Ln'ted St
ncv
•'lards
Research Tpar.rjls Park NC 277' 1
Air
Calciners and
Dryers Emission
Test Report
North American
Refractories
Company
Farber, Missouri
EMS Report 84-CDR-1 4
March 1 984
-------
NSPS DEVELOPMENT
PARTICULATE AND PARTICLE SIZING EMISSIONS TESTING
CLAY ROTARY DRYER SYSTEM
NORTH AMERICAN REFRACTORIES
FARBER, MISSOURI
MARCH 12-15, 1984
Compiled by:
ENTROPY
Post Office Box 12291
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27709
68-02-3852
ESED No. 81/08
EMB No. 84-CDR-14
Task Manager
Dennis Holzschuh
Emission Measurement Branch
Emissions Standards and Engineering Division
OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING AND STANDARDS
OFFICE OF AIR, NOISE, AND RADIATION
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N. C., 27711
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Scope of the Project 1-1
1.3 North American Refractories Company Testing Program ... 1-1
1.3.1 Source Applicability 1-1
1.3.2 Outline of Testing Program . . . 1-2
1.4 Report Organization 1-2
2. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 2-1
2.1 Summary 2-1
2.2 Discussion 2-1
3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION 3-1
3.1 General 3-1
3.2 Calcining Process 3-1
3.2.1 Raw Material 3-1
3.2.2 Rotary Dryer 3^1
3.2.2.1 Dryer Design Capacity 3-1
3.2.2.2 Dryer Exhaust Gases ... .... 3-3
3.2.3 Storage 3-3
3.3 Process Conditions During Testing 3-3
3.3.1 Monitoring Procedures 3-3
3.3.2 Test Interruptions 3-4
3.3.3 Control Equipment 3-4
3.3.4 Production Rates 3-4
3.3.5 Moisture Content 3-5
3.4 Discussion/Conclusions .... 3-5
4. SAMPLING LOCATIONS - 4-1
4.1 Suitability of Sampling Sites 4-1
4.2 Rotary Dryer Inlet (Sample Location A) „ 4-1
4.3 Rotary Dryer Inlet (Observation Location B) 4-1
4.4 Rotary Dryer Outlet (Observation Location C) 4-1
4.5 Rotary Dryer Outlet (Sample Location D) 4-1
4.6 Cyclone .Inlet (Sample Location E) 4-1
(continued next page)
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
(continued)
4.7 Scrubber Inlet (Sample Location F) 4-3
4.8 Scrubber Outlet Stack (Sample Location G) 4-3
4.9 Scrubber Outlet Stack (Observation Location H) 4-3
5. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS 5-1
5.1 Sampling Objectives 5-1
5.2 Particulate Emissions Testing 5-1
5.3 Trace Metals Analysis 5-1
5.4 Sieve and Moisture Content Analysis 5-1
5.5 Plume Opacity and Fugitive Emissions 5-1
5.6 Particle Size Testing 5-1
6. QUALITY ASSURANCE 6-1
6.1 Introduction 6-1
6.2 Sampling Train Components ....... 6-1
6.3 Preseparator and Cascade Impactors ..... 6-1
6.4 Sample Collection Substrates 6-2
6.5 Substrate Weighting 6-2
6.6 Sample Analysis 6-2
6.7 SPA Method 3 6-2
6.8 EPA Method 9 6-2
7. APPENDICES 1
7.1 Plastic Clay Test Results and Example Calculations .... 2
7.1.1 Particulate 2
Cyclone Inlet & Example Calculations for Run 1 .... 3
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 8
Scrubber Outlet Stack 10
7.1.2 Particle Sizing 12
Cyclone Inlet 13
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 24
(continued next page)
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
7.2 Flint Clay Test Results . 36
7.2.1 Participate 36
Cyclone Inlet 37
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) ..... 39
Scrubber Outlet Stack 41
7.2.2 Particle Sizing 43
Cyclone Inlet 44
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 58
7.3 Plastic Clay Field and Analytical Data 68
7.3.1 Particulate 68
Cyclone Inlet . 69
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 80
Scrubber Outlet Stack 92
7.3.2 Particle Sizing 104
Cyclone Inlet ..... 105
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) Ill
7.3.3 Visible Emissions Results and Reader Certification ... 117
7.3.4 Trace Metals Analytical Results . . * 138
7.4 Flint Clay Field and Analytical Data 140
7.4.1 Particulate 140
Cyclone Inlet & Example Calculations for Run 1 .... 141
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) . 151
Scrubber Outlet Stack ' 163
7.4.2 Particle Sizing 175
Cyclone Inlet 176
Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 184
7.4.3 Visible Emissions Results and Reader Certification . . . 188
7.4.4 Trace Metals Analytical Results 221
7.5 Sampling and Analytical Procedures 223
7.6 Feed and Product Analytical Data 319
7.7 Calibration Data 386
7.8 Entropy Test Participants 415
iii
-------
LIST OP TABLES
Number Title Page
1-1 Testing Protocol and Run/Sample Numbering 1-3
Cross-Reference
2-1 . Particulate Emission Rates and Concentrations 2-2
and Control Equipment Efficiencies (Plastic Clay)
2-2 Particulate Emission Rates and Concentrations 2-3
and Control Equipment Efficiencies (Flint Clay)
Particulate Tests Summary - Plastic Clay;
2-3 Cyclone Inlet 2-4
2-4 Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 2-5
2-5 Scrubber Outlet Stack 2-6
Particulate Tests S'j™"ary - Flint Clay;
2-6 Cyclone Inlet 2-7
2-7 Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 2-8
2-8 Particulate Tests Summary Scrubber Outlet Stack 2-9
Particle Sizing Tests Summary - Plastic Clay;
2-9 Cyclone Inlet 2-10
2-10 Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 2-12
Particle Sizing Summary - Flint Clay;
2-11 Cyclone Inlet 2-14
2-12 Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 2-16
Six Minute Summary of Visible Emissions - Flint Clay;
2-13 Scrubber Outlet Stack - Run 2 2-18
2-14 Scrubber Outlet Stack - Run 3 2-19
2-15 Scrubber Outlet Stack - Run'4 2-20
Six Minute Summary of Visible Emissions - Plastic Clay;
2-16 Scrubber Outlet Stack - Run 5 2-21
2-17 Scrubber Outlet Stack - Run 6 2-22
Operating Conditions
3-1 Run No. 1 - Plastic Clay 3-6
3-2 Run No. 2 - Flint Clay 3-7
3-3 Run No. 3 - Flint Clay 3-8
3-4 Run No. 4 - Flint Clay 3-9
3-5 Run No. 5 - Plastic Clay 3-10
3-6 Run No. 6 - Plastic Clay 3-11
3-7 NARCO Test Production Summary 3-12
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Title Page
3-1 Plastic and Flint Clay Processing 3-2
4-1 Process Flow Schematic Showing Sampling Locations 4-2
4-2 Rotary Dryer Cyclone Inlet 4-4
4-3 Rotary Dryer Scrubber Inlet (Cyclone Outlet) 4-5
4-4 Rotary Dryer Scrubber Outlet Stack 4-6
-------
1-1
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background. The Emission Measurement Branch (EMB) of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is directing a project designed to
generate support data for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for
calclners and dryers in the mineral industries. Emission standards for the
various industries may be developed based upon process-related emission
factors determined from the testing of controlled sources.
1.2 Scope of the Project. The EMB is responsible for coordinating the
efforts of Entropy and Midwest Research Institute (MRI) to achieve the goals
of the testing program. Entropy has been retained under the EMB Contract No.
68-02-3852, Work Assignment No. 2 to conduct testing programs at designated
industrial facilities. Entropy is to perform emission measurements at the
recommended sampling locations, obtain process feed and product samples, and,
in conjunction with Research Triangle.Institute (RTI), conduct sample
analyses. MRI will monitor process and operating conditions in order to
designate suitable testing conditions for the respective processes and to
provide a record of process and operational data during the testing.
1.3 North American Refractories Company (NARCO) Source Testing
Program. The present report covers stationary source sampling performed at
the NARCO manufacturing plant in Farber, Missouri on March 12-15, 1984 to
characterize emissions from the refractory manufacturing processes and
pollution control equipment. Steve Sutton of NARCO and Dennis Holzschuh of
EPA EMB were present to coordinate the testing. Amy J. Kowalski of MRI
monitored the plant process and recorded operational data during the testing.
1.3.1 Source Applicability. NARCO operates a McDermott, direct-fired,
rotary dryer. The raw clay is placed in a hopper which feeds the clay into
an Eagle crusher. Emissions from the rotary dryer system are controlled by a
cyclone and a scrubber. The reasons for selecting this plant are as
followst NARCO is considered to be a well-maintained facility; no EMB
approved data exists on a rotary fire clay dryer drying a worst-case clay
type; and NARCO processes Missouri plastic and flint clays which are both
reported to be the most difficult to control.
-------
1-2
1.3.2 Outline of Testing Program. EPA Method 5 testing was conducted
simultaneously at the cyclone inlet, at the scrubber inlet (cyclone outlet),
and at the scrubber outlet stack to determine the particulate emissions from
two types of fire clay: flint clay (Brohard) and Missouri plastic clay.
During the processing of each of the two clays, three sets of EPA Method 5
runs were performed for a total of six sets. Each set consisted of three
simultaneous runs, i.e., one run at each of the three sampling locations.
The impinger reagents from one Method 5 run at each location were analyzed
for trace metals.
Concurrent with five of the six sets of Method 5 runs, Method 9 opacity
readings were taken at the dryer inlet conveyor belt and at the scrubber
outlet stack. Eight particle sizing runs were performed at the cyclone
inlet, while seven were performed at the scrubber inlet (cyclone outlet).
One reactivity run was performed as a control measure at the cyclone inlet.
Feed and product samples were taken for moisture content and sieve analysis.
Table 1-1 presents a test log which summarizes the test dates, sampling
locations, run or sample numbers, and the types of testing performed.
1.4 Report Organization. Section 1, "Introduction," briefly describes
the purpose of the testing program, the responsibilities of the project
participants, the NARCO facility, and the specific tests that were
conducted. Section 2 presents a comprehensive summary of all test results,
including pollutant emission rates and concentrations, control equipment
collection efficiencies, and particle sizing results. Detailed information
describing the process and operating conditions during the test is contained
in Section 3. Section 4 describes the various sampling locations used in the
testing program. Section 5 contains the sampling and analytical procedures
employed at the NARCO facility. The quality assurance procedures utilized in
this testing program are included in Section 6.
Section 7, "Appendices," contains all relevant supporting documentation
for the testing program. Appendices 7.1 and 7.2 present detailed results for
the plastic and flint clay tests, respectively. Appendices 7.3 and 7.4 con-
tain all sampling and analytical data for the plastic and flint clay emis-
sions testing, respectively. Descriptions of sampling and analytical proce-
dures are provided in Appendix 7.5. Analytical results for feed and product
samples are included as Appendix 7.6. Equipment calibration data are includ-
ed in Appendix 7.7; Appendix 7.8 contains a list of Entropy test participants.
-------
1-3
TABLE 1-1
TESTING PROTOCOL AND
RON/SAMPLE NUMBERING CROSS-REFERENCE
Plastic Clay
Test Set
Flint Clay
Test Set
Objective
Particulate
Particle
Sizing
Sieving/
Moisture
Opacity
>ampj.ing
Method
EPA 5
Cascade
Impact or
Grab
Sample
EPA 9
Location*
CI
SI
SO
CI
SI
DI
DO
DI
SO
i
3/12
1
4
7
X
X
1
1
X
X
e.
3/15
Htm
14 tm
17 on
S11A&B
S14A&B
5
5
5
5
j
3/15
12
15
18
S12A&B
S15A&B
6
6
6
6
i
3/13
2
5
8
S2A&B
S5A
2
2
2
2
L
3/14
3tm
6tm
9tm
S3A
S6A&B
3
3
3
3
o
3/14
10
13
16
S10A
X
4
4
4
4
* DI - Dryer Inlet
DO - Dryer Outlet
CI - Cyclone Inlet
SI - Scrubber Inlet
SO - Scrubber Outlet Stack
X - Testing not performed
tm - Method 5 particulate catch-and distilled water from impingers
analyzed for trace metals.
-------
2-1
2. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
2.1 Summary. Tables 2-1 and 2-2 present the emission rates and
concentrations and control equipment efficiencies for the participate testing
performed during the processing of plastic clay and flint clay,
respectively. Run-by-run summaries of the particulate results for the
plastic clay testing are presented in Tables 2-3 through 2-5, while
Tables 2-6 through 2-8 present run-by-run summaries of the flint clay
testing; detailed results appear in Appendix 7.1. Particle sizing summations
are given in Tables 2-9 through 2-12. Individual run summaries of the
visible emissions observations are presented in Tables 2-13 through 2-17.
2.2 Discussion of Results. The emissions rates at the scrubber outlet
stack varied inversely with the efficiency of the cyclone; the scrubber
efficiency was only slightly lower during the flint clay condition than the
plastic clay condition.
Due to equipment problems and the length of process time available on
the first day of testing, no particle sizing runs performed at any of the
sampling locations; throughout the testing program no particle sizing runs
were performed at the scrubber outlet stack due to the presence of water
droplets in the exhaust gases. Test times at certain locations varied due to
the length of process time available.
EMB chose to perform EPA Method 9 (visible emissions) instead of
EPA Method 22 (fugitive emissions) at the rotary dryer inlet observation
location; due to adverse weather conditions, no visible emissions readings
were taken at either observation location during the first day of testing.
Opacity measurements were planned at the rotary dryer outlet; however, during
a presurvey of the sampling locations, it was discovered that from the dryer
outlet to the scrubber outlet stack, the process was a closed system.
After the completion of.run 7 at the scrubber outlet stack, it was
discovered that the thermocouple temperature readout was measuring low by
approximately 38°F. The scrubber inlet/outlet temperatures for the
subsequent runs were reviewed, and a representative stack temperature of
130°F was used for the emissions calculations. However, the temperature
adjustment resulted in an over isokinetic sampling rate of 113.7%.
During the first particulate run (run 1) at the cyclone inlet, heavy
particulate loading caused the positive pitot to plug, making it necessary to
back-calculate a velocity from the scrubber inlet; limited process time
restricted the run to the horizontal sampling traverse only.
-------
2-2
TABLE 2-1
PARTICDLATE EMISSIONS & CONCENTRATIONS SUMMARY
AND CONTROL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCIES
Plastic Clay
Emission Rates, Ib/hr:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Emission Rates, kg/hr:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Concentration, gr/DSCF:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Collection Efficiency, %:
Cyclone
Scrubber
Concentration, mg/DSCM:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
1
1,907
389.5
3.57
864.8
176.7
1.62
42.03
6.26
0.051
85.11
99.19
96,171
14,329
- iesc aet — - - — -
2 3
2,435 1,989
343.4 196.0
2.55 1.67
1,104 902.3
155.8 88.9
1.16 0.757
59.35 50.09
5.65 3.19
0.038 0.024
90.48 93.63
99.33 99.25
135,807 114,601
6,911 5,791
Average
2,109
309.6
2.60
957.0
140.5
1.18
50.49
5.03
0.038
89.74
99.26
115,526
9,010
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
115.5
86.2
53.6
85.1
-------
2-3
TABLE 2-2
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS & CONCENTRATIONS SUMMARY
AND CONTROL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCIES
Flint Clay
Emission Rates, Ib/hr:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Emission Rates, kg/hr:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Concentration, gr/DSCF:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
Collection Efficiency, 7,:
Cyclone
Scrubber
Concentration, mg/DSCM:
Cyclone Inlet
Scrubber Inlet
1 2 3
1,543 906.8 1,608
174.5 143.9 384.9
2.03 2.61 3.18
699.9 411.3 729.5
79.2 65.3 174.6
0.921 1.18 1.44
36.78 23.64 38.36
3.02 2.53 6.40
0.030 0.039 0.046
91.79 89.30 83.32
99.01 98.46 99.28
84,156 54,082 87,770
6,911 5,791 14,634
Average
1,352
234.4
2.61
613.6
106.4
1.18
32.93
4.99
0.038
88.14
98.92
75,336
9,112
(Cyclone Outlet)
Scrubber Outlet Stack
68.0
89.8
105.0
87.6
-------
2-4
TABLE 2-3
PARTICDLATE TESTS SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Plastic Clay - Cyclone Inlet
Run Date
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled, SCF*
Percent Isokinetic
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F
Air Flow Rates
SCFM* , Dry
ACFM, Wet
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams
Concen. , grains/DSCF*
Emissions, pounds/hour
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen., milligrams/DSCM*
Emissions, kilograms/hour
1
03/12/84
13.613
103.3
160
5,292
7,412
37,075.7
42.03
1,906.6
96,170.6
864.8
11
03/15/84
9.777
102.5
139
4,787
6,857
••
37,602.9
59.35
2,435.1
135,807.1
1,104.5
12
03/15/84
9.534
103.3
138
4,633
6,613
30,942.6
50.09
1,989.3
114,601.0
902.3
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-5
TABLE 2-4
PARTICDLATE TESTS SUMMARY OP RESULTS
Plastic Clay - Scrubber Inlet
Run Date
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled, SCF*
Percent Isokinetic
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F
Air Flow Rates
SCFM* , Dry
ACFM, Wet
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams
Concen., grains/DSCF*
Emissions, pounds/hour
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen. , milligrams/DSCM*
Emissions, kilograms/hour
4
03/12/84
26.393
100.4
132
7,256
10,109
10,709.9
6.26
389.5
14,328.6
176.7
14
03/15/84
16.412
98.8
132
7,086
9,776
6,012.2
5.65
343.4
12,935.4
155.8
15
03/15/84
16.508
98.1
133
7,176
9,962
3,408.9
3.19
196.0
7,291.7
88.9
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-6
TABLE 2-5
PARTICULATE TESTS SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Plastic Clay - Scrubber Outlet Stack
17 18
Run Date
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled, SCF*
Percent Isokinetic
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F
Air Flow Rates
SCFM*. Dry
ACFM, Wet
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams
Concen. , grains/DSCF*
Emissions, pounds/hour
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen. , milligrams/DSCM*
Emissions, kilograms/hour
03/12/84
82.266
113.7
130
8,258
10,748
269.2
0.051
3.57
115.5
1.62
03/15/84
61.237
110.5
134
7,904
10,366
149.5
0.038
2.55
86.2
1.16
03/15/84
60.702
105.1
132
8,240
10,677
92.9
0.024-
1.67
53.6
0.757
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-7
TABLE 2-6
PARTICDLATE TESTS SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Flint Clay - Cyclone Inlet
Run Date
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled , SCF*
Percent Isokinetic
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F
Air Flow Rates
SCFM*, Dry
ACFM, Wet
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams
Concen. , grains/DSCF*
Emissions, pounds/hour
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen. , milligrams/DSCM*
Emissions, kilograms/hour
2
03/13/84
10.148
104.0
150
4,895
6,776
24,185.8
36.78
1,543.1
84,156.3
699.9
3
03/14/84
9.521
106.8
153
4,476
6,566
14,582.4
23.64
906.8
54,082.1
411.3
10
03/14/84
9.797
100.5
149
4,891
6,952
24,352.0
38.36
1,608.2
87,770.4
729.5
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-8
TABLE 2-7
PARTICIJLATE TESTS SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Flint Clay - Scrubber Inlet
5 6 13
Run Date 03/13/84 03/14/84 03/14/84
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas 25.581 25.203 16.578
Sampled, SCF*
Percent Isokinetic 103.6 103.7 100.7
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F 136 140 145
Air Flow Rates
SCFM*, Dry 6,741 6,634 7,022
ACFM, Wet 9,440 9,506 10,126
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams 5,006.4 4,133.0 6,870.3
Concen., grains/DSCF* 3.02 2.53 6.40
Emissions, pounds/hour 174.5 143.9 384.9
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen., milligrams/DSCM* 6,910.6 5,790.6 14,633.6
Emissions, kilograms/hour 79.2 65.3 174.6
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-9
TABLE 2-8
PARTICTJLATE TESTS SUMMARY OP RESULTS
Flint Clay - Scrubber Outlet Stack
Run Date
Test Train Parameters:
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled, SCF*
Percent Isokinetic
Stack Parameters:
Temperature, Deg. F
Air Flow Rates
SCFM*. Dry
ACFM, Wet
Method 5 Results (English):
Catch, milligrams
Concen. , grains /DSCF*
Emissions, pounds/hour
Method 5 Results (Metric):
Concen. , milligrams/DSCM*
Emissions, kilograms/hour
8
03/13/84
67.713
108.5
134
7,964
10,645
130.4
0.030
2.03
68.0
0.921
9
03/14/84
58.717
108.0
132
7,759
10,262
149.4
0.039
2.61
89.8
•1.18
16
03/14/84
46.662
109.9
133
8,078
10,909
138.8
0.046
3.18
105.0
1.44
* 68 Deg. F. - 29.92 in. Hg.
-------
2-10
TABLE 2-9
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZING TEST RESULTS
Plastic Clay - Cyclone Inlet
SAMPLING DATA
Date
Start Time
Finish Time
Impactor Flow Rate (1/min)
Isokinetic Ratio (Z)
STACK DATA
Temperature (degress C)
Moisture (%)
Velocity (m/min)
EMISSION DATA
Concentration (mg/dscm)
Percent Recovery (PS cone./
M-5 cone.)
Cumulative % Mass less than
10 microns
Concentration < 10 microns:
From PS runs, mg/dscm
From M-5 runs, mg/dscm
Emission Rate < 10 microns
(kg/hr, from M-5 runs)
PS: Particle Size Run
M-5: Method 5 Particulate Run
PS Run 11
3/15/84
1256, 1325
1256, 1325
21.81
105.3
61.3
20.0
1,154
80,250
59.0
15.55
12,400
20,371
165.7
PS Run 12
3/15/84
1512,1546
1512,1546
22.06
109.9
58.3
19.5
1,118
22,570
19.7
9.03
1,740
10,314
81.2
Averai
59.8
19.8
1,136
51,410
39.3
12.29
7,070
15,342
123.4
-------
. 2-11
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
COMPANY NAME North American Refractories Company AVERAGE OF RUNS HA. 11B, 12A
ADDRESS _ Farber . Missouri _ & 12B
SAMPLING
Cyclone Inlet
3-15-84
CO
I
u
(0
u
u
\
DENSITY = I CM/CM
1 ft ---'
70 =
** •
1O .1 .. L
9 '
4^—*
(:
9 «
8 ^
7 -
5
2"
.t —
)
(T)
V-/
0
5 10 IS 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 85 90 95 98
PERCENT OF PARTICLES LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
-------
2-12
TABLE 2-10
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZING TEST RESULTS
Plastic Clay - Scrubber Inlet
SAMPLING DATA
Date
Start Time
Finish Time
Impactor Flow Rate (1/min)
Isokinetic Ratio (%)
STACK DATA
Temperature (degrees C)
Moisture (%)
Velocity (m/min)
EMISSION DATA
Concentration (mg/dscm)
Percent Recovery (PS cone./
M-5 cone.)
Cumulative % Mass less than
10 microns
Concentration < 10 microns:
From PS runs, mg/dscm
From M-5 runs, mg/dscm
Emission Rate < 10 microns
(kg/hr, from M-5 runs)
PS: Particle Size Run
M-5: Method 5 Particulate Run
PS Run 14
3/15/84
1305, 1338
1307, 1340
19.46
102.5
58.6
18.9
1,056
10,590
81.8
41.62
4,270
5,302
64.8
PS Run 15
3/15/84
1535, 1557
1536, 1558
21.72
111.5
58.6
16.6
1,086
3,913
53.6
34.81
1,570
2,478
30.2
Averagi
58.6
17.8
1,071
7,251
67.7
38.21
2,920
3,890
47.5
-------
COMPANY
ADDRESS
2-13
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
North American Refractories Company
Farber, Missouri
AVERAGE OF RUNS 14A. 14B.-15A..
& 15B
SAMPLING LOCATION
Scrubber Inlet
3/15/84
DENSITY = I GM/CM
U
i
e
to
H
to
U
U
00 =
70 '
30- i"
jto.. -
9 !
I i
3 :
:
M -
9 — c
7 =
.1 —
0
fa
<./
3
G
A
\.
K
s_
s
r^
rr\
^
I I I I I I
S 10 IS 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 85 90 95 93
PERCENT OF PARTICLES LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
-------
2-14
TABLE 2-11
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZING TEST RESULTS
Flint Clay - Cyclone Inlet
SAMPLING DATA
Date
Start Time
Finish Time
Impactor Flow Rate (1/min)
Isoklnetic Ratio (%)
STACK DATA
Temperature (degrees C)
Moisture (%)
Velocity (m/min)
EMISSION DATA
Concentration (mg/dscm)
Percent Recovery (PS cone./
M-5 cone.)
Cumulative % Mass less than
10 microns
Concentration < 10 microns:
From PS runs, mg/dscm
From M-5 runs, mg/dscm
Emission Rate < 10 microns
(kg/hr, from M-5 runs)
PS: Particle Size Run
M-5: Method 5 Particulate Run
PS Run 2
3/13/84
1730
1732
31.35
156.0
62.5
14.8
1,119
18,510
21.9
80.91
14,973
67,325
559.92
PS Run 3
3/14/84
1527
1527
20.73
105.4
62.0
19.5
1,095
57,870
107
4.0
2,314
2,163
16.45
PS Run 10
3/14/84
1736
1736
22.68
107.3
65.5
17.5
1,178
57,950
66
23.71
13,742
20,187
167.78
Averag
63.3
17.3
1,131
44,776
64.9
36.20
10,343
29,891
248.05
-------
2-15
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
COMPANY NAME- North American Refractories Company AVERAGE OF RUMS 2B, 3A. & 10A
ADDRESS _ Farber, Missouri _
SAMPLING LOCATION
Cyclone Inlet
3/13/84 & 3/14/84
DENSITY - I CM/CM
I
U
i
o
10
K
0)
III
U
50 :
5
40 -
30— -:
1 « r
a *
:
* :
fl =
3—"
9 :
8 2
. 7 ^
j
. I —
0
)
-------
2-16
TABLE 2-12
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZING TEST RESULTS
Flint Clay - Scrubber Inlet
SAMPLING DATA
Date
Start Time
Finish Time
Impactor Flow Rate (1/min)
Isokinetic Ratio (Z)
STACK DATA
Temperature (degrees C)
Moisture (%)
Velocity (m/min)
EMISSION DATA
Concentration (mg/dscm)
Percent Recovery (PS cone./
M-5 cone.)
Cumulative % Mass less than
10 microns
Concentration < 10 microns:
From PS runs, mg/dscm
From M-5 runs, mg/dscm
Emission Rate < 10 microns
(kg/hr, from M-5 runs)
PS: Particle Size Run
M-5: Method 5 Particulate Run
PS Run 5
3/13/84
1703
1705
20.05
107.1
58.8
17.0
1,043
4,862
70.3
70.44
3,424
4,837
55.44
PS Run 6
3/14/84
1546,1623
1548,1625
20.12
112.6
58.6
18.7
995
8,780
151.6
46.40
4,090
2,663
30.03
Averagi
58.7
17.9
1,019
6,821
110.9
58.42
3,757
3,750
42.73
-------
2-17
COMPANY
ADDRESS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
North American Refractories Company AVERAGE OF RUNS SA, fiA , & 6R
Farber, Missouri
SAMPLING
Scrubber Inlet
PATENS) 3/13/84 & 3/14/84
DENSITY = 1 CM/CM
s
u
o
IR
n
an..,. 5
70 5
40 '
* ** -'
in, ...
:
3 — ^
4 I
9 -4
ft «-/
7 s
C;
^^
i •
N-*
2
• J
^
S I
©
Illl
0 I
Illl
9 2
/
fill (HI
0 1
r\
j
IMIIIIII
0 '
I1IMIII
10 !
v«/
mi mi
>0 C
(
Illl Mil
tO 7
a
iimiiii
0 8
Illl
0 {
Illl
5 9
iiii
0 <
IS 9
PERCENT OF PARTICLES LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
-------
2-18
TABLE 2-13
SUMMARY OP VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Run 2
Date: 3/13/84
Type of Discharge; Stack
Height of Point of Discharge:
Wind Direction; East '
60
Color of Plume: White
Observer: J. R. Iserman
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Direction of Observer from Point: West
Type of Plant; Drying Kiln - Clay
Location of Discharge;Scrub. Outlet
Description of Sky; Overcast
•Wind Velocity; 0-5
Detached Plume; Slighty detached
Duration of Observation; 166 min.
150'
Height of Observation Point; Ground level
Description of Background; Light Gray
Set
1
2
3
4
A
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Time
1445
1451
1457
1503
1509
1515
1521
1527
1533
1539
1545
1551
1557
1603
1451
1457
1503
1509
1515
1521
1527
1533
1539
1545
1551
1557
1603
1609
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Opacity Set Time
Number Start End Sum Average
10
25
30
35
45
35
70
60
65
60
85
20
10
25
0.42
1.04
1.25
1.46
1.88
,46
.92
.50
.71
.50
3.54
0.83
0.42
1.04
Number
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
•1609
1615
1621
1627
1633
1639
1647
1653
1659
1705
1711
1717
1723
-1729
1615
1621
1627
1633
1639
1645
1653
1659
1705
1711
1717
1723
1729
1731
Opacity
Start End Sum Average
45
65
35
30
50
65
35
25
45
50
.60
65
40
30
1.88
2.71
1.46
1.25
2.08
2.71
1.46
1.04
1.38
2.08
2.50
2.71
1.67
*3.75
*Represents 2 minutes of readings
— 4
r
o
30
TIME
90
-------
2-19
TABLE 2-14
SUMMARY OP VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Run 3
Date: 3/14/84
Type of Discharge; Stack
Height of Point of Discharge:^
Wind Direction: North
60'
Color of Plume: White
Observer: J. R. Iserman
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Direction of Observer from Point: West
Type of Plant; Drying Kiln - Clay
Location of Discharge;Scrub. Outlet
Description of Sky; Overcast
Wind Velocity; 5-10
Detached Plume: No
Duration of Observation; 150 min.
150*
Height of Observation Point; Ground level
Description of Background; Light Gray
Set
1
2
3
.4.
5
6
7
8
9
10
Time
Number Start End
1315
1321
1327
1333
1339
1345
1420
1426
1432
1438
1321
1327
1333
1339
1345
1349
1426
1432
1438
1444
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Opacity Set Time
Sum Average Number Start End
60
60
60
65
50
55
35
70
55
55
2.50
2.50
2.50
.2.71
2.08
*3.24
**4.38
2.92
2.29
2.29
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1445
1451
1457
1503
1509
1515
1521
1527
1533
1539
1451
1457
1503
1509
1515
1521
1527
1533
1539
1545
Opacity
Sum Average
60
50
45
50
60
55
60
50
35
30
50
08
1.87
08
50
08
50
08
46
1.25
*Due to overcast conditions this reading represents only 4 minutes & 15
seconds
**Represents two minutes of readings
— 4
i1
r
u
30
1 HR
10
TIME
-------
2-20
TABLE 2-15
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Run 4
Date; 3/14/84
Type of Discharge: Stack
Height of Point of Discharge:
Wind Direction; North ]
Color of Plume: White
60
Observer: J. R. Iserman
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Direction of Observer from Point: West
Type of Plant; Drying Kiln - Clay
Location of Discharge;Scrub. Outlet
Description of Sky; Overcast
Wind Velocity; 10-15
Detached Plume: No
Duration of Observation; 112 min.
150'
Height of Observation Point; Ground level
Description of Background; Light Gray
Set
1.
2
.3.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Time
Number Start End
1615
1621
1627
1633
1639
1715
1721
1727
1733
1739
1621
1627
1633
1639
1645
1721
1727
1733
1739
1745
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Opacity Set Time
Sum Average Number Start End
60
70
65
50
55
80
70
55
55
50
50
92
71
08
2.29
3,
2.
2.
2.
33
92
29
29
Opacity
.Sum Average
11
12
13
14
1745 1751
1751 1757
1757 1803
1803 1807
55
60
70
40
2.29
2.50
2.92
*2.50
2.08
*Due to overcast, conditions this reading represents only 4 minutes
— 4
*
I'
s*
i
30
TIME
-------
2-21
TABLE 2-16
SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Run 5
Date: 3/15/84
Type of Discharge; Stack
Height of Point of Discharge:
Wind Direction; North ~
Color of Plume; White
Observer: J. R.
60'
Iserman
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Direction of Observer from Point: West
Type of Plant; Drying Kiln - Clay
Location of Discharge:Scrub. Outlet
Description of Sky; Overcast
Wind Velocity; 5-10
Detached Plume: No
Duration of Observation; 165 min.
150'
Height of Observation Point; Ground level
Description of Background; Gray
Set
Time
Number Start End
1
2
3
*4'
5
6
7
8
9
10
1100
1106
1112
1118
1124
1130
1136
1142
1148
1154
1106
1112
1118
1124
1130
1136
1142
1148
1154
1155
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Opacity Set Time
Sum Average Number. Start End
50
35
45
60
50
45
50
70
35
15
2.08
1.46
1.87
2.50
2.08
1.87
2.08
2.92
1.46
*3.00
Opacity
Sum Average
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1245
1251
1257
1303
1309
1315
1321
1327
1333
1339
1251
1257
1303
1309
1315
1321
1327
1333
1339
1345
65
65
35
50
70
55
65
35
55
45
2.71
2.71
1.46
.08
.92
.29
2.71
1.46
2.29
1.87
2.
2.
2.
^Represents 1.25 minutes of readings
— 4
r
I HR
10
TIME
2 HR
-------
2-22
TABLE 2-17
SUMMARY OP VISIBLE EMISSIONS
Run 6
Date: 3/15/84
Type of Discharge; Stack
Height of Point of Discharge; 60
Wind Direction: North-North-East
Color of Plume: White
Observer: J. R. Iserman
Distance from Observer to Discharge Point:
Direction of Observer from Point: West
Type of Plant; Drying Kiln - Clay
Location of Discharge:Scrub. Outlet
Description of Sky; Overcast
Wind Velocity; 5-10
Detached Plume: No
Duration of Observation; 105 min.
150'
Height of Observation Point; Ground level
Description of Background; Gray
Set
1
2
3
*4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Time
1415
1421
1427
1433
1439
1445
1451
1457
1503
1509
1421
1427
1433
1439
1445
1451
1457
1503
1509
1515
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE OPACITY
Opacity Set Time
Number Start End Sum Average
80
35
65
30
60
35
40
50
60
25
3.33
1.46
2.71
1.25
2.50
1.46
1.67
2.08
2.50
Opacity
Number
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
.Start End Sum Average
1515
1521
1527
1533
1539
1545
1551
1557
1521
1527
1533
1539
1545
1551
1557
1600
75
75
35
50
65
45
85
35
3.13
3.13
1.46
2.08
2.71
1.87
3.54
*2.92
1.04
*Represents three minutes of readings
u
a
r
10
TIME
2 MR
-------
3-1
3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION
3.1 General. NARCO produces a variety of refractory brick and
specialty products using an assortment of raw materials. A complete
description of NARCO's process operations was provided In an earlier MRI trip
report (final November 10, 1983). The following discussion describes the
processing of plastic and flint clays. Figure 3-1 is a general process flow
diagram of the clay process tested.
3.2 Calcining Process.
3.2.1 Raw Material. NARCO maintains an open-pit mine near Martinsburg,
Missouri, approximately 30 miles from Farber, which serves as the source of
Missouri plastic clay. Flint clay is purchased from a mine in Wheelersburg,
Ohio, and is called "Brohard" by plant personnel. The two raw materials are
stored in outdoor stockpiles and are moved by front-end loader into a
hopper. A drag feeder moves the clay from the hopper into an eagle crusher,
which reduces the material to less than 10.2 cm (4 In.) In size. A partially
covered conveyor belt carries the material to a chute where it is gravity-fed
into a rotary dryer.
3.2.2 Rotary Dryer. The McDermott, direct-fired, rotary dryer is 2.4 m
(8 ft) in diameter and 18.3 m (60 ft) long. It rotates at a speed of 5 rpm
and has an average material retention time of about 16 minutes. Actual
retention times vary with each raw material. The maximum drying temperature
provided by natural gas firing (combustion chamber) is 927°C (1700°F).
The actual gas temperature in the dryer is 149° to 204°C (300° to
400°F). Gas flow is cocurrent to process material flow, and there are no
heat recovery or recirculation systems associated with this dryer. The
amount of moisture removed by the dryer ranges from 2 to 10 percent.
3.2.2.1 Dryer Design Capacity. The design capacity of the dryer also
varies with each material processed. The final moisture content required for
a usuable product dictates the rate at- which the raw material can be
processed through the dryer. Typical maximum production capacities for
plastic and flint clay are 27 Mg/h (30 tph) and 18 Mg/h (20 tph)
respectively.
-------
3-2
TRUCK
OUTDOOR
STOCKPILES
FRONT-END
LOADER
CRUSHER
HOPPER
DRAG FEEDER
EAGLE
CRUSHER
BELT CONVEYOR
ROTARY
DRYER
BELT CONVEYOR
STORAGE
BINS
ADDITIONAL
PROCESSING
Figure 3-1 Plastic and flint clay processing.
NARCO, Farber, Mo.
-------
3-3
3.2.2.2 Dryer Exhaust Gases. The exhaust gases from the rotary dryer
pass through a cyclone (W.W. Sly, No. 48, Series 230) and a vane-type
scrubber (Entoleter, Model CF2-0511-11) before being emitted to the
atmosphere. The partlculate captured by the cyclone Is recycled onto the
product conveyor belt at the dryer outlet. The scrubber has a design gas
flow rate of 312 m3/min (11,100 acfm). The inlet gas temperature is 93°C
(200°?), and the moisture content of the inlet gas is 0.08 Ib l^O/lb dry
gas. The liquid flow rate is 75 1/min (20 gpm), and the gas pressure drop
across the scrubber is 2.7 to 3.2 kPa (11 to 13 in. w.c.). The pressure drop
across the entire cyclone/scrubber system is 4.2 to 4.5 kPa (17 to I80in.
w.c.).
3.2.3 Storage. After drying, the material is belt-conveyed to the main
plant. Storage bins, rated at 68 Mg (75 tons) each, are filled and emptied
as needed to meet NARCO production schedules. There are no scales or other
monitors for determining production rate; however, the loader operator is
aware of how many "dips" of material fed to the dryer will fill each bin.
The actual bin capacity varies for each raw material. For flint and plastic
clay, each bin holds approximately 54 Mg (60 tons) of dried material.
3.3 PROCESS CONDITIONS DURING TESTING
3.3.1 Monitoring Procedures. All processes were operating normally and
at maximum capacity during the emission testing. Test run Nos. 1, 5, and 6
were conducted during plastic clay processing. Run Nos. 2, 3, and 4 were
conducted during flint clay processing. The dryer operation was monitored by
recording the combustion chamber temperature at 15-minute intervals. This
temperature gauge was located in a shed at the feed end of the dryer. The
furnace temperature ranged from 888° to 927°C (1630° to 1700°F)
during the testing. The fuel usage rate was determined by taking natural gas
meter readings at the start and finish of each test run. The fuel usage rate
was determined by taking natural gas meter readings at the start and finish
of each test run. The fuel usage rate was constant so more frequent gas
readings were not required. The average fuel usuage rate during the testing
was approximately 7.1 nr/min (250 ft^/min) for both clays. This
corresponds to a fuel to product ratio of approximately 600,000 Btu/ton of
-------
3-4
flint clay and 465,000 Btu/ton of plastic clay. A sample calculation for
flint clay is shown below:
975 Btu 249.8 ft3 60 min h
x x x = 604,389 Btu/ton
ft3 min h 24.2 tons
3.3.2 Test Interruptions. On several occasions during test runs, the
dryer was shut off for employee break periods. Testing was also discontinued
during dryer shutoffs. In some cases the furnance was left on during the
break to avoid lighting it again and waiting for the dryer to reach its
proper operating temperature. In these cases, the incremental gas usuage was
determined for the nontestlng periods and was subtracted from the total gas
usage given by the meter reading.
3.3.3 Control Equipment. The operation of the air pollution control
equipment was monitored by recording the gas pressure drop across the system
from a manometer installed by NARCO inside the scrubber building. The
pressure drop across the cyclone/scrubber system ranged from 4.1 to 4.5 kPa
(16.5 to 18 in. w.c.) throughout the testing. The average gas flow rate from
the scrubber stack was 10,500 acfm at 135°F.
3.3.4 Production Rates. The production rate was measured by recording
the number of loads (dips) fed to the eagle crusher. The actual count was
provided to MRI by the front-end loader operator at various times throughout
each test run. The crusher operator maintained a steady stream of raw
material to the dryer. The conveyor belt feeding the dryer only operates at
one speed, so the production rate is varied by the depth and quantity of raw
material on the belt.
In some cases, the final moisture content of the dried material is too
high for proper milling. In these cases the crusher operator shuts off the
conveyor belt for 3 minutes to allow the dryer temperature to increase
slightly and to allow additional drying to occur. This occurred twice during
run No. 2 (flint clay), at 2:30 p.m. and 3:10 p.m. During all other test
runs the conveyor belt operated continuously.
The actual production rafie for each run was calculated .using the weight
-------
3-5
of an average load and the dip count given by the loader operator. For test
runs on March 12, 14, and 15, a small loader owned by NARCO was used. Due to
an electrical fire in this loader on March 13, a larger loader was rented for
use on the 13th. The original loader was repaired by the 14th and was used
the rest of the week. Each loader was weighed when full and empty to
determine the weight of an average load. The average production rates during
testing of flint and plastic clay were 21.9 Mg/h (24.2 tph) and 28.6 Mg/h
(31.5 tph), respectively. The dryer was operating at capacity at all times
to produce products with suitable final moisture contents. Tables 3-1
through 3-6 present the actual operating conditions during each test run.
Table 3-7 summarizes the production data.
3.3.5 Moisture Content. The initial and final moisture contents of the
two clays were measured by NARCO personnel at the request of MRI. The
initial moisture content of the flint clay (Brohard) was 12.9 percent and the
final moisture content was 1.9 percent. The plastic clay had initial and
final moisture contents of 11.9 and 4.1 percent, respectively.
3.4 DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS
Plant processes were operated at maximum capacity during all test runs.
Collected data are representative of normal process conditions and are useful
for NSPS development. All scheduled emission test runs were completed,
except for particle size sampling at the scrubber outlet stack. Particle
size testing was not possible at this location because of excessive moisture
in the gas stream. Visible emissions observations were made at the outlet
stack and the process feed inlet during five of the six runs; darkness
prevented any readings from being taken during run No. 1. All fugitive
emission readings were zero percent opacity. Most of the stack opacity
readings were also zero percent; however, an occasional 5 to 10 percent
reading was recorded. The average opacity for all test runs was 1.5 to 2
percent. Mr. Sutton and other NARCO personnel were very helpful in
maintaining a consistent process operation throughout the week of testing.
-------
3-6
TABLE 3-1 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN NO. 1—MISSOURI PLASTIC CLAY—MARCH 12, 1984-
Dryer
furnace
Time temp. (°F)
6:00 p.m.
6:15
6:30
6:45
7:00
7:15
7:30
7:45
8:00
8:15
Weight per load
Production rate
Natural gas used
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
=2.9 tons
=• 22 loads
= 93,309 -
Scrubber
system,
AP (in. w.c.
18.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
18.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
18.0
2.9 tons ..
A load "
93,276 MCF _
Natural
gas meter Cumulative No.
reading, loads into
) (MCF)a hopper
93,276 1
13
93,309 22
1 60 min _ 28.2 tons
135 min h h
33,000 ft3 _ 244.4 ft3
135 min min
*MCF = 1,000 ft3.
-------
3-7
TABLE 3-2 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN-NO. 2—FLINT CLAY—MARCH 13, 1984
Time
2:45 p.m.
3:00
3:15
3:30
3:45
4:00
4:15
4:30
4:45
5:00
5:15
5:30
Weight per
Production
Natural gas
Dryer
furnace
temp. (°F)
1700
1700
1700
1700
BREAK
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
1700
load =4.6 tons
rate = 15 loads
used = 93,445 -
Scrubber
system,
AP (in. w.c
16.8
17.3
17.0
16.8
Natural
gas meter Cumulative No.
reading, loads into
.) (MCF)a hopper0
93,411 1
•5
PERIOD— DRYER AND GAS SHUT OFF
TESTING
17;0
17.0
17.3
17.5
17.8
18.0
4.6 tons
x load
93,411 MCF
DISCONTINUED
6
9
11
93,445 15
1 60 min _ 30.4 tons
x 135 min x h h
_ 34,000 ft3 _ 251.9 ft3
135 min min
JMCF = 1,000 ft3.
Different front-end loader used for this run because of electrical
problem with original loader.
-------
3-8
TABLE 3-3 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN NO. 3--FLINT CLAY—MARCH 14, 1984
Time
1:15 p.m.
1:30
1:45
2:00
2:15
2:30
2:45
3:00
3:15
3:30
Dryer
furnace
temp. (°F)
1680
1680
1680
30 MIN
1670
1670
1670
1670
1670
1680
Scrubber
system,
AP (in. w.c.)
16.5
17.0
17.8
Natural
gas meter
reading,
(MCF)a
93,581
BREAK PERIOD—DRYER SHUT OFF (GAS
TESTING DISCONTINUED
17.3
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.8
93,624
Cumulative No.
loads into
hopper
1
8
STILL ON)
15
21
Weight per load =2.2 tons
Production rate = 21 loads 2.23 tons
x load x
105 min
60 min _ 26.8 tons
Natural gas used = 93,624 - 93,581 MCF = 43.000 ft3 = 260.6 ft3/min
135 min
260.6 ft3
mTn
x 30 min. = 7,818 ft3
43,000-7,818 = 35,182 ft3 used during testing
*MCF = 1,000 ft3.
Original loader.
-------
3-9
TABLE 3-4 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN NO. 4—FLINT CLAY—MARCH 14, 1984
Natural
Dryer Scrubber gas meter Cumulative No.
furnace system, reading, loads into
Time temp. (°F) AP (in. w.c.) (MCF)a hopper0
4:00 p.m.
4:15
4:30
4:45
5:00
5:15
5:30
5:45
6:00
6:15
Weight per load
Production rate
Natural nac ncorl
1680
1680
1680
1680
30 MIN BREAK
1630
1630
1650
1650
1650
=2.2 tons
= 12 loads x
= q-i ecc _ Q-a
17.5 93,624
17.3
17.3
17.3
PERIOD— DRYER SHUT OFF
TESTING DISCONTINUED
16.8
17.8
16.8
17.0
17.0 93,656
2.2 tons 1 60
load A 105 min A
fi?d MPP = 32,000 f,t
1
7
(GAS STILL ON)
9
10
12
min 15.3 tons
h h
32,000 - 7,110 = 24,890 ft3 used during testing
?MCF =1,000 ft3.
Original loader.
-------
3-10
TABLE 3-5 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN NO. 5—MISSOURI PLASTIC CLAY—MARCH 15, 1984
Time
11:00 a.m.
11:15
11:30
11:45
12:00
Dryer
furnace
temp. (°F)
1650
1680
1680
1680
LUNCH
Scrubber
system,
AP (in. w.c.)
17.4
17.4
17.0
17.2
BREAK— ORYER AND
Natural
gas meter
readi ng ,
(MCF)a
93,735
GAS OFF 12-12:
Cumulative No.
loads into
hopper
1
7
30 p.m.
GAS ON 12:30-12:45 p.m.
TESTING DISCONTINUED
12:30
12:45 p.m. 1650 16.8 13
1:00 1660 17.0
1:15 1660 17.0
1:30 1660 17.0 19
1:45 1660 17.0 93,769 22
Weight per load = 2.9 tons
Production rate = 22 loads 2.9 tons 1 60 min 31.7 tons
load * 120 min x h h
Natural gas used = 93,769 - 93,735 MCF =
251>.9 ft3 x 15 min = 3,779 ft3
mm
34,000 - 3,779 ft3 = 30,221 ft3 used during testing
= 1,000 ft3.
Original loader.
-------
3-11
TABLE 3r6 OPERATING CONDITIONS
RUN NO. 6—MISSOURI PLASTIC CLAY—MARCH 15, 1984
Natural
Dryer Scrubber gas meter Cumulative No.
furnace system, reading, loads into
Time temp. (°F) AP (in. w.c. ) (MCF)a hopper0
2:15 p.m. '
2:30
2:45
3:00
3:15
3:30
3:45
4:00
Weight per load
Production rate
Natural nac ncaH
1650
1650
1650
1650
1660
1660
1660
1660
=2.9 tons
= 21 loads ,
»
= q^ an? - <
17.0 93,775 1
17.0
17. 0 7
17.2
17.2 14
17.1
17.0 18
17.5 93,802 21
2.9 tons 1 60 min _ 34.6 tons
; load x 105 min x h h
^*» TTC U/*P fc / • UUU 1 U bw / • J> It
*MCF = 1,000 ft3.
Original loader.
-------
3-12
TABLE 3-7 NARCO TEST PRODUCTION SUMMARY
Test
run
1
2
3
4
5
6
Process
material
Plastic clay
Flint clay
Flint clay
Flint clay.
Plastic clay
Plastic clay
Production
rate (tons/h)
28.2
30.4
26.8
15.3
31.7
34.6
Fuel usage
(ftVmin)
244.4
251.9
260.6
237.0
251.9
257.1
AVERAGE PRODUCTION RATES:
FLINT CLAY = 24.2 tons/h
PLASTIC CLAY = 31.5 tons/h
-------
4-1
4. SAMPLING LOCATIONS
4.1 Suitability of Sampling Sites. The primary goal of the testing
program was to characterize emissions from the clay drying process pollution
control equipment. Additionally, physical properties of the process feed
stock and the product were investigated. Sampling sites appropriate to these
objectives were approved prior to testing. Each sampling location is
discussed individually, and the position of each site within the system is
illustrated in Figure 4-1.
4.2 Rotary Dryer Inlet (Sampling Location A). Grab samples of the feed
to the rotary dryer were collected for sieve analysis and moisture content
determination. Samples were taken during each set of simultaneous Method 5
runs. v
4.3 Rotary Dryer Inlet (Observation Location B). Method 9 visible
emissions were performed at the conveyor belt just as it enters the rotary
dryer.
4.4 Rotary Dryer Outlet (Observation Location C). Method 22 visible
emissions were planned for this location; however, during the presurvey of
the sampling locations, it was decided by the EPA EMB that, from the dryer
-outlet through the scrubber outlet stack, the process was a closed system.
4.5 Rotary Dryer Outlet (Sampling Locations D). Grab samples of the
product from the dryer were collected for sieve analysis and moisture content
determination. Samples were taken during each set of simultaneous Method 5
runs.
A •
4.6 Cyclone Inlet (Sampling Location E). Particulate emissions and
particle size distribution determinations were made in the 19-inch diameter
duct accessed through two sampling ports spaced 90 degrees apart. The
sampling ports were located 71 inches (i.e., 3.7 duct diameters) downstream
from the dryer hopper and 70 inches (i.e., 3.7 duct diameters) upstream from
the inlet to the cyclone. Figure 4-2 illustrates the cyclone inlet sampling
location.
The original test plan was to sample 24 points for five minutes each
(giving a total test time of 120 minutes), but the high particulate loading
-------
4-2
OBSERVATION
LOCATION C
ATMOSPHERE
-^ nn.cnrnvaTTOM
I
G
STACK O
|
1
I.D. FAN
|
1
SCRUBBER
A
PF
CYCLONE
1
• -..— . I
X_ A
^•9 E
ROTARY
DRYER
GRAB SAMPLES
O SAMPLING LOCATIONS
• OBSERVATION POINT
FIGURE 4-1 PROCESS FLOW SCHEMATIC SHOWING SAMPLING LOCATIONS
-------
4-3
in the duct made this plan impractical. EPA EMB and Entropy jointly approved
a revised particulate sampling plan in which 12 points (six points on each of
two traverse axes labeled A and B) were sampled for two minutes each, for a
net run time of 24 minotes.
4.7 Scrubber Inlet-Cyclone Outlet (Sampling Location F). Particulate
emissions and particle size distribution determinations were made in the
17-inch by 25-inch rectangular duct accessed through a rectangular slot in
the duct. Five traverse access points were located in the slot 73 inches
(i.e., 3.6 equivalent duct diameters) downstream from the cyclone outlet and
22 inches (i.e., 1.1 equivalent duct diameters) upstream from the inlet to
the scrubber. Figure 4-3 illustrates the scrubber inlet sampling location.
The original plan was to divide the duct cross section into 25 equal
areas and sample the centroid of each equal area for 2.5 minutes for a net
run time of 62.5 minutes; however, due to the high negative pressure
encountered at the location, only 20 of the 25 equal areas were sampled. For
runs 4-6, the first point on each traverse axis was not sampled, and the
second point was sampled twice, as approved by EPA EMB. During runs 13-15,
the second point was sampled only once anad the sampling time at each point
was dropped to two minutes for a net run time of 40 minutes as per EPA EMB.
4.8 Scrubber Outlet Stack (SamplingcLocation G). Particulate emissions
determinations were made in the 18.5-inch (depth) by 19-inch (width)
rectangular stack accessed through a rectangular slot in the stack. Five
traverse access points were located in the slot located 58 inches (i.e., 3.1
equivalent duct diameters) downstream from the scrubber outlet and 48 inches
(i.e., 2.6 equivalent duct diameters) upstream from the stack outlet. The
scrubber outlet stack sampling location is illustrated in Figure 4-4.
4.9 Scrubber Outlet Stack (Observation Location H). Method 5
particulate emissions and Method 9 visible emissions were performed at the
stack outlet.
-------
4-4
19" DIAMETER
1 AXIS
12 POINTS/AXIS
12 TOTAL POINTS
B
2 AXES
6 POINTS/AXIS
12 TOTAL POINTS
SECTION L-L
RUN 1
SECTION L-L
RUNS 2,3,10,11,12
FIGURE 4-2 CYCLONE INLET DIMENSIONS WITH SAMPLING PORT AND
POINT LOCATIONS
-------
4-5
25'
.17"
+-4—-
Tr~-T
4 i 3
_L
1
NOTE:
FIRST POINT OF EACH
TRAVERSE AXIS WAS
NOT SAMPLED
B
•D
L
20 SAMPLING POINTS
SECTION M-M
FROM
CYCLONE
BYPASS
TO STACK
TO
SCRUBBER
SAMPLING TRAVERSE
ACCESS
FIGURE 4-3 SCRUBBER INLET DIMENSIONS WITH SAMPLING PORT AND
POINT LOCATIONS
-------
4-6
18.5'
19'
- I • I • I. • I •
__
I I
8 I '
--- -- ,
I '
-I lr- —
I
I
I I I t I
A B C D E
25 SAMPLING
POINTS
SECTION R-R
SAMPLING
TRAVERSE
ACCESS
FROM FAN
FIGURE 4-4 SCRUBBER EXHAUST STACK DIMENSIONS WITH SAMPLING PORT
AND POINT LOCATIONS
-------
5-1
5. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
5.1 Sampling Objectives. This section describes the sampling and
analytical procedures which were employed at the North American Refractories
Company facility in order to gather data concerning emissions from the clay
drying pollution control equipment and to investigate physical properties of
the process feed stock and the product. The sampling program Included tests
for partlculate emissions and trace metals, sieve and moisture analysis on
feed and product samples, plume opacity, and particle size distribution.
5.2 Particulate Emissions Testing. Where appropriate, particulate
emissions sampling conformed to the standards and procedures set forth by EPA
Reference Methods 1-5 and described in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix 7.3. It was
necessary at some locations to modify the test procedures in order to cope
with heavy particulate loading and/or high negative pressure.
5.3 Trace Metals Analysis. For one run at each location, the Method 5
particulate catch and the distilled water reagent from the impingers were
analyzed for trace metals by using atomic absorption or inductively coupled
argon plasma spectrometry. These metals are zinc, nickel, iron, manganese,
vanadium, calcium, silicon, aluminum, magnesium, fluorine, beryllium,
uranium, lead, and mercury.
5.4 Sieve Analysis and Moisture Content. Sieve analysis and moisture
content determinations were performed on all feed and product samples. ASTM
Method D 2216 was used to analyze the samples for moisture content, while
ASTM Method D 422 was used for sieve analysis.
5.5 Plume Opacity and Fugitive Emissions. Plume opacity observations
were performed in accordance with EPA Reference Method 9 as described in 40
CFR Part 60. Fugitive emissions observations were made using EPA Reference
Method 9 instead of EPA Reference Method 22 as per EPA EMB.
5.6 Particle Size Tests. Particle size determinations were made using
a right angle inlet preseparator, followed by an Andersen Mark III cascade
impactor. The test procedures were based upon the publication, "Procedures
for Cascade Impactor Calibration and Operation In Process Streams - Revised
1979," developed by the Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory (IERL)
and Southern Research Institute.
-------
6-1
6. QUALITY ASSURANCE
6.1 Introduction. The goal of quality assurance for the project was to
ensure the accuracy of all data collected. The procedures used are contained
in Entropy's "Quality Assurance Program Plan," which was approved by the U.S.
EPA EMB in the contract agreement governing the project.
In order to ensure continuity among field testing personnel, daily
meetings were held before each day of the field testing. At the meetings,
results from the testing conducted on the previous day were reviewed.
Responsibilities were clearly delineated for each member of the testing team,
and questions were addressed and resolved immediately. In situations where
more than one person was performing similar activities, consistency was
ensured through communication at the meetings.
In addition to the general quality assurance measures, specific quality
assurance activities were conducted for several of the individual test
methods performed.
6.2 Sampling Train Components. Entropy's sampling equipment, including
nozzles, pitot tubes, dry gas meters, orifices, and thermocouples, was
uniquely identified and calibrated In accordance with .documented procedures
and acceptance criteria prior to and at the completion of the field testing
program. All sampling equipment was manufactured by Nutech Corporation,
Andersen 2000 or by Entropy. Calibration data for the sampling equipment are
contained in Appendix 7.6.
6.3 Preseparator and Cascade Impactors. All internal components and
surfaces of the impactors were cleaned in an ultrasonic bath to ensure that
all surface impurities were removed, and visual Inspections for cleanliness
were made prior to shipment to the field. After each sample recovery, the
preseparator, the impactor body, and the plates were rinsed with acetone to
ensure that all organic residuals and/or particulate matter were removed.
-------
6-2
6.4 Sample Collection Substrates. Schleicker & Schuell #30 glass fiber
sample collection substrates were used for particle size testing. To prevent
contamination of the substrate surface, all filters were handled with
laboratory tweezers. This procedure was used during impactor assembly,
sample recovery, and weighing of the substrates.
6.5 Substrate Weighing. An analytical balance capable of weighing to
the nearest 0.01 milligram (mg) was used. To ensure that no weight bias was
produced from the preparation, transportation, recovery, or weighing
procedures, two control samples were obtained during the test program. A
reactivity run was performed to ensure that the flue gases did not interact
with the substrate to produce extraneous results. For the reactivity run, a
solid filter was placed In the front section of the impactor, and the
Impactor was introduced into the stack, and a sample was pulled through the
head using the parameters outlined for a normal particle sizing run. The
average difference between the pre- and post-test weights was 0.000053
milligrams, based upon weight differences ranging from 0.00001 to 0.00017
milligrams. A blank run was also performed to demonstrate that the impactor
could be assembled and disassembled without affecting the weight of the
substrate. The average difference between the pre- and post-assembly weights
was 0.000021 milligrams, based upon a difference ranging from 0.00001 to
0.00006 milligrams.
6.6 Sample Analysis. In order to reduce the probability of errors or
inconsistent results, one member of the field crew had sole responsibility
for the sample analysis procedure. Sample analysis was performed in a room
dedicated exclusively to filter weighing.
6.7 EPA Method 3. All Method 3 analyses were performed in triplicate.
Each analyzer was checked for leaks prior to any analysis as specified in the
method. Samples were analyzed within four hours of collection.
6.8 EPA Method 9. The visible emissions observers held current
certifications issued within the last 6 months. Documentation verifying the
observer's certifications are provided-in Appendix 7.2.4.
------- |