No. 1; The filter and any loose material in the sample
container were desiccated and weighed to a constant
weight.
• Container No. 2; The acetone washings were transferred to a tared
beaker and evaporated to dryness at ambient tem-
perature and pressure. The material that remained
was then desiccated and weighed to a constant
weight.
• Container No. 3; The silica gel was weighed for moisture gain.
A sample of the acetone used to wash the probe and nozzle was also returned
from the field. The volume of this acetone blank was measured and the blank
was then evaporated to dryness/ desiccated and weighed.
5.3 Sampling and Analysis Problems During Particulate Emission Tests
The primary problem encountered at the No. 5 kettle calciner baghouse was
due to variation in stack gas moisture content during the batch cycle. Be-
cause of changes in the rate of heating and length of cooking time of each
cycle, the total amount of moisture collected during the test run varied. The
variation in moisture collected often resulted in anisokinetic sampling condi-
tions because nomograph settings were based either on moisture content mea-
sured in previous runs or on preliminary moisture tests.
Outlet test Runs 3 (batch) and 4 (continuous) were repeated because of
anisokinetic sampling conditions. Batch inlet Run 3 was adversely affected by
the increased moisture content due to a shortened cooking time but Radian de-
cided that this test should not be repeated. The high particulate concentra-
tions at the inlet necessitated changing the filter between ports. Probe and
nozzle plugging problems were encountered during all batch inlet tests. To
reduce the effects of the high loadings the sampling times were reduced and,
within the constraints of isokinetic sampling considerations, the largest noz-
zles possible were used . for these inlet tests. Sampling could not
-47-
-------
be performed at some traverse end points because of nozzle plugging and heavy
particulate buildup on the stack walls. The moisture content and particulate
loadings prevented doing in-stack particle size tests at the inlet as origi-
nally planned. Instead the desiccated filter particulate catches were ana-
lyzed with a Bahco centrifugal separator.
The moisture content (60 percent) at the kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse
inlet during the continuous production mode was in excess of the nomograph
maximum value of 50 percent. It was therefore necessary to use the isokinetic
rate equation to adjust sampling rates to isokinetic values instead of using
the nomograph.
No problems were encountered during the board end saw baghouse outlet
tests.
'5*4 Particle Size Distribution Tests
5.4.1 Board End Saw Baghouse Outlet
One particle size test was performed at the board end saw baghouse outlet
using an Andersen Mark II cascade impactor with a preimpac'tor. The impactor
was operated in its in-stack mode in accordance with the manufacturer's proce-
dures. A schematic diagram of the impactor sampling train is shown in Figure
5-2. Because of the low moisture content in this outlet (1 percent), only one
impinger with silica gel was needed in the train.
Prior to the initiation of sampling, the impactor was leak-tested and
placed in the duct for 20 minutes to allow it to heat to duct temperature to
prevent condensation. Sampling began immediately upon rotation of the nozzle
into the flow stream. Sampling was performed isokinetically from a single
point at the centroid of the duct. The test lasted for 90 minutes, with sam-
pling parameter values recorded every 5 minutes.
-48-
-------
Thermometer
/I
Cascade
Impaclor
Vacuum
Tubing
Slack Wall
Nozzle
I
Reverse-Type
Pilot Tube
Probe
Pilot Manometer^ Thermometers BypaSS
Orifice
\
Ice Bath
Vacuum Gauge
Air Tight Pump
Vacuum
Line
Impinger With
Silica Gel
FIGURE 5-2: PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION SAMPLING TRAIN
-------
The impactor was loaded before the test run with preweighed glass fiber
collection substrates. Upon completion of the test run/ the substrates were
removed in a secluded, clean area and placed in petri dishes and sealed. The
cyclone preseparator contents were brushed into a tared sample jar and
sealed. These samples were brought to the TRC laboratory and were weighed on
an analytical balance to 0.01 mg in a constant-humidity environment.
5.4.2 Kettle Calciner No. 5 Baghouse Inlet
The high moisture and heavy grain loading at this location precluded the
use of the Andersen cascade impactor for particle size tests. Instead, the
desiccated filter catches from the six Method 5 inlet test runs (3 batch mode
and 3 continousxmode) were analyzed with a Bahco centrifugal separator fol-
lowing ASME Power Test Code 28. These Bahco analyses were performed by a sub-
contractor retained by TRC. The analysis method and data are presented in
Appendix B.
5.5 Visible Emission Observations
Visible emission observations of the plumes from the kettle calciner No. 5
baghouse, the board end saw baghouse, the stucco conveyor baghouse, and the
bagging operation baghouse were conducted by a certified observer. Observa-
tion locations, as described in Section 4.3, were choosen to conform to the
guidelines of EPA Method 9. The gray plant buildings and blue sky were used
as backgrounds. During an observation period, opacity readings were taken and
recorded at 15-second intervals. Six-minute averages were calculated from
these 15-second observations.
The only problems encountered during _the visible emissions observations
were associated with the kettle calciner No. 5 baghouse outlet plume. The
-50-
-------
high moisture content of the exiting gas stream/ in conjunction with relative-
ly cool ambient air temperatures (ranging from 40 F to 70 F), caused the
formation of a heavy steam plume. With westerly winds the plume was blown
through a line of stacks (see Figure 4-2). This occasionally caused some dif-
ficulty in estimating plume opacity at the point where the steam plume dissi-
pated.
Visible fugitive emssions from the board end saw were observed by certi-
fied visible emission observers over a period of 3 hours following the guide-
lines of EPA Method 22. The amount of time during which emissions were ob-
served was measured and recorded.
-51-
------- |