&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 79-CKO-14
July 1979
Air
Iron and Steel
(Coke Oven Battery
Stack)
Emission Test Report
Kaiser Steel Corporation
Fontana, California
-------
Emission Test Report
Kaiser Steel Corporation, Fontana, Ca,
Coke Oven Battery "B" Baghouse
To
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Contract #68-02-2812
Work Assignment #43
D. J. Powell
TRW
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DIVISION
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
1 Introducti on ,1-1
2 Summary and Discussion of Results 2-1
3 Process Description 3-1
4 Location of Sampling Points 4-1
5 Sampling and Analytical Procedures .....5-1
6 Appendices
A. Field and Laboratory Data A-l
1) Traverse Poi nt Locati ons A-l
2) Field Data Sheets A-3
3) Analytical Datasheets A-39
4) Calibration Data Sheets , A-48
B. Sample Calculations ;B-l
C. Daily Activity Log C-l
D. Process Data D-l
ii
-------
FIGURES
Number
~~T
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
Carbon
Monoxide
Monoxi de
Monoxide
Monoxi de
Concentrations,
Concentrations,
Concentrations,
Concentrations,
Page
9/18/79 2-7
9/19/79 2-8
9/20/79 2-9
9/21/79 2-10
Baghouse "B" Ducting Schematic 4-2
Inlet Sampling Location 4-3
Outlet Sampling Location 4-4
Particulate Sampling Train Schematic 5-2
BaP Sampling Train Schematic 5-4
Adsorbent Sampling System 5-5
Integrated-bag Sampling Train 5-8
CO Continuous Sampling System 5-9
111
-------
TABLES
Number Page
T Baghouse Inlet Parti oil ate Results 2-2
2 Baghouse Outlet Particulate Results 2-3
3 Baghouse Inlet BaP Results 2-4
4 Baghouse Outlet BaP Results 2-5
5 Gaseous Constituent Concentrations i2-6
IV
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
A test crew from TRW Environmental Engineering Division performed emis-
sion testing at Kaiser Steel Corporation's Fontana works between September
17th and 22nd, 1979. The testing was performed simultaneously at the inlet
and outlet of a baghouse controlling emissions from Coke oven battery "B".
The test results will be used to assist the EPA In establishing performance
standards for the iron and steel industry.
The gas constituents monitored included particulates, benzo-a-pyrene,
carbon monoxide, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and benzene. Opacity observations
of the battery stack were made during the tests. Two engineers monitored
the process during the testing to assure normal battery operation.
This report presents the results of the sampling and analysis effort
at the Kaiser Steel Corporation Plant in Fontana, California. The following
sections of the report contain a summary of the results, description of the
process, descriptions of the sampling locations, descriptions of the sampling
and analysis procedures, and appendices containing field and laboratory data
and example calculations.
1-1
-------
SECTION 2
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The results of the test program at Kaiser Steels baghouse "B" are
summarized in Tables 1-5 and figures 1-4. The results of simultaneous inlet
and outlet partlculate tests are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
The results of simultaneous inlet and outlet benzo-a-pyrene (BaP) tests are
summarized 1n Tables 3 and 4, respectively,. The analysis results of the Inte-
grated bag samples for benzene, 02, C02, and CO are given in Table 5. The
results of continuous monitoring of the stack gas for carbon monoxide is pre-
sented graphically in Figures 1-4.
The data from partlculate test number 2 (Baghouse Inlet) is not present-
ed because this run was terminated at the middle of the test. The probe at the
Inlet sampling location failed to pass the leak check after changing sampling
ports and the glass probe liner was found to be broken.
The BaP and particulate tests were done simultaneously except for test
number 2 where the partlculate test was aborted. The simultaneous testing
was accomplished by operating a BaP train in one sampling port and a partlculate
sampling train in the other port at both the inlet and outlet locations.
Continuous carbon monoxide monitoring and an integrated bag sample (for benzene,
C09, CO, and 09) were also done simultaneously with the BaP and partlculate
tests. *
Since the baghouse Inlet particulate run #2 was aborted, another run was
made on Friday. This run (#4) consisted of a partlculate sample at both the
inlet and outlet. The chart below gives a visual presentation of the sample
runs made in order to facilitate the comparison of Inlet and Outlet runs with
respect to BAP and partlculate testing.
. Run 1
Particulate
and
BAP
Particulate
and
BAP
BAGHOUSE INLET
Run 2
Particulate
Aborted
BAP only
Run 3
Particulate
and 3
BAP
BAGHOUSE. OUTLET
Particulate
and
BAP
Partlculate
and
BAP '
i>V
Run 4
Particulate
' .Only
Partlculate
Only
2-1
-------
Table 1
Baghouse Inlet Particulate Results
RUN NUMBER
1 Dm
II STACK PARAMETERS
PST - STATIC PRESSURE, "He (MMHG)
Ps - STACK GAS PRESSURE, 'Ho ABSOLUTE (MMHG)
I CO, - VOLUME I DRY
1 0, - VOLUME J DRV
I CO - VOLUME > DRV
I N2 - VOLUME I DRV
Ts - AVERAGE STACK TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
X H20 - Z MOISTURE IN STACK GAS, BY VOLUME
As - STACK AREA, FT2
MD - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, DRV BASIS
Ms - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, WET BASIS
Vs - STACK GAS VELOCITY, FT/SEC, (M/SEC)
QA - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STACK CONDITIONS, ACFM (NM'/MIN)
Qs - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, DSCFn (NM'/MIN)
III TEST CONDITIONS
PB - BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, "He (MHKG)
DN - SAMPLING NOZZLE DIAMETER, IN. (MM)
T - SAMPLING TIME, NIN
VM - SAMPLE VOLUME, 'ACF (M3)
1 Np - NET SAMPLING POINTS
CP.- PITOT TUBE COEFFICIENT
TM - AVERAGE METER TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
PM - AVERAGE ORIFICE PRESSURE DROP, "H20 (n*20)
VLC - COHDENSATE COLLECTED (IMPIHGEHS AND GEL), MLS
Cf - STACK VELOCITY HEAD 'H20 (MnH20)
IV TEST CALCULATIONS
V» - CONDENSED WATER VAPOR, SDCF
-------
Table 2
Baghouse Outlet Particulate Results
RUN NUMBER
1 Dm
II STACK PARAMETERS
PIT - STATIC PRESSURE, 'Ho (MMHO)
Ps - STACK GAS PRESSURE, "Ho ABSOLUTE (MMHG)
I CO, • VOLUME t Dor
I 02 - VOLUME J DRV
t CO - VOLUME I DRV
I Nj - VOLUME I DRV
Ts - AVERAGE STACK TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
Z I^O - I FloisTURE IN STACK GAS, Bv VOLUME
As - STACK AREA, FT2 (M2)
No - MOLECULAR WEIGHT Q' STACK GAS, DRV BASIS
Ms - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, WET BASIS
Vs - STACK GAS VELOCITV, FT/SEC, (M/SEC)
QA - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STACK CONDITIONS, ACFM (NMVHIH)
Qs - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, I1SCFM (NV/MIN)
III TEST CONDITIONS
PB - BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, *Hc (MNHG)
ON - SAMPLING NOZZLE DIAMETER, IN. (MM)
T - SAMPLING TIME, NIH
VM - SAMPLE VOLUME. »CF (M3)
NP - NET SAMPLING POINTS
O - PITOT TUBE COEFFICIENT
TM - AVERAGE METER TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
PM - AVERAGE ORIFICE PRESSURE DROP, 'I^O (MNH^O)
VLC - CONOENSATE COLLECTED (IMPINGERS AND GEL), MLS
OP - STACK VELOCITV HEAD "HjO (MMty))
IV TEST CALCULATIONS
VM - CONDENSED WATER VAPOR, SDCF (nV) T
VM - VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, DSCF
t HjO - PERCENT MOISTURE, BY VOLUME
Ms - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, WET BASIS
Vs - STACK VELOCITY, FT/SEC (M/SEC)
X 1 - PERCENT ISOKINETIC
V AWLTTICAL »TA
A) PARTIOLATES FRONT HALF
PROBE <«)
CYOONE Oc>
FILTER Oc)
PWTIOLATES FRONT HALF TOTAL (MG)
ORS/SCCF, C«VM3)
Urn, «B/W)
B) FWTlCUUTtS Bvx lkU> (CoCBGAUS)
IMPINGBB (us)
cw/sur, (w^>
I/}*, (KG.HR)
O Tom. PumcuATJj
at/stf, (re/*3)
I/HJ, (a/ml
0) so, FRONT HALF (re)
GRS/sccF, (Mc/rn
t/m, (OS/HI)
1
ENGLISH
WITS
9/18/79
-0.61
27. 9«
1.90
13.30
0.00
B2.9
442
9.04
20.63
29. 14
28.13
!9.!7
73230
3647!
!B.!7
0.25
120
71.39
12
0.94
105
I.3B
...
0.594
7. OB
70.185
9.04
28.13
59.27
95
0.027
B.S4
0.007
2.34
0.0348
10. 8B
6. IB
0.011
3. IS
METRIC
UNITS
9/18/79
-15.50
710. 18
3.80
13.30
0.00
B2.9
22!
9.04
1.92
29.14
28.13
18.06
2074
1033
725.68
6.3S
120
2.22
12
0.84
41
35. OS
151.9
15.09
0.20
I.9BB
9.04
28.13
18.06
9S
44.5
79.4
124.2
62.17
3.87
3.11
17. IS
l.CS
158.3
79.64
4.94
6.18
25.22
I.S6
2
ENGLISH
UNITS
-«.30
27.96
3.03
15.1
0.00
B1.B7
443.3
2.1
20.6
29.09
28. 36
58.12
71B11
3B433
28.57
0.25
120
80.84
12
0.84
107.58
1.42
O.S8S
1.70
72.058
2.1
28.86
S8.12
92.9
0.004
1.26
0.001
0.47
0.005
1.73
0.39
0.004
0.144
METRIC
UNITS
-is. so
710.16
3.03
15.1
0.00
ai.87
228.5
2.1
1.92
29.09
28.86
17.71
2034
108B
725. fi8
3
ENGLISH
UNITS
9/20/79
.0.61
28.12
4.39
12.00
0.00
83.65
443
7.47
20.63
29. IB
28.34
58.55
72343
36B39
28.73
6.35 0.25
120 120
2.29 77.76
12 12
0.84 | 0.84
41.99
36.14
13.8
14.86
0.05
2.041
2.1
28.86
17.71
92.9
16.3
1.6
17.9
8.77
0.57
6.7
104
1.36
...
0.587
5.81
70.082
7.47
28.34
58.55
94
0.034
10. SB
3.28 ' a_m
0.21
24.6 '
U.05
2.32
0.041
0.78 1 13.20
3.2
0.39
1.S7
0.065
9.32
0.017
5.26
METRIC
UNITS
9/20/79
•IS. 50
714.24
4.15
12.00
0.00
83.65
228
7.47
1.92
29. IB
28.34
17.85
2049
1043
729.74
6.35
120
2.20
12
0.84
40
34.44
123.3
14.91
0.165
1.985
7.47
28.34
17.85
94
82.4
74.1
156.5
7B.84
4.94
33.4
16. B3
1.05
189. 9
95.67
5.99
9.32
38.06
2.39
4
ENGLISH
UNITS
9/21/79
•0.61
28.09
4.46
12.10
0.00
83.44
444
6. nil
20.63
29.20
2B.43
57.24
70723
36136
28.70
0.25
120
73.07
12
0.84
103
1.26
0.561
5. IB
67.693
6.88
28.43
57.21
93
0.014
4.37
0.026
8.19
0.04C
12.56
fi.25
0.011
3.4S
METRIC
UNITS
9/21/79
-IS. 50
713. 48
4.41
12.10
0.00
83.44
229
6.8C
1.92
29.20
2B.I3
17.45
2003
1023
728.98
6.35
120
2.13
12
0.84
40
31. 95
108.9
14.25
0.15
1.917
6.88
28.43
17.45
93
60.8
1.10
61.9
32.29
i.fle
116. 0
60.51
3.71
177.9
12.80
5.70
S.25
25.50
1.S6
2-3
-------
Table 3
Baghouse Inlet BaP Results
RUN NUfKR
1 frt
II STACK PARAMETERS
PST - STATIC PRESSURE, 'He CMMHG)
Pi - STACK GAS PRESSURE, "Ha ABSOLUTE (MHHG)
: C02 - VOLUMK X DRV
I 0? • VOLU* I DRV
I CD - VOLUME I DRV
Z N2 • VOLUME I DRY
Ts - AVERAGE STACK TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
t HjO - I MOISTURE IN STACK GAS, BY VOLUME
As - STACK AREA, FT2 («*)
No - MOLECULAR HEIGHT OF STACK GAS, DRV BASIS
ftS - flOLECULAR HEIGHT Qf STACK GAS, MET BASIS
Vs - STACK GAS VELOCITY, FT/SEC, CM/SEC)
QA - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STACK CONDITIONS, ACFH
HP - NET SAMPLING POINTS
CP - PITOT TUBE COEFFICIENT
TM - AVERAGE NITER TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
P« - AVERAGE ORIFICE PRESSURE DROP, 'HjO (MMH^O)
VLC - CONDENSATE COLLECTED UMPINGERS AND GEL), MLS
& • STACK VELOCITY HEAD *H20
W TEST CALCULATIONS
f 3
VM - VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, DSCF (f*MJ) '
I H^O - PERCENT MOISTURE, BY VOLUME
As • MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, MET BASIS
Vs - STACK VELOCITY, FT/SEC (M/SEC)
I 1 - PERCENT ISOKINETIC
v mvriCAL WTA
A) B*PFio(TK*Lf
PROBE
-------
Table 4
Baghouse Outlet BaP Results
RUN NUMBER
I fcre
11 STACK PARAMETERS
PST - STATIC PRESSURE, "He (nxHc) • ' .
Ps - STACK GAS PRESSURE, "He ABSOLUTE (MMHG)
X COo - VOLUME X DRV
I 0, - VOLUME X DRY •
X CD - VOLUME X DRV
X N2' - VOLUME X DHV
Ts - AVERAGE STACK TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
X HjO - X MOISTURE IN STACK GAS, Bv VOLUME
As - STACK AREA, FTZ (M2)
HD - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, DRY BASIS
'Ms - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, WET BASIS
Vs - STACK GAS VELOCITY,. FT/SEC, (M/SEC)
,. - QA - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STACK CONDITIONS, ACFM
Qs - STACK GAS VOLUMETRIC FLOW AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, DSCFM (NM*/MIN)
III TEST CONDITIONS
PB - BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, "He (MMHG) •
DN - SAMPLING NOZZLE DIAMETER, IN. (MM)
T - SAMPLING TIME, HIN
VM - SAMPLE VOLUME, ACF (M3);
NP - NET SAMPLING POINTS
CP - PITOT TUBE COEFFICIENT
TM - AVERAGE METER TEMPERATURE °F (°C)
PM • AVERAGE ORIFICE PRESSURE DROP, "H20 (Mj*20)
• VLC - CONDENSATE COLLECTED <|MPINGERS AND GEL), MLS
Cf - STACK VELOCITY HEAD "^0 (MH^O)
* . IV TEST CALCULATIONS
Vw - CONDENSED WATER VAPOR, SDCF (N*V
VH - VOLUME OF GAS SAMPLED AT STANDARD CONDITIONS, DSCF (NV)
X HjO - PERCENT MOISTURE, Bv VOLUME ,
Ms - MOLECULAR WEIGHT OF STACK GAS, WET BASIS
Vs - STACK VELOCITY, FT/SEC (M/SEC)
X 1 - PERCENT ISOKINETIC
V WLYTICAL DATA
W W FRONT KALF
PROBE (UG)
CVCUJNE (DC)
FILTER (UG)
flip FRONT HALF TOT*. fa)
GRS/SDtF, (MO/N}}
0/DAY (KG/DAV)
. B) BtPfiMXHALF
AfiOfBEKT SAPPIER ( »G)
I* INCOG fa)
BKX H*J ToTAtfa)
GHS/SDCF '
I/DAY (KG/DAY)
MTTCTOLf «<»
GRS/SDCF, (M/t$)
V/DAY (KG/DAY)
1
ENGLISH
UNITS
9/18/79
-0.61
27.96
1.80
13.10
0.00 '
82.90
440
9.04
20.63
29.14
28.13
SB. IS
72094
35936
o.zs
120
74.68
12
0.84
107
1.41
...
0.577
6.75
66.630
9.04
28.11
SB.:?
• 92
...
1.7 . 10-6
0.012 •
7.9 M 10'7
0.0058
2.5 * NT6
0.018
METRIC
UNITS
9/18/79
-15.50
710.18
3.80
11.30
0.00
82.90
227
9.04
1.92
29.14
28.11
17.78
2042
1019
6. IS
120
2.11
12
0.84
42
35.61
144.2.
14.66
0.19*
1.887
9.04
28.13
17.78
92
S.O
-U ' '
2.20
7.20
0.0018
0.0056
1.12
2.28
3.40
0.0018
0.0026
10.60
0.0056
0.0082
2
ENGLISH
UNITS
9/H/79
-0.61
27.96
3.03 '
15.10
0.00
81.87
441
3.10
20.63
29.09
28.86
57.19
70787
37S98
0.2S
120
80. B2
12
0.84
101
1.38
...
0.568
2.51
72.862
3.10
28.75
57.11
96.9
...
1.4 M icr6
0,011
...
...
2.8 M 10-6
0.022
4.2 'x 10'6
0.031
METRIC
. UNITS
9/1V79
-IS. 50
710.18
1.03
IS. 10
0.00
81.87
»2B
2.10
1.92
29.09
28.86
17.43
2005
IOCS
6.35
120
2.29
12
0.84
38
35.05
50.8
14.43
0.07
2.063
3.10
28.75
17.47
96 •
5.42
1.12
6.54
0.0032
0.0049
10.60
2.S6
11.16
0.0064
0.0098
19.70
0.0096
0.0147
3
ENGLISH
UNITS
9/20/79
-o.ei
4.35
12.00
0.00
83.65
443
7.47
Z0.63
29.18
28.34
57.93
71569
3641
0.2S
120
78.82
12
0.84
10S
1.11
...
0.574
5.89 '
71.003
7.47
28.34
57.91
97
...
l.e'Vio-6
0.012
1.0 « 10'6
0.0076
2.6 x ID'6
0.0196
METRIC
UNITS
9/20/79
-15.50
71 .24
.15
1 .00
.00
81. 63
29
.47
.92
2 .IB
. 28.34
17.66
2027
ton
.35
20
.23
12
.84
0
3 .81
124.9
14.58
0.17'
2.011
7.47
28.34
17.66
«7
7."
r.25
7.60
0.0038
0.0056
2.75
1.91
4.66 •
0.0023
0.0034
12.26
0.0061
0.0090
ENGLISH
UNITS
-0.61
28! 01
3.73
13.47
0.00
82.81
441
6.2
20.63
29.14 '
28.41
57.82
• 71483
36666
26.61
0.25
120
78.11
12
0.84
104
1.37
O.S71
5.05
70.165
6.S4
28.41
57.86
95
...
1.6 x IO"6
0.012
1.53 x 10'6
0.0118
3.1 x 10'6
0.0235
'
METRIC
UNITS
-15.50
711.51
1.71
11.47
9.00
82.81
Z28
. 6.54
1.92
21.14
21.41
17.62
2024
1018
6.35
120'
2.21
12
0.84
40
14.89
106.6
14.56
0.14
1.99
6. 54
28.41
17.64
95
S.92
1.19
7.11
' 0.0036
O.OOS4
4.82
2.26
7.07
0.0035
0.0053
14.19
0.0071
0.0106
2-5
-------
Table 5
Gaseous Constituent Concentrations
Test No.
1
2
3
4
Date
9/18/79
9/19/79
9/20/79
9/21/79
Benzene
(ppm)
1.8
2.9
2.5
4.1
Carbon
Monoxide
(ppm)
153
111
97
139
Carbon
Dioxide
(%)
3.80
3.03
4.35
4.46
Oxygen
. (X)
13.30
15.10
12.00
12.10
-2-6
-------
Carbon
Monoxide
(ppm)
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Kv
1:58 2:28 2:56 3:23 3:51 4:28
Time
Figure 1
Carbon Monoxide Concentration, 9/18/79
2-7
-------
300
250
Carbon
Monoxide „
(ppm) 20°
150
100
50
2:00
3:00
4:00
Time
5:00
300
250
Carbon
150
100
50
9:00
10:00
11:00 12:00
Time
1:00
Figure 2
Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, 9/19/79
2-8
-------
Carbon
Monoxide
(ppm)
600
500
400
300
200
100
8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00
Time
1:00
2:00 3:00 4:00
Figure 3
Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, 9/20/79
2-9
-------
300
Carbon
Monoxide
(ppm)
200
100
1:00
10:00 11:00
Time
12:00
Figure 4
Carbon Monoxide Concentration, 9/21/79
2-10
-------
A TRW crew member certified by the California Air Resources Board to
read visible emissions made opacity observations of the coke oven stack during
each test. No visible emissions were evident during any of the tests.
2-11
-------
3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION
Kaiser Steel Corporation operates seven metallurgical coke oven
batteries at its steel plant located in Fontana, California. This is
the only domestic steel plant which uses fabric filters to control par-
ti cul ate emissions from coke oven battery stacks. Currently, four bat-
teries (B, C, D, and E) are equipped with fabric filter controls.
Kaiser plans to install similar controls on the remaining three batteries
in the near future (A, F, and G).
Of the four batteries equipped with fabric filter controls, Battery
"B" was selected for testing because the duct run configurations to and
from the fabric filter were considered more amenable to representative
sampling. As discussed previously in Section 2.0 of this report, the
emission tests conducted included simultaneous inlet and outlet measure-
ments for mass particulate and benzo-a-pyrene (BaP), continuous carbon
monoxide measurements, benzene measurements, and visible emission ob-
servations on the battery stack itself. The purpose for these tests
was to (a) characterize emissions from battery stacks and (b) assess
the performance of a fabric filter on these emissions.
Salient facts on the design and operation of the battery are sum-
marized in Table 3-1. As indicated, the battery is a Koppers-Becker
3-1
-------
TABLE 3-1. PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATING RECORD
Date 9/17/79
Plant Name Kaiser Steel
Plant Location Fontana, California
Battery No. B
Name of Plant Contact Gerald Rounds
Type of Ovens and Designer Koppers-Becker Underjet
Date Built 1941
Date of Last Rehabilitation 1973-1974
Type of Last Rehabilitation Hot End Flue Rehabilitation
Number of Ovens Total 45 In Service 33-
Size of Ovens Height 13 ft . Width 13-1/2" , Length 40 ft
avg.
Type of Coke Produced Furnace
Normal Coking Time (hr) 17 hr
Coal Charged Per Oven (tons) 14
Reversal Period (min) 30 min
Nozzle Decarbonization Method Recirculating Duct
Is Flue Gas Recirculated? Yes
Type of Fuel Gas COG Heating value 500 Btu/scf
Is Fuel Gas Desulfurized? No
Note Use of Stage Charging, Preheated Coal, etc.
Stage Charging (Double Collecting Main)
Stack Height and Top Diameter 225 ft, 10 ft diameter
Test Location (Stack or Waste Heat Canal) Filter Duct (inlet and outlet)
Control Method Used Fabric Filter ^ _____
a/ Ovens permanently out of service are Nos. 83, 85, 95, 87, 97, 92, 64,
74, 94, 86, 68, and 98.
3-2
-------
design and was originally built in 1941. It underwent its most recent
rehabilitation, consisting of hot end-flue repairs in 1974. The battery
is equipped with double collecting mains and consists of 45 ovens each
measuring 4 m (13 ft) in height and capable of coking about 14 tons of
coal per charge. During the test period, 12 of the 45 ovens were perma-
nently out of service.
The battery is fired with undesulfurized coke oven gas (COG) using
underjet firing. Charging of the ovens is performed by larry car using
stage charging techniques. Fuel gas flow was not measurable during the
test; however, we were told that the fuel flow rate is generally about
220,000 SCFH. Analysis of the fuel gas and the coal charged to the ovens
during the emission tests are included in Appendix D. During the test
period, the battery was operated on a 17-hr coking cycle. With 12 ovens
out of service, this resulted in a charging frequency of about 1.94
charges per hour.
Normal maintenance practices on the battery include the patching of
cracks in the end flues using a hand-held slurry patching gun. Each
oven is patched every 30 to 45 days. A complete rebuild of the battery
is planned sometime in 1980.
The fabric filter unit used to collect particulate emissions con-
tained in the underfiring exhaust gases was installed in June 1979. The
unit is a closed-suction design with reverse air cleaning. It consists
of five compartments with a total filtering area of 39,600 sq ft. Each
3-3
-------
compartment contains 140 graphite-si 11 cone treated glass fiber bags,
each measuring 8 in. in diameter and 22 ft in length. The fabric filter
was designed to handle about 88,000 acfm at a net air-to-cloth ratio of
2.76:1 with one compartment isolated for cleaning. The design operating
temperature was 450°F. Actual operating conditions are closer to 71,000
acfm at 450°F and the net air-to-cloth ratio nearer 2.23:1. Exhaust
gases from the fabric filter are pulled through a 450-hp induced draft
fan and are then discharged to the atmosphere through a 225-ft stack.
Each compartment is cleaned automatically at least once every 6 hr
for 50 sec or whenever the pressure drop across a compartment exceeds a
preset level (about 8.5 in. of water). .
It was observed that the total pressure drop across the fabric
filter was higher than expected, usually exceeding 8 in. w.c. and that
the pressure drop did not decrease by more than 1 in. w.c. after a
cleaning cycle. Kaiser engineers were aware of this and were trying
to determine the reason for it.
During each of the test periods, the amount of dust captured by
the two filters serving Batteries B and C was collected and weighed.
Both of these filters are served by one common hopper discharge dust
conveyor so it was not possible to separate the dust collected by each
filter. Based on the three dust weights most closely associated with
each Method 5 test, it was calculated that the dust collection rate
was 1.3, 0.2, and < 0.03 kg/hr. These quantities are considerably less
3-4
-------
than expected, based on the filter inlet/outlet participate concentra-
tions. These dust weights may indicate that dust was not being properly
discharged from the filter. On the other hand, the weighings were of
rather short duration, so the quantities collected may not be represen-
tative of longer term operation.
During the periods when the emission testing was conducted, both
the battery and fabric filter operations were monitored. The process
operating data obtained and observations made are summarized in Appendix D.
Tests were conducted only when the battery was operating within normal
limits.
3-5
-------
SECTION 4
LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
(1) Baghouse inlet - The Inlet duct to baghouse "B" 1s a 5'1" self supported
duct connected to an underground duct from the coke ovens. The duct goes
up to an elevation of 24 feet above the ground and has a straight run of
128 feet to the baghouse. The sampling location 1s 63 feet (12.6 diameters)
downstream from the nearest bend and 65 feet (13 diameters) upstream from
the baghouse. Sampling was done at twelve traverse points. Figures 5 and
6 show this sampling location.
(2) Baghouse outlet - The duct carrying the treated stack gas from the bag-
house to the battery stack 1s also a 5 feet 1 inch I.D. duct which 1s 31
feet above the ground at the sampling location. There is a 51 foot (10
diameters) run of straight ducting upstream from the sampling location.
The Induced draft fan is 44 feet downstream from the sampling location.
Samples were taken at twelve traverse points across the duct. Figures
5 and 7 show this sampling location.
4-1
-------
Outlet Sampling
Location
Inlet Sampling
Location
Baghouse
Figure 5 Baghouse "B" Ducting Schematic
4-2
-------
Traverse Point Locations
61.5"
Traverse
Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
Percentage
of
Stack ID
4.4
14.6
29.6
70.4
85.4
95.6
Distance
From Inside
Wall (inc)
2.71
8.98
18.20
43.30
52.52
58.79
Figure 6 Inlet Sampling Location
4-3
-------
Traverse Point Locations
61.5"
Traverse
Point
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
Percentage
of
Stack I.D.
4.4
14.6
29.6
70.4
85.4
95.6
Distance
from Inside
Wall (inc)
2.71
8.98
18.98
43.30
52.52
58.79
Figure 7 Outlet Sampling Location
4-4
-------
SECTION 5
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
(A) Particulate Sampling
Particulate sampling was performed according to EPA Method 5 (as revised
August 10, 1977). The sampling train varied from the usual Method 5 train in
that a flexible teflon line was used between the probe and the filter holder.
Figure 8 1s a diagram of the sampling train.
The front half of the sampling train consisted of a calibrated nozzle,
glass probe liner, flexible teflon line, and heated glass fiber filter.
Filterable particulates were collected in the front half of the sampling train.
The back half of the sampling train consisted of four glass impingers
in series kept in an ice bath. The first, third and fourth impingers were
modified Greenburg-Smith design, with the tip replaced with a h inch I.D.
glass tube extending to h Inch of the bottom of the flask. The second impinger
was the Greenburg-Smith type. The first and second impinger was empty, and
the fourth Impinger contained 250 grams silica gel. The impingers collected
moisture and other gas constituents condensing at 32°F.
Before sampling a velocity traverse was done at each sampling location to
determine the average temperature and velocity.; A moisture test according
to EPA method 4 was done at the inlet to the baghouse before the first test
to get an estimate of the stack gas moisture content. These data were used
in nozzle size selection and adjustment of nomographs for isoklnetic sampling.
After assembling the sampling train it was leak checked at 15 Inches of
mercury vacuum and sampling was not begun until a leak rate of less than 0.02
cfm was achieved. Leak checks were done before each traverse change, and at
the end of each test run at the maximum vacuum encountered during each portion
of the test.
Sampling was done at the centers of twelve equal areas within the stack
at both the inlet and outlet locations. Inlet and outlet sampling of parti-
culates and BaP (benzo-a-pyrene) were done simultaneously.
Sample Recovery
The sampling nozzle, probe liner, flexible line, and front half of the
filter holder were rinsed with acetone and brushed with a nvlon probe brush
with a polypropylene handle. This acetone rinse was placed in a 250 ml nalgene
bottle.
5-1
-------
Figures. EPA method 5 participate sampling train
1) Calibrated nozzle 13)
2) Glass lined probe 14)
3) Flexible teflon sample line 15)
4) Cyclone 16)
5) Filter holder 17)
6) Heated box 18)
7) Ice bath 19)
8) Impinger (water) 20)
9) Impinger (water) 21)
10) Impinger (empty) 22)
11) Impinger (silica gel) 23)
12) Thermometer 24)
Check value
Vacuum line
Vacuum gauge
Main value
Air tight pump
Bypass value
Dry test meter
Orifice
Pi tot manometer
Potentiometer
Orifice manometer
S type pi tot tube
5-2
-------
The particulate filter was removed from the filter holder and placed 1n
a sealed polyethylene jar.
The impinger solutions were measured and placed 1n a glass sample container.
The acetone rinse of the implngers, back half of the filter holder, and con-
necting glassware were placed in a separate glass sample container with a teflon
lid liner.
The front half acetone rinses were placed 1n tared beakers and evaporated.
The impinger solutions were placed in tared beakers and dried on a steam bath.
The filters and beakers were then placed in a dessicator until 'they reached
a constant weight, and were weighed to within a tenth of a milligram.
After the front half rinses and filters had been weighed to determine the
amount of filterable particulate collected, the particulates in the beakers
were redissolved with 100 mi 111 liters of 80% isopropanol. The filter for each
test was then added to this solution, and macerated to dissolve sulfate collected
on it. The resultant solution was then filtered and titrated with standardized
barium perchlorate against thorin indicator to determine the amount of sulfate
collected.
(B) Benzo-a-Pyrene (BaP) Sampling
The sampling train used to collect BaP was Identical to the train used
for particulates except that it contained an absorbent module between the
filter and the first Impinger. Figure 9 is a diagram of this sampling train.
A schematic diagram of the BaP adsorbent module is hown in figure 10.
The module was packed with XAD-2, (styrene divlnyl Senzene) a polymeric adsorbent.
The temperature of the water circulating through the cooling jacket was kept
at 127°F so that the sampled gas would be cooled to this temperature as it
passed through the adsorbent material. The adsorbent module was covered with
aluminum foil throughout the testing to prevent deterioration of the sample
by exposure to ultraviolet light. Aside from operation of the adsorbent module
the BaP train was operated the same as the particulate trains.
Since the BaP adsorbent module is located Immediately behind the heated
filter, and water cooled to 127 F, some moisture 1n the stack gas will condense -
in the module prior to reaching the Implngers. Water collected in the Implngers
and silica gel will not accurately reflect the true moisture content of the
stack gas since all the water collected 1n the BaP train 1s not accounted
for. In operating a BaP train at a source with a high moisture content,
either a moisture train or a Method 5 train should be operated during the run
for accurate moisture determination. For the purposes of this report, the
moisture content determined from the Method 5 train is also used for the BaP —
train - 1n data reduction.
Sample Extraction
The filter was extracted with 100 mi 111 liters of cyclohexane in a soxh-
let extractor for 7 hours. The probe rinse was agitated 1n an ultrasonic
5-3
-------
,16
\. Calibrated Nozzle 9-
2. Glass Lined Probe 10.
3. S-Type Pi tot Tube 11.
4. Thermocouple 12.
5. Thermocouple Potentiometer 13.
6. PI tot Tube Manometer 14.
7. Teflon Flex Line 15.
8. Heated Filter 16.
Adsorbent Sampler
Water Pump
Temperature Controlled Reservior
Modified G-S Impinger-Uater
6-S Imp1nger-«ater
Modified G-S Implnger-Empty
Modified G-S Imp1nger-Sil1cagel
Thermometer
17. Ice Mater Bath
18. Vacuum Gauge
19. Main Valve
20. Bypass Valve
21. Vacuum Pump
22. Dry Gas Meter
23. Thermometers
24. Calibrated Orifice
25. Orifice Manometer
Figure9 - BaP Sampling Train
5-4
-------
Flow Direction
Retaining Spring'
en
i
in
28/12 Ball joint
Glass Water'
Jacket
8-mm Glass
Cooling Coil
Adsorbent
Glass Fritted
Disc
Fritted Stainless Steel Disc
15-MM Solv-Seal Joint'
Figure 10 Adsorbent Sampling System
-------
bath for one hour and filtered through a Whatman No. 40 filter. The adsor-
bent module was extracted with 180 mi Hi liters of cyclohexane for 24 hours
in a continuous extraction device. These extraction procedures were done under
yellow safe lights and the extract stored in amber glass bottles.
BaP Sample Analysis
The sample extract was concentrated in a Kuderna-Danish Concentrator
which was heated in a water bath to 5QOC. The Samples were concentrated to
7 mi Hi liters and brought up to 10 milliliters with washings of the concen-
trator flask. The concentrated samples were stored in the dark at 1°C until
the final analysis step.
Analysis of the BaP samples entailed spotting the concentrate extracts
on thin layer chromatography (TLC) plates and reading the fluorescence of
the plates with an Aminco 125F spectrofluorometer. The TLC plates were read
at an excitation wavelength of 378 nm and an emission wavelength of 403 nm for
BaP. Since anthanthrene has an excitation wavelength of 420 nm and an emission
wavelength of 430 nm it does not interfere in the analysis. The sample
fluorescence was compared with the fluorescence of BaP standard solutions to
determine the amount of BaP in the sample.
Benzene Sampling
An integrated bag sample of the stack gas was taken during the BaP and
particulate test. Figure 11 is a diagram of the integrated-bag sampling
train. The c'ontents of the bag were analyzed for benzene with a Shimadzu
Mini-1 gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector, and for
fixed gases (02* C02, CO) with a Carle Basic gas chromatograph equipped with
a thermal conductivity detector.
Benzene Analysis
The sample was injected through a 1 milliliter sample loop into a 6 feet
by 1/8 inch stainless steel column containing 5 percent SP 1200 and 1.75 percent
Bentone 34 on 100/120 mesh Supelcoport. The column and detector were main-
tained at 75°C and 225°C, respectively. The peak area was measured with a disc
integrator on a Linear Strip chart recorder. Sample values were compared with
values obtained from certified standards to calculate sample concentrations.
Carbon Monoxide Sampling
A sample of the stack gas was extracted continuously from the duct and
analyzed for carbon monoxide. The analysis was performed according to EPA
method 10, "Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources". Figure 12 is a schematic diagram of the sampling system used.
Carbon Monoxide Analysis
The Continuous analyzer used was an Infrared Industries Model 702-352
5-6
-------
nondisperslve Infrared (NDIR) analyzer with detectors for carbon monoxide and
carbon dioxide. The sample gas was drawn through impingers containing ascarite
and silica gel to remove carbon dioxide and moisture, respectively, from the
sample gas to prevent them from interfering with the carbon monoxide concentra-
tion, Quantification of the sample concentration was done by comparison of the
response of the analyzer with certified standard gas concentrations.
5-7
-------
1) probe
2) air cooled condenser
3) filter
4) needle valve
5) flow meter
6) Aluminized NJylar bag
7) Air-tight drum
8) pump
Figure 11 Integrated - Bag Sampling Train
5-8
-------
\
1) Probe
2) Air-Cooled Condenser
3) filter
4) flow meter
5) Zero gas
6) span gas
7) Ascarite
8) silica gel
Figure 12 CO Continuous Sampling System
9) pump .'
TO) NDIR
11) tee bath
5-9
------- |