&EPA
EPA 600 7 79-028
Env •• January 1 979
M 1
Guidelines for Particulate
Sampling in Gaseous
Effluents from Industrial
Processes
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-79-028
January 1979
Guidelines for Particulate
Sampling in Gaseous Effluents
from Industrial Processes
by
R.R. Wilson, Jr., P.R. Cavanaugh, K.M. Gushing,
W.E. Farthing, and W.B. Smith
Southern Research Institute
2000 Ninth Avenue, South
Birmingham, Alabama 35205
Contract No. 68-02-2111
T.D. 10904
Program Element No. EHE624
EPA Project Officer: D. Bruce Harris
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
This guideline document lists and describes briefly many
of the instruments and techniques that are available for measur-
ing the concentration or size distribution of particles suspended
in process streams. The standard, or well established, methods
are described as well as some experimental methods and prototype
instruments.
Descriptions of instruments and procedures for measuring
mass concentration, opacity, and particle size distribution are
given. Procedures for planning and implementing tests for con-
trol device evaluation are also included.
ii
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract i i
Figures v
Tables viii
Acknowledgment ix
1. Introduction and Summary 1
2. Mass Concentration 3
Filtration 3
EPA Test Method 5 4
EPA Test Method 17 5
ASTM - Test Method 17 5
ASME Performance Test Code 27 9
Advantages and Disadvantages 9
Filter Materials 9
Process Monitors 11
Beta Particle Attenuation Monitors 12
Piezoelectric Mass Monitors 14
Charge Transfer 15
Optical Methods 16
Conventional Transmissometers 16
Other Optical Methods 19
Multiple-wavelength transmissom-
eters 19
Light scattering 21
3. Opacity 25
4. Particle Size Distributions 33
Established Techniques 33
Field Measurements 33
Aerodynamic Methods 33
Cascade impactors 34
Cyclones 41
Optical Particle Counters 48
Diffusion Batteries with Condensation
Nuclei Counters 51
Electrical Mobility 58
Laboratory Measurements 63
Sedimentation and Elutriation 65
Centrifuges 66
Microscopy 69
Sieves 73
Coulter Counter 74
New Techniques 74
Low Pressure Impactors 76
Impactors with Beta Radiation Attenuation
Sensors 76
iii
-------
CONTENTS (CONT)
Cascade Impactors with Piezoelectric
Crystal Sensors 79
Virtual Impactors 79
Optical Measurement Techniques 81
Hot Wire Anemometry 85
Large Volume Samplers 85
5. Control Device Evaluation 87
References 90
Bibliography 100
iv
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 The EPA Method 5 particulate sampling train 6
2 ASTM type particulate sampling train 8
3 Schematic flow diagram of a typical RAC Automatic Stack
Monitor System installation. (Drawing not to scale.)
Used by permission 13
4 Opacity of smoke plumes containing particles of dif-
ferent sizes and refractive indexes as a function of
their mass concentration. After Connor.10 17
5 Mean extinction coefficient as a function of the phase
shift parameter p . After Dobbins and Jizmagian.18 20
vs •
6 Optical assembly diagram of a nephelometer used in
stack monitoring. After Ensor and Bevan.21 22
7 Optical diagram of the PILLS V instrument. After
Schmitt, Nusplinger, and Kreikelbaum.25 23
8 Schenatic of a transmissometer showing projection and
view angles which must be no greater than 5° for
EPA compliance 27
9 A typical"double pass in situ transmissometer design.
After Nader.2 9 28
10 A single pass transmissometer design.
After Haville.31 30
11 Particle extinction coefficients for various aerosols
over three scattering regions: Rayleigh, Mie, and
Geometric. After Hodkinson and Greenfield.32 32
12 Schematic diagram, operation of cascade impactor 35
13 Schematics of five commercial cascade impactors 38 & 39
14 Calibration of an Anderson Mark III impactor. Collec-
tion efficiency vs. particle size for stages 1
through 8. After Gushing, et al."1 40
-------
FIGURES (CONT)
Number
15 Hypothetical flow through typical reverse flow
cyclone 42
16 Comparison of cascade impactor stage with cyclone
collection efficiency curve 43
17 Schematic of the Southern Research Institute Three
Series Cyclone System 45
18 The EPA/Southern Research Institute Five Series
Cyclone System 46
19 Collection efficiency of the EPA-S.R.I. Cyclones at a
flow rate of 28.3 £,/min, a temperature of 25°C, and
for a particle density of 1.00 g/cm3 47
20 Schematic of the Acurex-Aerotherm Source Assessment
Sampling System (SASS) 49
21 Schematic of an optical single particle counter 50
22 Optical configurations for six commercial particle
counters 52
23 A rectangular channel diffusion battery 54
24 Screen type diffusion battery. The battery is 21 cm
long, 4 cm in diameter, and contains 55, 635 mesh
stainless steel screens. After Sinclair.56 55
25 Diagram of a condensation nuclei counter. After
Haberl and Fusco.5 7 57
26 Diffusion battery and condensation nuclei counter
layout for fine particle sizing.19 59
27 Theoretical parallel plate diffusion battery
penetration curves 60
28 Particle mobility as a function of diameter foif shellac
aerosol particles charged in a positive ion field
(after Cochet and Trillat59). K is the dielectric
constant of the aerosol particles 61
29 The electric mobility principle §2
vi
-------
FIGURES (CONT)
Number Page
30 Schematic of the Thermosystems Model 3030 Electrical
Aerosol Analyzer 64
31 The Roller elutriator. After Allen.69 67
32 The Bahco microparticle classifier 68
33 A cut-away sketch of the Goetz Aerosol Spectrometer
spiral centrifuge. In assembled form the vertical
axes (1)coincide and horizontal arrows (2)coincide.
After Gerber. 7 3 .' 70
34 Cross-sectional sketch of the Stbber Centrifuge.
After Stober and Flachsbart. 7" 71
35 Cross sectional sketch of a conifuge 72
36 Operating principle of the Coulter counter. Courtesy
of Coulter Electronics 75
37 Cross section of prototype Mark IV University of
Washington Source Test Cascade Impactor 77
38 Sampling train utilizing a low pressure impactor.
After Pilat. 8 : 78
39 Virtual impactors (centripeters, dichotomus samplers,
stagnation impactors) a. impingement into a stagnant
air space; b. opposed axisymmetric jets 80
vii
-------
TABLES
Number Page
I Status of Particulate Sampling Methods for Process
Streams 2
II Sampling Systems for Testing by EPA Method 5 7
III Glass Fiber Filter Products 10
IV Commercial Cascade Impactor Sampling Systems 37
V Characteristics of Commercial, Optical, Particle
Counters 53
VI Particulate Control Device Tasks 89
viii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Members of the Southern Research Institute staff who
reviewed this report are Joseph D. McCain, Charles Feazel,
and James Ragland. We appreciate the suggestions and continu-
ing support of D. Bruce Harris, our Project Officer.
ix
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
The purpose of this guideline document is to describe the
instruments and techniques that are available for measuring the
concentration or size distribution of particles suspended in gas
process streams. The standard or well established methods are
described as well as some experimental methods and prototype
instruments. A more detailed discussion of particulate sampling
methods is given in a companion document "Technical Manual: A
Survey of Equipment and Methods for Particulate Sampling in
Industrial Process Strearns", EPA report number EPA-600/7-78-043,
March, 1978, by Wallace B. Smith, Paul R. Cavanaugh, and Rufus R.
Wilson.
It is disappointing to everyone involved in aerosol sampling
that more convenient and efficient methods are not available for
making measurements of particle size and concentration. When
good resolution and accuracy are needed, one must rely on manual
techniques such as filters for mass and cascade impactors for
sizing measurements. Nevertheless, progress is being made in
the development of more convenient methods that yield real-time
information. For some applications, such instruments already
yield useful information. Table I summarizes the current status
of particulate sampling methods.
Section II contains descriptions of instruments and procedures
for measuring mass concentrations, Section III is devoted to mea-
surements of opacity. Section IV to particle-size measurements,
and Section V specifically to control device evaluation.
-------
TABLE I.
STATUS OF PARTICULATE SAMPLING METHODS FOR PROCESS STREAMS
MASS CONCENTRATION
Filters - C
B-Particle Attenuation
Charge Transfer - CP
Transmissometers - P
P Light Scattering - P, CP
Piezoelectric Microbalances
- R
OPACITY
Transmissometers - C
Nephelometers - CP
PARTICLE SIZE
Cascade Impactors - C, P
Cyclones - P, C
Light Scattering - P
Diffusion Batteries and
Condensation Nuclei Counters - P
Electrical Mobility - P
C - Commercial instruments in everyday use.
CP - Commercial instruments available, these may require
special adaptation or skills.
P - Prototype systems have been used. These require special
adaptation or skills.
R - Established measurement techniques, but not applied to
process streams.
-------
SECTION II
PARTICULATE MASS CONCENTRATION
FILTRATION
Particulate mass concentration measurement methods using
filtration as the means of sample collection can be classified
according to the sampling flow rate used and the location of the
filter in or out of the gas process stream. Low sampling flow
rate methods usually sample in the 14.2 Jl/min (1/2 ft3/n»in) to
42.5 Jl/min ( 1 1/2 ft3/min) range. High flow rate methods usually
operate above 142 Jl/min (5 ft3/min). Use of a filter located
outside the process stream is referred to as an extractive
method. Use of the filter located in the process stream is
referred to as an in situ method.
Various organizations have promulgated specific procedures
and sampling train designs for one or more of these methods.
The EPA Test Method 51 specifies the use of extractive sampling
and EPA Test Method 17 specifies the use of in situ sampling.2
The American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) specifies
an in situ sampler.3 The American Society of Mechanical Engi-
neers (ASME) Performance Test Code 27 specifies the use of
either an in situ or extractive sampler.1* The ASME will soon
be releasing a new Performance Test Code 38 which will super-
cede the Performance Test Code 27.
-------
EPA Test Method 5
Compliance testing of stationary sources for particulate
emissions must be conducted with the EPA Test Method 5, "Deter-
mination of Particulate Emission from Stationary Sources".1
The stationary sources covered include new steam boilers, in-
cinerators, cement plants, and pulp and paper mills. All states
require the use of some form of the Method 5 train for compli-
ance testing. Method 5 relies on the removal or extraction of
a dust laden gaseous sample from the duct or stack followed by
the subsequent removal of the particles onto a filter media with
concurrent measurement of the sample volume to determine particu-
late mass concentration. Since the filter must be kept at
120 ± 14°Cf the particulate mass includes any material that
condenses at or above the filtration temperature. The particu-
late concentration is found for the dry component of the stack
gas, omitting the amount contributed by water and other vapors.
Finally, this is expressed as the concentration that would be
present under conditions of standard temperature and pressure.
A sample is removed from the duct by using a prescribed
traversing procedure which involves drawing portions of the
sample from different points within the duct. Isokinetic sam-
pling conditions must be maintained; that is, at each traverse
point, the sample velocity at the nozzle is adjusted to equal
the duct velocity. This procedure yields, in effect, an approx-
imate integration of collected mass and sample volume over the
cross-sectional area of the duct.
The Federal Register1 gives detailed specifications for
the apparatus comprising the sampling train which must be used
to properly conduct a Method 5 test. The sampling train consists
of a nozzle, probe, pitot tube, particulate sample collector,
-------
gaseous sample collector, sampling box, and meter set (refer to
Figure 1). The user can either construct his own sampling train
V
by following the specifications"5 or he can use one of the many
commercial models available (see Table II). A recent collabora-
tive test showed a trained crew could be expected to produce re-
sults with a standard deviation of 12%.6
An inherent limitation of the Method 5, indeed, of all stack
sampling systems, is the inability to obtain particulate matter
in the same state as it exists when the plume mixes with the
atmosphere. This change to atmospheric conditions may result
in particulate matter being formed in the plume that was not
present in the stack.
EPA Test Method 17
EPA Method 17 uses an unheated in-stack filter and probe
with the basic sampling train design of Method 5 to sample par-
ticulate emissions isokinetically. It is appropriate for situa-
tions where particulate mass concentrations are independent of
temperature and where the gaseous effluents are not saturated
with water. Determination of compliance with new source per-
formance standards can be made with Method 17 when it is speci-
fically provided for in a subpart of the standards.2
ASTM - Test Method
Both the ASTM and the ASME provide specifications for in
situ samplers. The ASTM Method is similar to the EPA Test Method
5, the main difference is the use of an instack filter. However,
the sizes of the sampler components (tubing, filter holder, etc.)
usually place an upper limit on the flow rate. With the ASTM
arrangement, shown in Figure 2, a thimble-shaped filter is used
to sample high mass concentrations. The pitot tube, pump, and
other parts are similar to the Method 5 sampler.
-------
\
NOTE
IMPINGER TRAIN OPTIONAL:
MAY BE REPLACED BY AN
EQUIVALENT CONDENSER
AREA FILTER HOLDER
THERMOMETER
CHECK
VALVE
VACUUM LINE
MANOMETER DRY TEST METER AIR TIGHT PUMP
070O-14.16
3630-201
Figure 1. The EPA Method 5 paniculate sampling train.
-------
TABLE II. SAMPLING SYSTEMS FOR TESTING BY EPA METHOD 5
Company
Aerotherm-Acurex
Glass Innovations, Inc.
Joy Manufacturing Co.
Lear Siegler, Inc./
Environmental Tech-
nology Div.
Misco International
Chemicals, Inc.
Research Appliance
Company
Scientific Glass &
Instruments, Inc.
Address
485 Clyde Avenue,
Mountain View, CA 94042
P.O. Box B
Addison, NY 14801
Commerce Road
Montgomeryville, PA 18936
One Inverness Dr. East
Englewood, CA 80110
1021 S. Noel Avenue
Wheeling, IL 60090
Pioneer and Hardies Rd,
Gibsonia, PA 15044
7246 Wynnewood
Houston, TX 77001
Train Title
High Volume Stack Sampler
The Source Sampler
Emission Parameter Analyzer
PM100 Manual Stack Sampler
Stack Source Sampler
Staksamplr
Stack-0-Lator
Note: Most companies will supply filters for use with their trains upon request.
-------
SAMPLING
NOZZLE
GLASS FIBER THIMBLE FILTER
HOLDER AND PROBE (HEATED)
REVERSE-TYPE
PITOT TUBE
PITOT
MANOMETER
THERMOMETER:
ORIFICE
CONDENSER
CHECK
VALVE
DRYER
VACUUM GAGE
(XJ
MAIN VALVE
DRY TEST METER
AIR-TIGHT PUMP
Figure 2. ASTM type paniculate sampling train.
0700-14.17
3630-202
8
-------
ASME Performance Test Code 27
The ASME Performance Test Code allows the use of a variety
of instruments and methods.1* Paragraph 55 of Section 4 of the
Code states "Testing experience has not been uniform enough to
permit standardized sampler design. This code, therefore, merely
gives limiting requirements which past experience has shown desir-
able to avoid major sources of error". The Code is designed as
a source document which provides technically sound options to
be selected and agreed upon by the sponsor and the contractor
who performs the sampling.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The main advantage of the in situ mass sampler is that sub-
stantially all of the particulate matter is deposited directly
in the filter and some in the nozzle; therefore, only the nozzle
and filter holder need to be washed. Because the filter is main-
tained at the stack gas temperature, auxiliary heating of the
filter is usually not needed.
The main disadvantage is that the in situ sampler is limited
to process streams with temperatures that do not exceed the limit
of the filter media and holder, and low moisture levels. Thermal
expansion of the filter holder may create gas leakage. Also,
the instack filter cannot yield data on the particulate frac-
tion due to cooling, e.g. in the plume.
Filter Materials
Filter materials for use in particulate collection equipment
are available from scientific equipment supply houses in several
different shapes, sizes, and compositions. Although membrane,
cellulose, metal-alloy, quartz, and ceramic filters are avail-
able, the most widely used for stack sampling is the glass fiber
filter. Glass fiber filters commonly used in air pollution mea-
-------
TABLE III. GLASS FIBER FILTER PRODUCTS
Company
Balston, Inc.
Gelman Instrument Company
Mine Safety Appliance Company
Whatman, Inc.
Address
703 Massachusetts Avenue
Lexington, MA 02173
600 S. Wagner Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
400 Penn Center Blvd.
Pittsburgh, PA 15235
9 Bridewell Place
Clifton, NJ 07014
Filter Name
Balston Microfibre
Gelman Type A
Gelman Type AE
Spectrograde
MSA 1106-BH
GF/A, GF/C, GF/D
Reeve Angel 900AF
Reeve Angel 934AH
-------
surements are listed in Table III. This list is not exhaustive.
For a particular test, a filter should be chosen considering the
objectives of the testing program and the characteristics of
the sampling environment and equipment.
PROCESS MONITORS
The ideal process stream mass monitor would have the follow-
ing features:
1. The sensing principle used to detect the particles in a gas
stream would be a direct measurement of the mass of the par-
ticles.
2. The mass sensor would be insensitive to such factors as
changes in gas temperature and humidity, corrosive gases,
and liquid droplets.
3. The monitor would provide continuous, instantaneous ("real-
time") measurements of mass concentration.
4. Since the mass concentration in a process stream often varies
over the cross-sectional area of the duct, the ideal moni-
•
tor would measure the average mass concentration across the
entire cross-sectional area of the duct.
5. A monitor with its sensor mounted directly within the gas
stream, called an in situ monitor, is generally preferred
over the extractive monitor, in which the sample may be
altered significantly prior to the measurement.
No monitor currently available has all the above qualifica-
tions. The development of process monitors has begun to gather
11
-------
momentum only recently, and much of the performance data pertain-
ing to their operation at various sources and under various con-
ditions has been shown to be contradictory or of limited useful-
ness. Nevertheless, a process monitor may provide sufficient
accuracy for certain applications.
Beta Radiation Attenuation Monitors
When beta particles impinge on matter, some are absorbed,
some are scattered, and some are transmitted. The reduction in
the incident beam intensity in passing through the sample is known
as beta radiation attenuation. Beta radiation attenuation is prac-
tically independent of the chemical composition of the absorber
and thus is considered by many engineers and scientists to be
a direct measure of mass.
Current instruments use either a Carbon-14 or a Promethium-
147 source; a Geiger-MUller, proportional counter, scintillation,
or solid state detector; and a filter, cyclone, combination cyclone-
filter, or an electrostatic precipitator collector. Recent models
include computerized data reduction and digital display of mass
concentration. The temperature limit is 538°C (1000°F) with the
use of a sample diluter and conditioner such as the prototype
shown in Figure 3. Although beta monitors of several designs
have been tested on industrial sources over the past ten years,
very little information is available on their performance, and
they must still be considered prototype devices.
Advantages include a sensing principle that is very closely
correlated to mass and independent of particle composition, low
sensitivity to particle and aerosol parameters other than mass,
and a movable filter tape which makes it convenient for perform-
ing chemical analysis concurrent with sampling.
12
-------
PROBE I DIIUTER (Optional)
.ample Flow
'•••
Onfice
Beta Radiation Gauge
CU Radiation Source
Dilution Air Line —Cl
U
OEHTORATIOH MODULE
Retngerated Condenser)
Watei/Condensale Oischaige
lenoid Valve
Purge/Back Flush Ait Line
Electric
m
Control
Valves
Control Station
can be located
up to 2M'from
Sampling Module
MASTER CONTROL I MINI COMPUTER MODULE
Beta Counter Volume Counter
Tape Printout
Dilution Air
Purge/ Back
Flush Air
MINICOMPUTER
CONTROL CONSOLE
(Measures Sample Volume)
.Measures Dilution Air Volume)
Figure 3. Schematic flow diagram of a prototype Automatic Stack
Monitor System installation. (Drawing not to scale.)
Used by permission of Research Appliance Company.
363O205
13
-------
Disadvantages include a response time longer than some other
monitors, the need for an extraction/dilution system, and a sensi-
tivity to variations in filter tape thickness. Errors may result
from sample losses in the probe, variations in the filter tape
thickness, nonuniform deposition of dust on the tape, variations
in particle collection efficiency, statistical variations in the
count rate, and variations in the predicted count rate due to
the nonexponential character of beta radiation attenuation.
Piezoelectric Mass Monitors
Piezolectricity is a property of certain crystals, such as
quartz, which involves the production of an electrical charge
on certain faces of the crystal when the crystal becomes mechani-
cally stressed. The converse process also occurs; that is, a
piezoelectric crystal becomes mechanically stressed where an elec-
trical charge is placed on certain faces. This two-way capability
is responsible for the ability of a piezoelectric crystal to cause
an oscillating electric circuit to oscillate at the natural vibra-
tional frequency of the crystal. When foreign material, such
as aerosol particles, adheres to the surface of a vibrating
piezoelectric crystal, the natural frequency of vibration of
the crystal decreases. The magnitude of the frequency change
is directly proportional to the mass of the added material.
Piezoelectric monitors have had no applications in sampling
industrial process streams, nor are there any prototype monitors
known to be designed for this purpose. However, they have been
used for ambient and automobile emissions monitoring and show
promise as process stream monitors. An extractive sampling system
combined with a dilution system could be used to condition a pro-
cess stream sample for measurements with an instrument originally
designed for ambient sampling. The main need for dilution is to
lower the mass concentration of the sample gas so that the sensor
of the monitor is not overloaded, thus yielding a non-linear mass-
frequency relationship.
14
-------
Advantages include a sensing principle that relates directly
to mass and which is independent of particle composition, and
yields continuous, instantaneous ("real-time") measurements.
Disadvantages include a need for an extraction/dilution sys-
tem, sensitivity to changes in gas temperature and humidity (de-
creases for particle sizes greater than 2 \im), and the necessity
of periodic cleaning to prevent non-linear sensor response.
Charge Transfer
The transfer of an electric charge occurs when two bodies
Of different composition come into contact. The transfer can occur
during either static contact or triboelectric (rubbing) contact.
The mechanism of transfer in static contact is essentially the
same for metals and semiconductors.7'8
In all charge-transfer instruments, the aerosol stream is
forced to collide with a sensor. When the particles in the aero-
sol stream contact the sensor, a charge is transferred producing
a current that is continuously monitored with an electrometer.
Since the amount of charge transferred is proportional to the
mass of the particle which collided with the sensor, the elec-
trometer can be scaled to read the mass concentration.
There are other factors, beside mass, that can affect the
amount of charge transferred to the sensor from particles in any
given process stream. Some of the possible factors are: the
chemical composition of the particles and the sensor material,
condition of the sensor surface, particle size, and particle
charge. The sensitivity to factors other than mass can result
in erroneous readings and frequent need for recalibration. The
extent to which these factors affect the instrument's response
15
-------
is discussed in a paper on a laboratory study of the IKOR Model
206.9 The IKOR Air Quality Monitors (IKOR Inc.), P.O. Box 660,
Blackburn Industrial Park, Gloucester, Massachusetts 01930, use
a bullet shaped Inconel metal sensor. They are available in
three models. Models 206 and 207 are extractive; Model 2710 is
the newly developed in situ monitor.
Charge transfer monitors have been used on industrial sources
for over 14 years. Advantages include in situ or extractive sam-
pling and continuous, instantaneous, real-time measurements.
Disadvantages include indirect measurement of mass; strong de-
pendence on chemical composition of the particles; sensor sen-
sitivity to particle size (suspected lower size limit due to
low impaction probability for small particles), water droplets,
corrosive gases, and particle charge; and degradation of sensor
performance when exposed to wet, waxy or sticky particles which
coat the sensor. This last disadvantage would hamper usage at
combustion systems fired with residual oil. Sources with elec-
trostatic precipitation present precharging problems, as dis-
cussed. In conclusion, the IKOR monitor performs best when
applied to the situation where process stream conditions are
constant or change predictably, and which contain dry, discrete,
uncharged particles.
Optical Methods
Conventional Transmissometers—
Light scattering theory predicts a dependence of light at-
tenuation not only on mass concentration but also on particle
size and composition. Figure 4 shows the results of applying
this theory to calculate the effects of various particle sizes
16
-------
§
S.
UJ
5
a.
cc
Ul
UJ
Oi
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
\
\ N,
\0> ^
6
LOG NORMAL DISTRIBUTION
STANDARD DEVIATION Og - 4
PARTICLE DENSITY - 2 gram/cm3
WAVELENGTH - 0.55M
REFRACTIVE INDEX
WHITE - 1.5
BLACK - 1.96 - 0.66i
\
\
V
\
\*
\
I
X
0.1 0.2 0.3
MASS CONCENTRATION, g/m3
0.4
0.10
0.20
0.30
C
-------
and composition on the relationship between the opacity and mass
concentration of .aerosols.10 At particle diameters above 3 or
4 pm the refractive index of the particle plays little role in
determining the opacity-mass concentration relationship. However,
at particle diameters below 3 or 4 vim, the refractive index plays
a major role.
For a transmissometer to be useful as a monitor of the mass
concentration, the properties (other than mass) of the particles
being monitored must remain fairly constant over the monitoring
period. Experimental data are available showing that good opacity-
mass concentration calibration can be obtained on some sources.
The sources evaluated include coal-fired plants;11'12'13 lignite-
fired power plants;^ cement plant;15 Kraft pulp mill recovery
furnace;16 petroleum refinery, asphaltic concrete plant, and
a sewage sludge incinerator.17 Once calibrated, transmissometers
may be useful indicators of mass emissions on sources where the
aerosol properties remain constant.
Conventional transmissometers are routinely used for pro-
viding a qualitative measurement, i.e., where changes in opacity
are used as a general indicator of changes in mass concentration.
Generally, transmissometers are not relied upon to produce quan-
titative measurements; i.e., where actual values of mass concen-
tration are obtained. This is due to the uncertainty introduced
by the strong dependence of the sensing principle on the particle
size distribution and index of refraction. The transmissometer
does possess the advantage of being able to provide an in situ,
continuous, real-time, integrated measurement. In conclusion,
it is unlikely that conventional transmissometers will ever be
used for routine quantitative measurement of mass concentration.
The multiple-wavelength transmissometer, discussed in the next
subsection, is a better candidate because it eliminates the un-
certainties caused by variable particle size distribution.
18
-------
Other Optical Methods—
Multiple-wavelength transmissometers—The general principle
underlying the multi-wavelength transmissometer can be seen by
referring to Figure 5. In this figure, the mean extinction co-
efficient (E) is shown as a function of the phase shift param-
eter (Pys) of a polydisperse aerosol.18
By making measurements of optical transmittance (opacity)
at two or more well separated wavelengths, points on a response
curve like the one shown in Figure 5 are obtained. Two such
points are sufficient to determine the average particle size and
the particulate concentration in an aerosol.19 The confusion
introduced into measurements of transmittance by variations in
particle size is removed by this technique, but the dependence
on refractive index remains.
To measure the transmittance as a function of wavelength,
the wavelength must be varied. This can be accomplished with
white light and monochromatic filters or a monochromator, or with
multiple laser sources. The system records the transmission
through the stack at each of the selected wavelengths.
There are several complex computational methods whereby the
particle size distribution and mass concentration can be obtained
from the optical density measurements made at the different wave-
lengths. These are discussed in detail by Kerker.20
The use of multiple-wavelength transmissometers to monitor
mass emissions seems promising, but the systems are more compli-
cated than ordinary transmissometers, and an undesirable depen-
dence on the particle refractive index can introduce errors.
19
-------
E 2
I
I
3 4
(FOR n * 1.5)
3630-216
Figure 5.
Mean extinction coefficient as a function of the phase
shift parameter P\K.. After Dobbins and Jizmagian. 18
20
-------
Light scattering—Suspended particles in an aerosol will
scatter (diffract, refract, and reflect), and absorb incident
light; the remaining portion is transmitted. Whereas transmissom-
eters use this remaining portion of the incident light as a mea-
sure of the particulate mass concentration or of opacity, other
instruments use the scattered portions. Instruments that detect
the scattered light can be much more sensitive at low particulate
concentrations than transmissometers.
Nephelometers, devices that attempt to measure all of the
scattered light, have recently been applied to stack monitoring.
One such instrument, the Plant Process Visiometer (PPV),
has been developed by Meteorology Research, Inc.21'22'23
This instrument is designed to measure opacity and is not con-
sidered a mass monitor per se; however, it is normally quite
sensitive to mass changes. A diagram of its optical assembly
is shown in Figure 6. The sample, extracted through a probe
with no dilution, is passed through the detector view.
An in situ monitor has been developed 2I* that is based on
the measurement of the backscattered light. It uses a laser as
the light source and is a single ended instrument, i.e., both
the light source and detector are located within the same enclo-
sure. The instrument is the PILLS V (see Figure 7). It and the
improved model P-5A is a member of a family of Particulate Instru-
mentation by Laser Light Scattering devices developed by Environ-
mental Systems Corporation. At present, the instrument does not
possess the capability to traverse large stacks in order to obtain
multi-point measurements. Since the particulate mass concentration
is frequently not uniform across the entire cross-sectional area of
the stack, the use of such a small sampling volume and the in-
ability to traverse creates a problem when trying to obtain data
that is representative of the actual total mass concentration
present within the stack.
21
-------
LIGHT
SOURCE
APERTURES
DETECTOR
OPAL GLASS
CALIBRATOR
LIGHT TRAP
3630-219
Figure 6. Optical assembly diagram of a nephelometer used in stack
monitoring. After Ensor and Bevan.^1
22
-------
BACKSCATTERED
BEAM
SAMPLING
VOLUME
LIGHT COLLECTION
LENS
REFERENCE
DETECTOR
EMITTED
BEAM
LIGHT OMITTING
DIODE
SIGNAL
DETECTOR
3630-222
Figure 7. Optical diagram of the PILLS V instrument.
Schmitt, Nusplinger, and Kreikelbaum.25
After
23
-------
Light scattering instruments suffer from some of the same
problems as transmissometers when attempting to infer mass; i.e.,
sensitivity to particle size, shape, and chemical composition.
The functional dependence of the instrument response to these
factors is determined by the detection angles employed relative
to the incident beam. The effects of such behavior are accounted
for in practice by calibrations of the instrument against another
more direct mass measurement of the aerosol of interest.
24
-------
SECTION III
OPACITY
Suspended particles in an aerosol will scatter and absorb
radiation; the remaining portion is transmitted. The transmit-
tance, T, of a fluid medium containing suspended particles is
defined as the ratio of transmitted radiation intensity to in-
cident radiation intensity. T is given by the Bouguer, or the
Beer-Lambert, law:27
T = exp (-EL) (1)
where L is the thickness of the medium, and E, the extinction
coefficient of the medium, is a complicated function of the size,
shape, total projected area, refractive index of the particles,
and the wavelength of the radiation.
While transmittance is defined as the ratio of the intensity
of the light transmitted through the aerosol to the intensity
of the incident light, opacity is defined as the ratio of the
intensity of the light attenuated by the aerosol to the intensity
of the incident light (i.e., opacity = 1/T). Aerosols which trans-
mit all incident light are invisible, have a transmittance of
100%, and an opacity of zero. Emissions which attenuate all
incident light are totally opaque, have an opacity of 100% and
a transmittance of zero. By definition, opacity can only be
measured rigorously using transmittance, rather than light scat-
tering measurements, because the latter yield no measure of the
quantity of light that is absorbed.
25
-------
As the opacity, 1-T, approaches zero, the relative error
in its value as calculated from a measurement of transmittance
becomes unavoidably large. For example, a two percent error in
a transmittance measurement of 98% gives a 100 percent error in
the calculated value of opacity. In such cases a nephelometer
as used by Ensor,22 may be a more accurate measure of opacity
although it requires a probe and sampling traverses.
To obtain true transmittance data the collimation angles
(angles of view and projection) for the transmitter and receiver
must be limited to reduce the sensitivity to stray light scatter
(see Figure 8). A zero degree angle is the ideal collimating
angle, whereas a finite angle will introduce a systematic error.
However, a compromise is necessary, since as a zero degree col-
limation is approached, instrument construction costs, operating
stability, and optical alignment problems increase.
Many versions of transmissometers, or smoke meters, are avail-
able as stack emission monitors. If the transmissometer is used
to measure in-stack opacity for purposes of compliance with federal
regulations, it must meet the EPA requirements for opacity mea-
surement systems as specified in the Federal Register of September
11, 1974.2e For instance, the use of visible light as a light
source is required. For other uses of the data, it may be pos-
sible to operate with nonvisible wavelengths. The angle of view
and the angle of projection are both specified, for compliance,
as no greater than 5° (see Figure 8).
A typical double pass in situ transmissometer design is il-
lustrated in Figure 9. The design shown employs a chopped, dual-
beam, optical system that automatically compensates for the ef-
fects of temperature, voltage changes, and component aging.30
The same source is optically divided into a measuring beam and
a reference beam. The measuring beam is reflected back by a
26
-------
PROJECTION ANGLE ANGLE OF VIEW
SOURCE
I „!
SAMPLE VOLUME
APERTURE
SCHEMATIC OF A TYPICAL TRANSMISSOMETER SYSTEM
Figure 8. Schematic of a transmissometer showing projection
and view angles which must be no greater than 5°
for EPA compliance.
3630-225
27
-------
CHOPPER FREQUENCY
MEASUREMENT
BEAM
F - 3.9 kHz
REFERENCE
CALIBRATION
FILTER
OBJECTIVE
FOCUSING
LENS
BEAM SPLINTER
RETROFELfcCTOR
K) TUNGSTEN LAMP
0> (16W)
PHOTOCELL
RECEIVER
SOLENOID—lJ
ZERO
CALIBRATION
REFLECTOR
ADJUSTABLE
IRIS COARSE
ZERO
CHOPPER
FREQUENCY
F - 2.5 kHz
ROTATING
CHOPPER
DISC
PURGE AIR BLOWER
AND FILTER
3630-226
SYNCHRONOUS
CHOPPER
MOTOR
Figure 9. A typical double pass in situ transmissometer design.
After Nader.29
-------
corner-cube retroreflector. The reference beam provides automatic
gain control to compensate for any changes in detector response
or source intensity. Both the transceiver and retroreflector
unit are specially constructed with air purging attachments to
keep the optical windows free of particulate deposits, and can
provide adequately clean windows for three or more months of
unattended operation.
A block diagram of a single pass transmissometer design is
shown in Figure 10. In this design, the light source with the
collimating lens and power supply are placed on one side of the
stack with the detector cell, electronics and power supply on
the opposite side. The beam makes only one pass through the stack
gas which eliminates the problems caused by reflectivity or back
scattering of the effluent being measured.
Transmissometers usually contain an alarm or warning system
that alerts plant personnel when the opacity exceeds a preset
limit. An alarm and/or plant cut off switch can be automatically
activated when limit values are exceeded. One instrument pos-
sesses the ability to integrate the opacity measurements over
various time intervals. This permits automatic monitoring and
control of unacceptable emission or dust levels which are present
for long periods of time, and not for just a brief moment.
Comparisons of transmissometer measurement with visual plume
opacity have been made, and have generally shown favorable results,
The in-stack measurement is usually compared with an out-of-stack
plume measurement performed by visual observation by a trained
observer or performed by telephotometry.
Besides the collimating angles of the transmissometer, the
important parameters affecting transmissometer performance in
a given process stream are the particle size distribution in the
process stream, particle shape and refractive index, and the wave-
29
-------
SOURCE UNIT
r
POWER
SUPPLY
LIGHT SOURCE
WITH
COLLI MATING
LENS
Lnutiwa i I
APERATUREJ
ZERO
ADJUST
APERATUR
DETECTOR UNIT
STACK
SAMPLE PATH
(THROUGH
STACK)
REFERENCE PATH
(FIBER OPTICS)
DETECTOR
CELL
REFERENCE
CELL
REGULATED
POWER
SUPPLY
AMPLIFIER
AND ANALOG
DIVIDER
STRIP-CHART
RECORDER
OPTIONAL
ALARM OR
CONTROL
RELAY
FUNCTIONAL BLOCK DIAGRAM
3630-227
Figure 10. A single pass transmissometer design. After Haville.31
-------
length of the transmitted radiation. The effect of these param-
eters is reflected in the measured values of the mean extinction
coefficient, Ef of the process stream. The mean extinction co-
efficient, E, can be determined by summing the particle extinc-
tion coefficients, QE, of the particles in the process stream.
Figure 11 gives the theoretical extinction coefficient for
spherical particles with typical indices of refraction (relative
to air) of 1.3 to 1.6 under white light illumination. For par-
ticles in the Rayleigh scattering region (diameter (d)<0.05 urn),
QE is approximately zero. For those in the Mie scattering region
(0.05 2 ym) QE approaches a theo-
retical limit of 2 for very large particles.
In practice, the particles in stack emissions are polydis-
perse and the incident light is polychromatic. This results in
a smoothing out of the oscillatory behavior depicted in Figure 11
However, a size distribution of transparent particles which
mostly lies within a narrow range of particle sizes in the Mie
region can result in transmittance measurements yielding opacity
values similar to opacity values for much higher mass concentra-
tions of absorbing particles.
31
-------
A - TRANSPARENT MONODISPERSE SPHERES, m - 1.33
B - TRANSPARENT MONODISPERSE SPHERES, m = 1.5
C • ABSORBING MONODISPERSE SPHERES, m - 1.59 - 0.66 i
1.0 1.5 2.0
PARTICLE DIAMETER, micrometers
MIE
GEOMETRIC
3630-229
Figure 11. Particle extinction coefficients for various aerosols over
three scattering regions: Rayleigh, Mie, and Geometric.
After Hodkinson and Greenfield.^
32
-------
SECTION IV
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
The methods of sizing particles can be classified as either
established, widely used techniques or new techniques which have
not yet received widespread use.
ESTABLISHED TECHNIQUES
The established techniques of particulate sizing can be
divided into those that size particles at the test site and those
that require a sample to be collected at the test site and exam-
ined in a laboratory environment. Often the laboratory measure-
ments require the dust to be redispersed.
Field Measurements
On-site particle sizing instruments classify particles by
using aerodynamic (inertial), optical, diffusive, or electrical
mobility methods.
Aerodynamic Methods—
In order to avoid unnecessary complications in data presenta-
tion, particles of different shapes may be assigned aerodynamic
diameters. The aerodynamic diameter of a particle is the diameter
of a unity density sphere that has the same settling velocity as
the particle of interest. The aerodynamic diameter is related
to the way that a particle will behave in the respiratory system
as well as in aerodynamic sizing devices.
Examples of aerodynamic particle sizing instruments are
centrifuges, cyclones, cascade impactors, and elutriators. Each
33
-------
of these instruments employs the unique relationship between a
particle's diameter and mobility in gas or air to collect and
classify the particles by size. For pollution studies cyclones
and impactors, primarily the latter, are more useful because they
are rugged and compact enough for in situ sampling. As previously
explained, in situ sampling is preferred because the measured
size distribution may be seriously distorted if a probe is used
for sample extraction. In the following two subsections, methods
of using impactors and cyclones are discussed.
Cascade impactors—Because of its compact arrangement and
mechanical simplicity, the cascade impactor has gained wide
acceptance as a practical means of making particle size measure-
ments in flue gases. Their long-time use as ambient samplers
has resulted in a large number of experimental studies on cascade
impactor design and performance in the laboratory.33'31* In
general, impactors provide sizing information in the size range
from 0.3 to 20 ym diameter, and collect from 10 to 100 mg of dust,
depending on the size distribution of the dust, its density, and
whether a cyclone precutter (a cyclone operating upstream of the
impactor) is used. The mechanism by which a cascade impactor oper-
ates is illustrated in Figure 12. In each stage of an impactor,
the gas stream passes through an orifice and forms a jet which is
directed toward an impaction plate. For each stage there is a
characteristic particle diameter which has a 50% probability of
impaction. This characteristic diameter is called the D50 of
the stage. Although single jets are shown in Figure 12 for il-
lustrative purposes, commercial impactors may have from one to
several hundred jets in a stage. Typically, an impactor has five
to ten stages.
The particle collection efficiency of a particular impactor
jet-plate combination is determined by the properties of the aero-
sol, such as the particle shape and density, and the viscosity
34
-------
-I SMALLER PARTICLES
1 N PATH OF
I SMALL PARTICLE
X
3630-230
Figure 12. Schematic diagram, operation of cascade impactor.
35
-------
of the gas; and by the design of the impactor stage, that is the
shape of the jet, the diameter of the jet, and the jet-to-plate
spacing.35'36'37'38'39 There is also a slight dependence on the
type of collection surface used (glass fiber, grease, metal,
etc.)."0'"1'"2
Table IV lists six commercially available cascade impactors
that are designed for instack use, and schematics of five of them
are shown in Figure 13.
The impactors are all constructed of stainless steel for
corrosion resistance. All of the impactors have round jets,
except the Sierra Model 226, which is a radial slit design, and
all have stages with multiple jets, except the Brink. It is
necessary to operate the impactors at a constant flow rate during
a test so that the D50's will remain constant. The impactor flow
rate is chosen, within a fairly narrow allowable range, to give
a certain sampling velocity at the nozzle inlet. Streamlined
nozzles of different diameters are provided to allow the sample
to be taken at a velocity equal to that of the gas stream.
Since the impaction plates weigh a gram or more, and the
typical mass collected on a plate during a test is on the order
of 1-10 mg, it is often necessary to place a light weight collec-
tion substrate over the impaction plate to reduce the tare. These
substrates are usually glass fiber filter material or greased
aluminum foil. A second function of the substrates is to reduce
particle bounce.
Gushing, et al. have done extensive calibration studies of
the commercial, instack, cascade impactors. *** Figure 14 shows
results from calibration of the Andersen Mark III impactor that
are typical of the performance of the other types as well. The
decrease in collection efficiency for large particles represents
bounce and can introduce serious errors in the calculated par-
ticle-size distribution.
36
-------
TABLE IV
COMMERCIAL CASCADE IMPACTOR SAMPLING SYSTEMS
U)
Name
Andersen Stack Sampler
(Precollection Cyclone
Avail.)
Univ. of Washington
Mark III Source Test
Cascade Impactor
(Precollection Cyclone
Avail.)
Univ. of Washington
Mark V
Brink Cascade Impactor
(Precollection Cyclone
Avail.)
Sierra Source Cascade
Impactor - Model 226
(Precollection Cyclone
Avail.)
MRI Inertial Cascade
Impactor
Nominal Flow rate
(cm3/sec)
236
236
100
14.2
118
236
Substrates
Glass Fiber (Available from
manufacturer)
Stainless Steel Inserts,
Glass Fiber, Grease
Stainless Steel Inserts,
Glass Fiber, Grease
Glass Fiber, Aluminum,
Grease
Glass Fiber (Available
from manufacturer)
Stainless Steel, Alumn-
num. Mylar, Teflon.
Optional: Gold, Silver,
Nickel
Manufacturer
Andersen 2000, Inc.
P.O. Box 20769
Atlanta, GA 30320
Pollution Control
System Corp.
321 Evergreen Bldg.
Renton, WA 98055
Pollution Control
System Corp.
321 Evergreen Bldg.
Renton, WA 98055
Zoltek Corp.
68 Worthington Drive
St. Louis, MO 63043
Sierra Instruments, Inc.
P.O. Box 909
Village Square
Carmel Valley, CA 93924
Meteorology Research,
Inc.
Box 637
Altadena, CA 91001
-------
MXZ/IE
INLET JET
STAGE NO 1
STAGE NO2
STAGE NO 3
STAGE NO 4
STAGE NO S
STAGE NO. 8
STAGE NO 7
FILTER
lUPACTOfl BASE
PHECOLLECTION
CYCLONE
I NOZZLE
COLLECTION. ^ I—I 1m
PLATE
SPRING
t
IT
D
MRI MODEL 1502
MODIFIED BRINK
INLET
JET STAGE
COLLECTION PLATE
COLLECTION
PLATE (7 TOTALI
FILTER HOLOEH
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON MARK III
Figure 13. Schematics of five commercial cascade impactors (Sheet 1 of 2).
38
-------
INLET CONE
STAGE 3
SIERRA MODEL 226
JET STAGE IB TOTAL!
ANDERSON MARK III
Figure 13. Schematics of five commercial cascade impactors (Sheet 2 of 2).
39
-------
100
90
80
* 70
S3 60|
5
Z
u 50|
40
8 301
20
10
1 I I I I 11
T 1—I I I I I II
.4 .5 .6.7.8.91.0 2 3 45678910
PARTICLE DIAMETER, micrometers 3630-234
Figure 14. Calibration of an Anderson Mark III impactor.
Collection efficiency vs. particle size for stages
1 through 8. After Gushing, et al. 41
40
-------
There has not been an extensive evaluation of cascade im-
pactors under field conditions, although some preliminary work
was reported by McCain, et al."3 It is difficult to judge from
existing data exactly how accurate impactors are, or how well
the data taken by different groups or with different impactors
will correlate. Problems that are known to exist in the applica-
tion of impactors in the field are: substrate instability,1"*'"5
the presence of charge on the aerosol particles,"6 particle
bounce,"°'"7 and mechanical problems in the operation of the
impactor systems.
In the past, the reduction of data from an extensive field
test has been excessively tedious and time consuming. However,
a computer program is now available that decreases the
effort required to reduce and analyze impactor data by approxi-
mately a factor of five.1*8
Cyclones—Cyclones have been used for many years as devices
for cleaning dusty air and also to separate respirable and non-
respirable dusts in personal exposure monitors. Strauss'*9 has
reviewed in detail the theory, design, and performance of indus-
trial cyclones, while Lippmann and Chan have performed several
experimental/theoretical studies of the small cyclones used as
personal exposure monitors.50'51 In general, it can be said
that the existing theories are not accurate enough to design
cyclones for particle sizing, and thus such designs must be de-
veloped empirically.
Figure 15 illustrates a typical reverse flow cyclone. The
aerosol sample enters the cyclone through a tangential inlet and
forms a vortex flow pattern. Particles move outward toward the
cyclone wall with velocity that is determined by the geometry
and flow rate in the cyclone, and by their size. Large particles
reach the walls and are collected. Figure 16 compares the cali-
bration curve for a small cyclone with a typical impactor calibra-
tion curve. The cyclone can be seen to perform almost as well
41
-------
GAS EXIT TUBE
CAP
SAMPLE AIR FLOW
CYLINDER
CONE
•COLLECTION CUP
Figure 15. Hypothetical flow through a cyclone of conventional design.
42
-------
u
o
u.
u.
UJ
O
u
.5
1.0 1.5 2.0
PARTICLE DIAMETER /
3630-236
Figure 16. Comparison of cascade impactor stage with cyclone collection
efficiency curve.
43
-------
as the impactor, and the problem of large particle bounce and
reentrainment is absent.
A series of cyclones with progressively decreasing D5o's
can be used instead of impactors to obtain particle size distri-
butions, with the advantages that larger samples are acquired
and that particle bounce is not a problem. Longer sampling times
are possible with cyclones because of their large dust capacity
(the collection cup may hold several grams of dust without
affecting the performance of the cyclone). This is an advan-
tage for sampling very dusty streams because it allows longer
run times.
Southern Research Institute, under EPA sponsorship, has de-
signed and built a prototype three-stage series cyclone system
for in-stack use.52 A sketch of this system is shown in Figure
17. It is designed to operate at 472 cm3/sec (1 ft3/min). The
DSD'S f°c these cyclones are 3.0, 1.6, and 0.6 micrometer aero-
dynamic at 21°C. A 47 mm Gelman filter holder, (Gelman Instrument
Co., 600 South Wagner Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106), is used as a
back up filter after the last cyclone. This series cyclone system
was designed for in-stack use and requires a 15 cm diameter
sampling port.
Figure 18 illustrates a second generation EPA/Southern Re-
search series cyclone system now under development which contains
five cyclones and a back up filter and will fit through 10 cm
diameter ports. Prototypes of anodized aluminum, titanium, (for
in-stack evaluation), and Hastelloy (for high temperature and
pressure sampling) have been constructed and are under evaluation.
Figure 19 contains laboratory calibrations data for the five
cyclone prototype system. The D50's at the test conditions are
0.32, 0.65, 1.4, 1.6, 2.1, and 5.4 micrometers.53
44
-------
TO PUMP
BACKUP FILTER
CYCLONE 2
• CYCLONE 3
NOZZLE
CYCLONE 1
3630-238
Figure 17. Schematic of the Southern Research Institute Three Series
Cyclone System.
45
-------
CYCLONE 1
CYCLONE 4
CYCLONE 5
CYCLONE 2
CYCLONE 3
OUTLET
INLET NOZZLE
3630-O56
Figure 18. Environmental Protection Agency-Southern Research Institute
Five-Stage Cyclone.
46
-------
100
8
S.
o
UJ
u
u.
u.
UJ
O
U
UJ
o
u
CYCLONE I
CYCLONE II
CYCLONE III
CYCLONE IV
CYCLONE V
PARTICLE DIAMETER, mfcranwten
Figure 19. Collection efficiency of the EPA-S.fi. I. Cyclones at a flow rate
of 28.3 S/min, a temperature of 28°C, and for a particle
density of LOOgm/cm3.
47
-------
The Acurex-Aerotherm Source Assessment Sampling System (SASS)
incorporates three cyclones and a back-up filter. Shown schemati-
cally in Figure 20, the SASS is designed to be operated at a flow
rate of 3065 cm3/sec (6.5 ft3/rnin) with nominal cyclone D50's
of 10, 3, and 1 micrometer aerodynamic diameter at a gas tempera-
ture of 205°C. The cyclones, which are too large for in situ
sampling, are heated in an oven to keep the air stream from the
heated extractive probe at stack temperature or above the dew
point until the particulate is collected. Besides providing par-
ticle size distribution information, the cyclones collect gram
quantities of dust (due to the high flow rate) for chemical and
biological analyses. The SASS train is available from Acurex-
Aerotherm, Inc., 485 Clyde Ave., Mountain View, California 94042.
Small cyclone systems appear to be practical alternatives
to cascade impactors as instruments for measuring particle size
distributions in process streams under conditions where it is
appropriate to sample for longer periods and to obtain larger
samples. Additional investigations are underway to obtain a
more detailed understanding of cyclones used for sampling.
Optical Particle Counters—
Figure 21 is a schematic illustrating the principle of opera-
tion for optical particle counters. A dilute aerosol stream inter-
sects the focus of a light beam to form an optical "view volume."
The photodetector is located so that no light reaches its sensitive
cathode except that scattered by particles in the view volume.
Thus, each particle that scatters light with enough intensity
will generate a current pulse at the photodetector, and the ampli-
tude of the pulse can be related to the particle diameter. Optical
particle counters yield real-time information on particle size
and concentration.
48
-------
HEATER
CONTROLLER
FILTER
GAS COOLER
GAS
TEMPERATURE
T.C.
CONDENSATE
COLLECTOR
IMP/COOLER
TRACE ELEMENT
COLLECTOR
\
IMPINGER
T.C.
DRY GAS METER
ORIFICE METERS
CENTRALIZED TEMPERATURE
AND PRESSURE READOUT
CONTROL MODULE
10 CFM VACUUM PUMP
36dO-242
Figure 20. Schematic of the Acurex-Aerotherm Source Assessment
Sampling System fSASS).
-------
LIGHT TRAP
LAMP
SAMPLE AEROSOL
TO PUMP
PHOTOMULTIPLIER
3630-243
Figure 21. Schematic of an optical single particle counter.
50
-------
Figure 22 illustrates some of the optical configurations
that are found in commercial particle counters. The pertinent
geometric and operating constants of the counters are summarized
in Table V.
The commercial optical counters that are available now were
designed for laboratory work and have concentration limits of
a few hundred particles per cubic centimeter. The lower size
limit is nominally about 0.3 pm diameter. For use in studies
of industrial aerosols, dilution of the sample is required and
the useful upper limit in particle size has been limited by losses
in the dilution system to about 2.0 ym diameter.55 In addition,
the particle diameter that is measured is not aerodynamic, and
some assumptions must be made in order to compare optical with
aerodynamic data. Nevertheless, the ability to obtain real-time
information can sometimes be very important and the special prob-
lems in sampling with optical counters may be justified.
Diffusion Batteries with Condensation Nuclei Counters—
The classical technique for measuring the size distribution
of submicron particles employs the relationship between particle
diffusivity and diameter. In a diffusional sizing system, the
test aerosol is drawn, under conditions of laminar flow, through
a number of narrow, rectangular channels, a cluster of small bore
tubes, or a series of small mesh screens (diffusion batteries).
For a given particle diameter and diffusion battery geometry,
it is possible to predict the rate at which particles are lost
to the walls by diffusion, the rate being higher for smaller par-
ticles. The total number of particles penetrating the diffusion
battery is measured under several test conditions where the main
adjustable parameter is the aerosol retention time, and the par-
ticle-size distribution is calculated by means of suitable mathe-
matical deconvolution techniques. Figure 23 illustrates the geo-
metry of a rectangular channel diffusion battery, and Figure 24
a screen-type diffusion battery.
51
-------
INLET
VIEW VOCUUC
PHOTOMULTVUED
CALIBRATOR
CUMET
02*
(CATTOIINC
CURVED MIRROR
MA* REFLECTIVITY
aOmmFJ-
CYUNDER LENt
PMBLAS400
SmmFJ.
PARABOLIC wnman
9O» NEFLECTIVITV
-a* RING SEAL
'DUMP WINDOW
AEROOVNAMICALLV
FORMING INLET
(HEATH AIR
(AMPLE AIR
Q2b
COLLECTION PUPIL
UGMT LEW
TRAP
PHOTOMULTIPLIER
PHOTOMULTIPLIER
LENSE*
TIVE
VOLUME
ROVCO 210
ROYCO:
OZe
(Od
PHOTOMUITIPUEB
COLLECT! NO
FLOW PIPE
PHOTOMULTIPLI EH
FLOW
LIGHT
TRAP
VIEW
VOLUME
ROVCO 246
B AND L 40-1
02*
02f
Figure 22. Optical configurations for six commercial particle counters.
52
-------
TABLE V.
CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMERCIAL, OPTICAL, PARTICLE COUNTERS
Bauach t Lonb Model 40-1
820 Linden Avel
Rochester, NY 14625
Climet Models 201. 208
Climet Inat. Co.
1620 M. Colton Ave.
Redlands, CA 92373
illuminating Cone
Half Angle, y
13°
15
Light Trap Half Collecting Aperture Inclination Between
Angle, a Half Angle, 6 Illuminating And Viewing
Collecting Cone Axis, 4* Volume
•Model LAS-200
Particle Measuring Systems
1855 S. 57th Ct.
Boulder, CO 80301
•632.8 mm laser ilium., all others are white light.
33°
35
53°
90
0°
0.5
0.5
Sampling
Rate
170
7,080
Ul
U)
ClUet Model 150
Royco Model 218
Royco Inst.
41 Jefferson Dr.
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Royco Model 220
Royco Model 245
Royco Model 225
Tech Ecology Model 200
Tech Ecology, Inc.
645 N. Mary Ave.
Sunnyvalle, CA 94086
Tech Ecology Model 208
Particle Measurement Systems
12
5
24
5
5
5
5
0.5
18 28
11 30
24
16 25
7 25
8 20
10 20
35 120
0
0
90
0
0
0
0
0
0.4
0.25
2.63
4.0
2.0
0.46
2.5
0.003
472
283
2,830
28,300
283 or
283
2,830
120 or 1
2,830
,200
-------
CHANNEL DIMENSIONS
MULTI CHANNEL BATTERY
3630-246
Figure 23. A rectangular channel diffusion battery.
54
-------
SAMPLING
PORT (TYP)
SECTION CONTAINING
SCREENS (TYP)
3630-247
Figure 24. Screen type diffusion battery. The battery is 21 cm long,
4 cm in diameter, and contains 55, 635 mesh stainless
steel screens. After Sinclair. 56
55
-------
Condensation nuclei (CN) counters function on the principle
that particles act as nuclei for the condensation of water or
other condensable vapors in a supersaturated environment. This
process is used to detect and count particles in the 0.002 to
0.3 micron range (often referred to as condensation or Aitken
nuclei). In condensation nuclei detectors, a sample is withdrawn
from the gas stream, humidified, and brought to a supersaturated
condition by reducing the pressure. In this supersaturated con-
dition, condensation will be initiated on all particles larger
than a certain critical size and will continue as long as the
sample is supersaturated. This condensation process forms a
homogeneous aerosol, predominantly composed of the condensed vapor
containing one drop for each original particle whose size was
greater than the critical size appropriate to the degree of super-
saturation obtained; a greater degree of supersaturation is used
to initiate growth on smaller particles. The number of particles
that are formed is estimated from the light scattering properties
of the final aerosol. Figure 25, after Haberl and Fusco, illus-
trates the condensation nuclei counter operating principle.57
Four models of CN counters are now available commercially.
Two automatic, or motorized, types are the General Electric Model
CNC-2 (General Electric-Ordnance Systems, Electronics Systems
Division, Pittsfield, MA 01201) and the Environment-One Model
Rich 100 (Environment-One Corporation, Schenectady, NY 12301).
Small, manually operated, CN counters are also available from
Gardner Associates (Gardner Associates, Schenectady, NY 12301),
and Environment-One.
Thermosysterns, Inc. (Thermosysterns, Inc., St. Paul, MN 55113)
now manufactures and sells screen-type diffusion batteries of
Sinclair design (Figure 24). These diffusion batteries are 21
cm long, approximately 4 cm in diameter, weigh 0.9 kg, and contain
55 stainless steel screens of 635 mesh.
56
-------
PHOTO DETECTOR
•MM
X
HUMIDIFIER
CHAMBER
LIGHT STOP
SAMPLE
& HOLD
[COMPARATOR) J I
SAMPLE
& HOLD
| TRIGGER |- -{TIMER 3J.
OUTPUT
DIGITAL
PANEL
METER
COUNTER)—»• RANGE
VACUUM
PUMP
OUTER LIGHT STOP
,—I GEAR
~l—| MOTOR
3630-248
Figure 25. Diagram of a condensation nuclei counter. After
Haberl and Fusco. 57
57
-------
Figure 26 is a schematic that illustrates an experimental
setup for measuring particle-size distributions by diffusional
means, and Figure 27 shows penetration curves for four operating
configurations. Because of the long retention time required for
removal of particles by diffusion, measurements with diffusion
batteries and CN counters are very time consuming. With the
system described by Ragland, et al., for example, approximately
two hours are required to measure a particle-size distribution
from 0.01 to 0.2 ym.58 Obviously, this method is best applied
to stable aerosol streams. It is possible that the new, smaller
diffusion batteries will allow much shorter sampling times, but
pulsations in flow may pose a serious problem for the low volume
geometries.
Electrical Mobility—
Figure 28 illustrates the relationship between the diameter
and electrical mobility of small aerosol particles. If particles
larger than those of minimum mobility are removed from the sample,
the remaining particles exhibit a monotonically decreasing mobil-
ity with increasing diameter. Several aerosol spectrometers,
or mobility analyzers, have been demonstrated that employ the
diameter-mobility relationship to classify particles according
to their size,60'61'62'63 and Figure 29 illustrates the principle
on which these devices operate. Particles are charged under con-
ditions of homogeneous electric field and ion concentration, and
then passed into the spectrometer. Clean air flows down the length
of the device and a transverse electric field is applied. From
a knowledge of the system geometry and operating conditions, the
mobility is derived for any position of deposition on the grounded
electrode. The particle diameter is then readily calculated from
a knowledge of the electric charge and mobility.
Difficulties with mobility analyzers are associated primarily
with charging the particles to a known value with a minimum of
58
-------
ANTI-PULSATION
DEVICE v
SAMPLE FROM
OILUTER
ANTI-
PULSATION
DEVICE
CN COUNTER
RETURN TO
DILUTER
CN COUNTER
D.B. 1
D.B. 2
D.B. 3
D.B. 4
D.B. 5
-^ RETURN
TO DILUTER
3630-249
Figure 26. Diffusion battery and condensation nuclei counter layout
for fine particle sizing. 19
59
-------
100
90
80
70
a*
2 60
O
g 50
oc
uj 40
ut
°- 30
20
10
0.01
0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.1
PARTICLE DIAMETER,
0
10
20
30
*.
40 §
H
50 <
60 £
70 <
80
90
100
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5
3630-250
Figure 27. Theoretical parallel plate diffusion battery penetration curves.
60
-------
10-6
10-7
u
10-8
o
0
o
0 0
0 °
a
a
a
a
O E - 5.0 x 105 V/m
Nt- ao x 1011 sec/m3
Q E - 1.5 x 10s V/m
Nt « 3.2 x 1012 sec/m3
SHELLAC AEROSOL K = 3.2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
PARTICLE DIAMETER, fun
Figure 28. Particle mobility as a function of diameter for shellac aerosol
particles charged in a positive ion field (after Cochet and
Trillat-59 }. K is the dielectric constant of the aerosol particles.
61
-------
CHARGED PARTICLES
HV
1
CLEAN AIR
LAMINAR FLOW
k
\
SMALLER PARTICLES OF
HIGH ELECTRICAL MOBILITY
LARGER PARTICLES OF
LOW ELECTRICAL MOBILITY
I
3630-252
Figure 29. The electric mobility principle.
62
-------
loss by precipitation and obtaining accurate analyses of the
quantity of particles in each size range. The latter may be
done gravimetrically,60 optically,61 or electrically.62
The concept described above has been used by Whitby, Liu,
et al.,61"65 at the University of Minnesota, to develop a series
of models of the Electrical Aerosol Analyzer (EAA). A commercial
version of the University of Minnesota devices is now marketed
by Thermosysterns, Inc., as the Model 3030 (Figure 30). The EAA
is designed to measure the size distribution of particles in
the range from 0.0032 to 1.0 ym diameter. The concentration
range for best operation is 1 to 1000 yg/m3, and thus dilution
is required for most industrial gas aerosols.66'67
When the EAA is applied to fluctuating sources a peculiar
problem arises. The instrument reading is cumulative, and it
is impossible to tell whether variations in the reading reflect
changes in the distribution of concentration of particles; hence,
recordings that show rapid fluctuations in amplitude must be
interpreted with great care. The lack of sensitivity can also
be a problem at extremely clean sources.
The EAA requires only two minutes to perform a complete size
distribution analysis, which generally makes it advantageous to
use, especially on stable sources.
/
Laboratory Measurements
Measurements of the size distribution of particles that have
been collected in the field and transported to a laboratory must
be interpreted with great caution, if not skepticism. It is dif-
ficult to collect representative samples in the first place, and
it is almost impossible to reconstruct the original size distri-
bution under laboratory conditions. For example, one cannot dis-
tinguish from laboratory measurements whether or not some of
the particle existed in the process gas stream as agglomerates
of smaller particles. In spite of the limitations inherent in
63
-------
CONTROL MODULE
MULTIIII OUTPUT I
em KIM) i
CTCV.C »TMT i
CtClC «
AMMO. rLOMTI* KtAOOUT
CHMJU euMVMT MAOOUT
OMMC* VOLTMI IIUOOUT
MJTOMATK MOM MXTMt CWTWl MO M400UT
CUCTROMf Till UHALTtt* CUMNCMTI KATOUT
TOTAL ft(»KTt« ««B»it
-• tmi
Ml
tOUII
(TfTW
,— TO VKCUUH f
-------
laboratory methods, they must be used in some instances to
determine particle size and to segregate particles for deter-
mination of their composition or other properties of interest.
This section contains a discussion of some of the "standard"
techniques used for particle size analysis of dust samples.
Sedimentation and Elutriation—
Elutriation and sedimentation devices separate particles
that are dispersed in a fluid according to their settling veloc-
ities due to gravity. Large particles in a quiescent aerosol
will settle to the bottom region of the chamber more quickly
than smaller particles with smaller settling velocities. In elu-
triation, the air flows upward so that particles with setting
velocities equal to or less than the air velocity will have a
net velocity upward and particles which have settling velocities
greater than the air velocity will move downward.
There are a number of commercial devices and methods having
varying requirements of dust amounts and giving different ranges
of size distributions, with a minimum size usually no smaller
than two micrometers.68'69 Disadvantages include the inability
of most sedimentation and elutriation devices to give good size
resolution, and the length of time (sometimes several hours)
required to use some of the methods.
Instruments used for sedimentation include the pan balance,
which weighs the amount of sediment falling on it from a suspen-
sion, and the pipette, which collects the particles in a small
pipette at the base of a large chamber. The Cahn electronic
microbalance, (Cahn Instrument Company, 7500 Jefferson St., Para-
mount, CA 90723), has an attachment that permits it to function
65
-------
as a settling chamber. Perhaps the most popular elutriator is
the Roller particle size analyzer illustrated in Figure 31,
available from the American Standard Instrument Co., Inc., Silver
Spring, MD). A recent instrument that measures the size distri-
bution of particles in a liquid suspension is the Xray SediGraph,
(Micromeritics Instrument Corporation, 800 Coshen Springs Road,
Norcross GA 30071), which has a reported range of sensitivity
of 0.1 to 100 ym.
Centrifuges—
Aerosol centrifuges provide a laboratory method of size-
classifying particles according to their aerodynamic diameters.
The advantage over elutriators is that the settling, or preci-
pitation, process is speeded up by the large centrifugal accelera-
tion and that smaller particles may be sized. The sample dust is
introduced in the device as an aerosol and enters a chamber which
contains a centrifugal force field.
In one type of aerosol centrifuge, the larger particles over-
come the viscous forces of the fluid and migrate to the wall of
the chamber, while the smaller particles remain suspended. After
the two size fractions are separated, one of them is reintroduced
into the device and is fractionated further, using a different
spin speed to give a slightly different centrifugal force. This
is repeated as many times as desired to give an adequate size dis-
tribution. One of the more popular lab instruments using this
technique is the Bahco microparticle classifier, which is illus-
trated in Figure 32, and is available commercially from the Harry
W. Dietert Company, Detroit, Michigan. The cutoff size can be
varied from about two to fifty micrometers to give size distribu-
tion characterization of a 7 g or larger (usually lOg) dust
sample. A similar instrument is the B.C.U.R.A. (British Coal
Utilization Research Association, Leatherhead, Surrey, U.K.)
centrifugal elutriator which has a range of four to twenty-six
micrometers.7 °
66
-------
SEPARATOR TUBE
AIR SUPPLY
FLEXIBLE JOINT
POWDER
CIRCULATION
363O-254
Figure 31. The Roller elutriator. After Allen
67
-------
9 10 11 12 13
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
1. Electric Motor 9.
2. Threaded Spindle 10.
3. Symmetrical Disc 11.
4. Sifting Chamber 12.
5. Container 13.
6. Housing 14.
7. Top Edge 15.
8. Radial Vanes 16.
Feed Point
Feed Hole
Rotor
Rotary Duct
Feed Slot
Fan Wheel Outlet
Grading Member
Throttle
3630-255
Figure 32. The Bahco microparticle classifier.
68
-------
In the second type of centrifuge, the device is run continu-
ously, and the particle size distribution is determined from the
position where the particles are deposited. Examples are a spiral
centrifuge developed by Goetz, et al.,71'72'73 (Figure 33)
and by Stober and Flachsbart 71f (Figure 34) that can classify
polydisperse dust samples with particles from a few hundredths
of a micron to approximately two microns in diameter. The conifuge,
first built by Sawyer and Walton75 and modified several times
since then,76'77 is useful in the study of aerodynamic shape factor,
but can also be used for the determination of size distributions,
especially for particles having aerodynamic diameters smaller
than twenty-five micrometers (see Figure 35). In continuously
operating centrifuges, the particles are generally deposited onto
a foil strip, where their position yields a measure of their size,
and their number is obtained by microscopy or radiation or by
weighing segments of the foil.
Microscopy—
Microscopic analysis has long been regarded as the estab-
lished, fundamental technique of counting and sizing particles
that the human eye cannot comfortably see. Usually, the method
involves one person, a microscope, and a slide prepared with a
sample of the aerosol to be measured. A random selection of the
particles would then be measured and counted, with notable charac-
teristics of color, shape, transparency, or composition duly
recorded. The most difficult task, especially since the advent
of sophisticated computerized equipment has made counting and
sizing easier, is the preparation of a slide which contains a
representative sample of the aerosol.
Particle sizes which can be easily studied on optical micro-
scopes range from about .2 to 100 micrometers. Electron micro-
scopes have increased the size range of particles capable of being
69
-------
COLLECTING
FOIL
JET
ORIFICE
INLET TUBE
3630-256
Figure 33. A cut-away sketch of the Goetz Aerosol Spectrometer
spiral centrifuge. In assembled form the vertical axes
(1) coincide and the horizontal arrows (2) coincide.
After Gerber.73
70
-------
THERMOCONTROLLED
WATER
AEROSOL
ENTRANCE
SPIRAL
DUCT
CLEAN AIR INPUT
SUCTION PUMP
THERMOCONTROLLED
WATER
3630 257
Figure 34. Cross-sectional sketch of the Stober Centrifuge.
After Stober and Flachsbart.
71
-------
LARGER PARTICLES
COLLECTED HERE
ARTICLE STREAM
CLEAN AIR
OUTER CONE
SMALLER PARTICLES
COLLECTED HERE
r/////77/;
AXIS OF ROTATION
Figure 35. Cross-sectional sketch of a conifuge.
3630-268
72
-------
analyzed by microscopy down to 0.001 micrometers. Computerized
scanning devices have increased the analyzing ability of present
day microscopes and simplified counting and sizing. Several com-
mercial laboratories are equipped to provide physical and struc-
tural characterizations of dust samples quickly and fairly in-
expensively.
Sieves—
Sieving, one of the oldest ways of sizing particles geomet-
rically, is the process by which a polydisperse powder is passed
through a series of screens with progressively smaller openings
until it is classified as desired. The lower size limit is set
by the size of the openings of the smallest available screen,
usually a woven wire cloth. Recently, micro-etched screens have
become available. In the future, the lower size limit may be
lowered by using membrane filters which can be made with smaller
holes than woven fine wire cloth.
Woven wire sieves are available from several manufacturers
in four similar standard size series: Tyler,- U.S., British, and
German. Tyler screens are manufactured by the W.S. Tyler Co.,
Cleveland, Ohio.
Other methods of size classification using sieving principles
are currently being studied and improved. Wet sieving is useful
for material originally suspended in a liquid or which forms
aggregates when dry-sieved. Air-jet sieving, where the particles
are "shaken" by a jet of air directed upward through a portion
of the sieve, has been found to be quicker and more reproducible
than hand or machine sieving, although smaller amounts of powder
(5 to 10 g) are generally used. Felvation78 (using sieves in
conjunction with elutriation) and "sonic sifting"79 (oscillation
of the air column in which the particles are suspended in a set
of sieves) are similar techniques that employ this principle.
73
-------
Because of its relatively large lower particle size limit
(50-75 micrometers for woven wire screens), sieving has a limited
use for characterizing most industrial sources today. However,
for particles within its workable size range, sieving can be a
very accurate technique, yielding adequate amounts of particles
in each size range for thorough chemical analysis.
Coulter Counter—
Figure 36 illustrates the principle by which Coulter counters
(Coulter Electronics, Inc., 590 West 20th Street, Hialeah, FL
33010) operate. Particles suspended in an electrolyte are forced
through a small aperture in which an electric current has been
established. The particles passing through the aperture displace
the electrolyte, and if the conductivity of the particle is dif-
ferent from the electrolyte, an electrical pulse of amplitude
proportional to the particle-electrolyte interface volume will
be seen. A special pulse height analyzer is provided to convert
the electronic data into a size distribution. A bibliography
of publications related to the operation of the Coulter counter
has been compiled by the manufacturer and is available on request.
NEW TECHNIQUES
Promising instruments and techniques for particle size de-
terterminations in industrial process streams are summarized in
this section. These devices have not had widespread usage under
field conditions, and some of them exist only in prototype form.
Special skills are needed to operate the instruments and to avoid
the problems associated with their use in industrial process
streams.
74
-------
THRESHOLD
COUNTER "START STOP"
3630 260
Figure 36. Operating principle of the Coulter counter.
Courtesy of Coulter Electronics.
75
-------
Low Pressure Impactors
It is possible to extend the sizing capability of cascade
impactors to submicron particles by operating the device at pres-
sures of 0.01 to 0.1 atmospheres. Pilat80'81 has developed and
tested a low pressure impactor for sampling from process streams.
(See Figure 37).
Figure 38 shows the sampling train used by Pilat.
Two impactors are operated in series. The first impactor
is a conventional design with cut points from about 0.3 to 20
ym diameter, and the second impactor is operated at reduced pres-
sure with cut points from about 0.03 to 0.2 ym diameter. The
maximum flow rate is approximately 50 liters/minute. The main
problems associated with this technique are the bulky equipment
required, the potential for particle bounce, and the very low
mass collected on each stage.
Impactors with Beta Radiation Attenuation Sensors
Beta attenuation has some appeal as a detection mechanism
for cascade impactors in air pollution work because the impactor
separates the particles according to their aerodynamic behavior,
and the beta attenuation yields a direct, nearly real-time measure
of the amount of mass collected. However, the unavailability
of high temperature beta detectors has hindered attempts to de-
velop in situ instruments. Other problems include: selecting
suitable tapes and greases for compatibility with the beta monitor
and for good particle retention, designing the impactor to give
a uniform deposit, and the mechanical problems associated with
designing such a complex system to be operated in a harsh, dirty
environment. It is unlikely that multiple stage impactors with
beta attenuation as detection mechanism can be made practical
for in stack use in the foreseeable future.
76
-------
3QC
INLET NOZZLE
IDC
10
11
12
13
14
n7
STAGE
^-COLLECTION PLATE
PRESSURE TAPS
VALVES
t
JT
I
TO VACUUM PUMP
TO PRESSURE GAUGE
3630-261
Figure 37. Cross section of prototype Mark IV University of
Washington Source Test Cascade Impactor.
77
-------
BCURA
CYCLONE
MARK III
IMPACTOR
MARK IV
IMPACTOR
STAGE
PRESSURE
TAPS
DRY GAS
METER
3830-262
Figure 38. Sampling train utilizing a low pressure impactor.
After Pilat. 81
78
-------
Cascade Impactors with Piezoelectric Crystal Sensors
Carpenter and Brenchly82 and Chuan83 have developed and
tested multiple-stage cascade impactors with piezoelectric crys-
tals on each stage to monitor the rate and amount of mass col-
lected. Chuan's impactor is now sold commercially by Berkeley
Controls, Inc. (2700 Du Pont Drive, Irvine, CA 92714). Chuan's
impactor has ten stages, with the cut points reported to be from
0.05 to about 25 ym. Because of the extreme sensitivity of the
instrument (and upper limit on mass accumulation), it is more
suitable for ambient than stack work, where sample extraction
and dilution would be required. The best application of piezo-
electric impactors would seem to be monitoring real time fluctua-
tions in fairly dilute aerosols. For more information, see
Piezoelectric Mass Monitors under Mass Concentration.
Virtual Impactors
Figure 39 illustrates the operating principle of virtual
impactors, sometimes called centripeters, dichotomous samplers,
or stagnation impactors. The aerosol jet is directed toward a
stagnant zone, or an opposing jet of clean gas, and a "virtual"
surface is formed at the boundary between the aerosol jet and
air space or opposing jet. The jet streamlines are diverted as
in a normal impactor. Particles of larger Stokes number impinge
on (and pass through) the virtual surface, while those having
smaller Stokes numbers follow the streamlines.
Several multiple-stage virtual impactors have been developed,
all for the purpose of obtaining large quantities of sized par-
ticles, in uniform deposits, for subsequent analysis. Hounam
and Sherwood,8* Conner,85 Peterson,86 and Loo, et al.B7 have de-
veloped virtual impactors with BGI, Inc. (58 Guinan St., Waltham,
MA 02154) handling the Hounam and Sherwood version and Sierra
79
-------
DUSTY GAS
SEPARATING
PLATE
SMALLER PARTICLES
(MAJORITY OF FLOW)
I
SMALLER PARTICLES
LARGER
PARTICLES
VIRTUAL IMPACTION
SURFACE
CLEAN GAS
FILTER
SMALL FRACTION
OF FLOW
3630-264
Figure 39. Virtual impactors (centripeters, dichotomus samplers, stagnation
impactors) a. impingement into a stagnant air space; b. opposed
axisymmetric jets.
80
-------
Instruments Co. (P.O. Box 909, Village Sq., Carmel Valley, CA
93924) handling Peterson's version. Since the performance of
opposed-jet impactors appears to be quite sensitive to the geometry
and alignment of various components, a rugged field model is not
yet available.
Virtual impactors have played a minor role in pollution
studies to date, with very little, if any, application to process
streams. The major advantage of these devices appears to be the
capability of using them to obtain large samples, apparently an
absence of particle reentrainment and uniformly deposited films
of dust for analysis by X-ray fluorescence, or any other technique
that requires similar sample preparation.
Optical Measurement Techniques
When light is incident upon a particle, some of the radiation
will be absorbed, some scattered, and some polarization will
occur. The exact nature and magnitude of the interaction depends
on the ratio of the particle diameter to the wavelength of the
radiation, and the shape and composition of the particle. Thus,
measurements can be envisioned that would yield information of
particle size, shape, concentration, and composition. It appears,
from the information now available, that optical methods offer
the greatest hope for a major advance in the technology of par-
ticulate sampling. Any successful instrument, however, must be
able to function in a harsh environment where extremes in tem-
perature, particle concentration, corrosion, etc. are found.
Also, the parameter that is measured should ideally be related
to the aerodynamic diameter of the particles.
Although there are no proven commercial instruments available
for measuring particle-size distributions in process streams,
a variety of methods have been proposed, and several prototype
instruments developed.
81
-------
Hodkinson88 suggested a method of minimizing the dependence
on particle refractive index in sizing measurements from a study
of the Fraunhofer diffraction formulation at small angles of
forward scattering. The basis of this method involves measure-
ment of the intensity of light scattered by a single particle
at two small angles, and calculation of the ratio of the two in-
tensities.
Shofner, et al.,89 Gravatt,90 and Chan91 have developed
prototype systems for particle sizing that are based on the in-
tensity ratio concept of Hodkinson. Shofner's system, the "PILLS-
IV", is designed for in situ operation. The useful size range
for particle sizing is from 0.2 to 3.0 pm diameter. Shofner states
that the view volume of his system is approximately 2xlO~7 cm3.
The upper concentration limit for single particle counters is
determined by the requirement that the probability of more than
one particle appearing in the view volume at a given time be much
less than unity. For Shofner's system this would set the con-
centration limit at approximately 106 particles/cm3, a value much
higher than for conventional single particle counters.
A real time in situ particle sizing probe utilizing small
angle light scattering is being developed for stack use under
the sponsorship of the U.S. EPA.92 It is an adaptation of an
optical particle sizing device developed for atmospheric measure-
ments. The field prototype of the instrument is now being
tested. The instrument covers a 0.3 to 10.0 pm size range with
60 channels resolution. The major uncertainty in sizing spherical
particles with the instrument, performed by relating size to flux
scattered at small forward angles by single particles, is the par-
ticle refractive index giving at most an error of ±20% and nor-
mally within ±10% of actual size. The maximum concentration for
accurate measurements limited by coincidence counting in the
82
-------
present model is 5x10" cm 3. Normally, the main effect of higher
concentrations is to decrease the effective size range. An opti-
cal velocimeter is also designed into the instrument. The present
design permits temperatures up to 250°C and velocities up to
30 m/sec. The results of an initial in-stack test at a coal-
fired power plant with an ESP and a scrubber were reasonable. Cal-
culated opacity from the measured particle size distribution was
about 15% while measured opacity was 17%. The calculated mass
loading was 0.01 to 0.02 gm/m3 with a volume average diameter of
about 1.3 ym. it appears that the instrument was capable of re-
solving several size modes in this test.
Systems employing optical Fourier transforms to obtain par-
ticle-size distributions in the 5-100 ym diameter range have been
described by Cornillaut93 and McSweeny.91* With the proper selec-
tion of measurement points in the diffraction pattern the size
interval covered by the technique can be extended outside the
previously mentioned 5-100 ym range.
Another in situ portable light scattering instrument being
developed under EPA sponsorship to determine size distribution
utilizes diffraction and polarization from scattering.95 This
device measures flux scattered from many particles simultaneously
at three small angles relative to the forward direction, 4°, 8°,
and 11°, and at a range of large angles 80°-100°. Each measure-
ment is performed at two wavelengths, 0.45 and 0.9 ym, and the
large angle scattering is measured at two orthogonal polariza-
tions. The instrument relates the small angle signals dominated
by Fraunhoffer diffraction to the volume of particles in three
size ranges centered at 1.0, 3.5, and 7.0 microns. For the lower
end of the size distribution, the differences in the two 90°
signals at two orthogonal polarizations obtained with the 0.9 ym
(0.45 ym) wavelength is related to the volume of particles in a
size range centered about 0.4 ym (0.2 ym). The size, range, mass
loading, and temperature ranges are 0.1 to 10 ym, 4 to 400 ppb by
volume, and 0° to 260°C. The prototype has been delivered to EPA
to be tested in a wind tunnel facility.
83
-------
Imaging systems, either of a direct type or of a type using
reconstructed images from holograms, have not been widely used
for size distribution analysis in flue gases but have been used
routinely for work with liquid aerosols.
Flash television particle counters providing real time size
distributions have been described by Hotham96 using pulsed ultra-
violet laser illumination and by Simmons and Dominic97 using
xenon flash tubes for illuminators. The reported range for size
distribution determinations for the latter device is 0.3 to 10,000
ym. Because of cost and practical difficulties involved in the
use of such a system in a flue gas environment, applications of
these systems will probably be limited to special research appli-
cations.
Holography as a technique for investigating aerosols has
several advantages over most of the methods previously described.
The aerosol is not disturbed by the measurement process, a large
depth of field is possible and, as in the flash television method,
the particles can be effectively "stopped" for examinations at
speeds up to a few hundred meters per second. Typical system reso-
lution limits, however, result in a lower limit in sensitivity for
particle sizing of about 5 ym. By double-pulsing the laser illumi-
nator one can obtain holograms which permit the determination
of particle velocities in three dimensions. Image Analyzing
Computers, Inc., of Monsey, NY, offers an automatic analyzer for
reading out and analyzing aerosol data from holograms, making
it possible to eliminate manual analysis.
Laser Doppler Velocimeters (LDV) are routinely used for mea-
suring the velocity of gases, and these instruments can also be
used to obtain information on particle size. Farmer,98 Robinson
and Chu,99 Adrian and Orloff,100 and Roberds101 have done experi-
mental and theoretical studies of LDV systems designed to enhance
84
-------
the sensitivity to particle size. A commercial LDV particle
spectrometer based on Farmer's work is available from Spectron
Development Laboratories, Inc. (Tullahoma, TN 37388). Advantages
of LDV systems are the potential for in situ sampling with little
or no perturbation of the sample. Disadvantages are the sensi-
tivity to particle refraction index and complexity of the system.
Hot Wire Anemometry
An electronic instrument has been developed by Medecki,
et al.102 of KLD Associates, Inc. (Huntington, NY, USA) for sizing
liquid droplets, especially in scrubbers. The instrument operates
by inertial deposition of 1 ym to 600 ym spray droplets on a 5
ym diameter by 1 mm long platinum sensing element of the type
used in hot-wire anemometry. Droplets smaller than 1 ym can be
measured with a change in sensor geometry. The sensing element
is electrically heated to a predetermined temperature. Impinging
particles cool the sensing element, resulting in changes in resis-
tance which are related to the sizes of the impinging droplets.
The commercially available version of the device provides con-
centration outputs in six selectable size channels. Size cali-
brations for the channels are for water droplets; however, the
application of the method is not, in principle, limited to water.
Because the device is essentially a modification of a hot-wire
anemometer, it could also theoretically be used to measure flow
velocity and temperature permitting impingement rates to be con-
verted to aerosol concentrations. Although commercial prototypes
are available now, this instrument is still under development
and detailed performance analyses are not available.
Large Volume Samplers
McFarland and Bertch103 have developed a system for collect-
ing bulk samples of classified dust for subsequent use in health
related research. The system contains, in series, two cyclones,
85
-------
a virtual impactor, and a bag filter. The Dso's of the cyclones
are 10 and 7 ym, and that of the virtual impactor is 5 pm at a
sample flow rate of 850 1/min. The particulate collection com-
ponents are housed in an insulated enclosure that is 2.7 x 1 x
2 m. In sampling for 12 days at the outlet of an electrostatic
precipitator, McFarland collected 8.1 kg of dust: 5.4 kg in the
large cyclone, 1.3 kg in the small cyclone, 0.6 kg in the virtual
impactor, and 0.8 kg in the filter. A new system, designed to
sample at a flow rate of 33 ma/min is now under development.101*
86
-------
SECTION V
CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION
Several reasons exist for performing control device evalua-
tions. These reasons may range from a verification of compliance
with emissions requirements to programs related strictly to
research.
The majority of stationary air pollution sources need some
type of control device to satisfy the national, state, or local
air pollution regulations that limit the allowable emissions.
In order to determine whether the plant is in compliance with
these regulations, tests are performed to measure the amount of
air pollutant emissions from the control device in question.
This is one type of control device evaluation and it is usually
the simplest and least expensive.
Another reason for performing tests on a control device is
to optimize the performance of the installation. These tests
might be requested by the owners of the plant where the control
device is installed, or by the control device manufacturer.
Usually tests of both the inlet and outlet particulate mass con-
centration are made resulting in a measure of the particulate
collection efficiency. In some instances the fractional effi-
ciency (efficiency as a function of particle size) is desired
and measurements of the particle size distributions of the inlet
and outlet dusts are necessary.
87
-------
If a particular control device is performing poorly due to
poor maintenance, or poor design, etc., then tests might be re-
quired in order to obtain data to be used in designing additional
or replacement control device units.
To obtain data for purely research purposes is a fourth reason
for performing a control device evaluation. In each test the
data may be used to confirm existing theories of control device
operation or to develop new theories for modelling and predicting
control device performance. Research tests may involve total
systems studies on the source/control device combination. These
tests are usually the most complicated and expensive because of
the amount of data that is desired.
Table VI indicates some of the considerations and problems
that must be dealt with in developing a test plan for control
device evaluations. Although this table is designed to serve
as a planning outline, the relative importance of the facets of
the plan, or considerations that are not listed, can only be
established from a good understanding of the plant-control device
system and the objectives of the test.
A more detailed treatment of control device evaluations can
be found in Procedures Manual for Electrostatic Precipitator Evalu-
ation , EPA-600/7-77-059, and Procedures Manual for Fabric Filter
Evaluation, EPA-600/7-78-113, available from the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia.
88
-------
TABLE VI
PARTICULATE CONTROL DEVICE TASKS
Assure Compliance
with EPA
Objective of Tests Regulation
Tests Required
Gas Composition
Gas Temperature
Pressure
Particle Size Distribution
Oust Composition —
Dust Resistivity
Control Device Data
Design •
Rant Process Data
Technical Considerations
(Decisions/Problems)
Adequate Space,
Condensible Vapors/
Wnlatila D*r*i*»ln*
Mass Concentration/
Sampling Time
Process/Emission
Select Particle Sizing
Select Mass Train Type
Select Gas Analysis Methods -
Real-Time Monitors Needed —
0
o
n
y
Optimize Performance
of Control Device
o
Y
D,
y
p
r
r
r
Obtain Design
Data for
Control Device
i
i
i
i
I
1
Y
Y
r
r
o
r
c
1 0
1 0
o
0
c
D
Obtain Data
for Modeling
Studies
,0
i n
I,U
I n
i n
i n
i n
cop nnlu
Y
1 0
Y
X. . . . .
P
p
c
c
10
1 0
o
D
c
- D
Systems Studies
Process and
Control Device
,0
i n
i,u
i n
i n
i n
— I.U
i n
i n<
I.U
1 0
X
Y
r
r
n
c
C
1 0
1 0
D
D
c
D
Key: 0 Outlet
I Inlet
X Required
D Decision based on specific site or test objectives
C Must be considered
* vs. Particle Diameter
89
-------
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Standards of Per-
formance for New Stationary Sources. Federal Register,
42(160):41776-41782, 1977.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Standards of Perform-
ance for New Stationary Sources. Federal Register, 43(37):
7584-7596, 1978.
3. American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard Method
for Sampling Stacks for Particulate Matter, Designation
D2928-71, In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, 1977. pp. 592-618.
4. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Determining Dust
Concentrations in a Gas Stream, Power Test Code 27. New
York, New York, 1957. 25 pp.
5. Martin, R.M. Construction Details of Isokinetic Source-
Sampling Equipment. APTD-0581, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Research Triangle Park. North Carolina, 1971.
6. Hamil, H.F., and R.E. Thomas. Collaborative Study of Method
for the Determination of Particulate Matter Emissions from
Stationary Sources (Municipal Incinerators). EPA-650/4-
74-022. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1974. 37 pp.
7. Harper, W.R. Contact and Frictional Electrification.
Oxford University Press, London, England, 1967. 369 pp.
8. Loeb, L.B. Static Electrification. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, Germany, 1958. 240 pp.
9. John, W. Investigation of Particulate Matter Monitoring
Using Contact Electrification. EPA-650/2-75-043, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 1975. 52 pp.
10« Conner, W.D. Measurement of the Opacity and Mass Concentra-
tion of Particulate Emissions by Transmissometry. EPA-650/2-
74-128, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Tri-
angle Park, North Carolina, 1974. 39 pp.
90
-------
11. Sem, G.J., J.A. Borgos, J.G. Olin, J.P. Pilney, B.Y.H. Liu,
N. Barsic, K.T. Whitby, and F.D. Dorman. State of the Art,
1971 Instrumentation for Measurement of Particulate Emis-
sions from Combustion Sources. Vol. II: Particulate Mass-
Detail Report. APTD-0734, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1971. 223
pp.
12. Schutz, A. Technical Dust Control Principles and Practice.
Staub Reinhalt. Luft, 26(10):l-8, 1966.
13. Schneider, W.A. Opacity Monitoring of Stack Emissions:
A Design Tool with Promising Results. In: The 1974 Elec-
tric Utility-Generation Planbook, McGraw-Hill, New York,
New York, 1974. pp. 74-76.
14. Duwel, L. Latest State of Development of Control Instru-
ments for the Continuous Monitoring of Dust Emissions.
Staub Reinhalt. Luft, 28(3):42-53, 1968.
15. BUhne, K. W., and L. Duwel. Recording Dust Emission Mea-
surements in the Cement Industry with the RM4 Smoke Density
Meter Made by Messrs Sick, Staub Reinhalt. Luft, 32(8):19-
26, 1972.
16. Larssen, S., D.S. Ensor, and M.J. Pilat. Relationship of
Plume Opacity to the Properties of Particulates Emitted
from Kraft Recovery Furnaces. Tappi, 55(l):88-92, 1972.
17. Reisman, E., W.D. Gerber, and N.D. Potter. In Stack Trans-
missometer Measurement of Particulate Opacity and Mass Con-
centration. EPA-650/2-74-120, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1974. 105
pp.
18. Dobbins, R.A., and G.S. Jizmagian. Particle Size Measure-
ments Based on Use of Mean Scattering Cross Sections. J.
Opt. Soc. Am., 56(10):1351-1354, 1966.
19. Smith, W.B., and J.D. McCain. Particle Size Measurement
in Industrial Flue Gases. In: Air Pollution Control -
Vol. Ill, Werner Strauss, ed. John Wiley and Sons, New
York, New York (in press).
20. Kerker, M. The Scattering of Light and Other Electromag-
netic Radiation. Academic Press, New York, New York, 1969.
pp. 334-343.
91
-------
21. Ensor, D.S., and L.D. Bevan. Application of Nephelometry
to the Monitoring of Air Pollution Sources. Presented at
the 1977 Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Assoc-
iation, Pacific Northwest International Section, 1973.
Paper 73-AP-14.
22. Ensor, D.S. Plume Opacity Measurements. In: Proceedings
of the Symposium on Control of Fine-Particulate Emissions
from Industrial Sources, Particulate Technical Sub-Group
of the U.S. - U.S.S.R. Working Group on Stationary Source
Air Pollution Control Technology, San Francisco, California,
1974. pp. 641-672.
23. Ensor, D.S., L.D. Bevan, and G. Markowski. Application
of Nephelometry to the Monitoring of Air Pollution Sources.
In: Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting, Air.
Pollution Control Association, Denver, Colorado, 1974.
Paper 74-110.
24. Shofner, P.M., G. Kreikebaum, and H.W. Schmitt. In-Situ
Continuous Measurement of Particulate Mass Concentration.
Presented at the 68th Annual Meeting and Exhibition of the
Air Pollution Control Association, Boston, Massachusetts,
1975. Paper 75-41.1.
25. Schmitt, H.W., R.J. Nuspliger- and G. Kreikebaum. Contin-
uous In-Situ Particulate Mass Concentration Measurement
of Industrial Discharges. Presented at the 70th Annual
Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, Toronto,
Ontario, Canada, 1977. Paper 77-27.4.
26. Environmental Systems Corporation. Sales Literature for
the Particulate Monitor Model P-5A, Knoxville, Tennessee.
27. Hodkinson, J.R. The Optical Measurement of Aerosols. In:
Aerosol Science, C.N. Davis, ed. Academic Press, New York,
New York, 1966. Chapter 10, pp. 287-357.
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Appendix B - Perform-
ance Specifications, Performance Specification 1 - Perform-
ance Specifications and Specification Test Procedures for
Transmissometer Systems for Continuous Measurement of the
Opacity of Stack Effluents. Federal Register, 39(177):32860-
32862, 1974.
29. Nader, J.S. Source Monitoring. In: Air Pollution, 3rd
Ed., Vol. Ill, Measuring, Monitoring, and Surveillance of
Air Pollution, A.C. Stern, ed. Academic Press, New York,
New York,1976. pp. 589-645.
92
-------
30. Beutner, H.P. Measurement of Opacity and Particulate Emis-
sions with an On-Stack Transmis.someter. J. Air Pollut
Contr. Assoc., 24 (9) :865-871, 1974.
31. Haville, D. A Single-Pass Photoelectric Opacity Measure-
ment System. In: Proceedings of the Specialty Conference
on Continuous Monitoring of Stationary Air Pollution Sources,
Air Pollution Control Association, St. Louis, Missouri,
1975. pp. 154-170.
32. Hodkinson, J.R., and J. R. Greenfield. Response Calcula-
tions for Light-Scattering Aerosol Counters and Photometers.
Appl. Optv 4(11):1463-1474, 1965.
33. Marple, V.A. A Fundamental Study of Inertial Impactors.
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minne-
sota, 1970. 243 pp.
34. Rao, A.K. An Experimental Study of Inertial Impactors.
Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minne-
sota, 1975. 194 pp.
35. Cohen, J.J., and D.N. Montan. Theoretical Considerations,
Design, and Evaluation of a Cascade Impactor. Amer. Ind.
Hyg. Assoc. J., 95-104, 1976.
36. Marple, V.A., and K. Willeke. Impactor Design, Atmos.
Environ., 10:891-896, 1976.
37. Mercer, T.T. On the Calibration of Cascade Impactors.
Ann. Occup. Hyg., 6:1-17, 1963.
38. Newton, G.J., O.G. Raabe, and B.V. Mokler. Cascade Impac-
tor Design and Performance. J. Aerosol Sci., 8:339-347,
1977.
39. Marple, V.A., and B.Y.H. Liu. Characteristics of Laminar
Jet Impactors. Environ. Sci. & Tech., 8(7):648-654, 1974.
40. Rao, A.K., and K.T. Whitby. Nonideal Collection Charac-
teristics of Single Stage and Cascade Impactors. Amer.
Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 38:174-179, 1977.
41. Gushing, K.M., G.E. Lacey, J.D. McCain, and W.B. Smith.
Particulate Sizing Techniques for Control Device Evaluation:
Cascade Impactor Calibrations. EPA-600/2-76-280, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 1976. 94 pp.
93
-------
42. Lundgren, D.A. An Aerosol Sampler for Determination of
Particle Concentration as a Function of Size and Time.
J. Air Pollut. Contr. Assoc., 17(4):225-259, 1967.
43. McCain, J.D., K.M. Gushing, and A.N. Bird, Jr. Field Mea-
surements of Particle Size Distribution with Inertial Sizing
Devices. EPA-650/2-73-035. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1973. 52
pp.
44. Felix, L.G., G.I. Clinard, G.E. Lacey, and J.D. McCain.
Inertial Cascade Impactor Substrate Media for Flue Gas
Sampling. EPA-600/7-77-060, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1977.
89 pp.
45. Forrest, J. and L. Newman. Sampling and Analysis of Atmos-
pheric Sulfur Compounds for Isotope Ratio Studies.
Atrcos. Environ. 7(5):5160573, 1973.
46. Brink, J.S., Jr., E.D. Kennedy, and H.S. Yu. Particle Size
Measurements with Cascade Impactors. In: Proceedings of
65th Annual Meeting, AIChE, New York, New York, 1972.
47. Mercer, T.T., and R.G. Stafford. Impaction from Round Jets.
Ann. Occup. Hyg., 12:41-48, 1969.
48. McCain, J.D., L.G. Felix, and J. Johnson. Cascade Impactor
Data Reduction System: Procedures Manual. EPA Contract
Number 68-02-2131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1978. (in press)
49. Strauss, W. Industrial Gas Cleaning. Pergamon Press, New
York, New York, 1975. 621 pp.
50. Lippmann, M., and T.L. Chan. Calibration of Dual-Inlet
Cyclones for "Respirable" Mass Sampling. Amer. Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. J., 35(4):187-200, 1974.
51. Chan, T., and M. Lippmann. Particle Collection Efficiencies
of Air Sampling Cyclones: An Empirical Theory. Environ.
Sci. Technol., 11(4):377-382, 1977.
52. Smith, W.B., K.M. Gushing, G.E. Lacey, and J.D. McCain.
Particulate Sizing Techniques for Control Device Evaluation.
EPA-650/2-74-102a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1975. 132 pp.
94
-------
53. Smith, W.B., and R.R. Wilson, Jr. Development and Labora-
tory Evaluation of a Five-Stage Cyclone System. EPA-600/
7-78-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1978.
54. Blake, D.E. Source Assessment Sampling System: Design
and Development. EPA-600/7-78-018, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
1978. 221 pp.
55. Smith, W.B., K.M. Gushing, and J.D. McCain. Procedures
Manual for Electrostatic Precipitator Evaluation. EPA-600/7-
77-059, U.S. Environmental Protection, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, 1977. 430 pp.
56. Sinclair, D., and G. Hoopes. A Novel Form of Diffusion
Battery. Amer. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 36(l):39-42, 1975.
57. Haberl, J.B., and S.J. Fusco. Condensation Nuclei Coun-
ters: Theory and Principles of Operation. Prepared for
presentation at the llth Conference on Methods in Air Pol-
lution and Industrial Hygiene Studies at the University
of California, Berkeley, California, sponsored by California
Air Resources Board and California Department of Public
Health, 1970. 24 pp.
58. Ragland, J.W., W.B. Smith and J.D. McCain. Design, Con-
struct, and Test a Field Usable Prototype System for Sizing
Particles Smaller than 0.5 pm Diameter. EPA Contract Num-
ber 68-02-2114, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
search Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1978.
59. Cochet, R., and J. Trillat. Charging of Submicron Particles
in Electrically Ionized Fields; Measurement of the Rate
of Precipitation in a Uniform Electric Field. Compt. Rend.
Acad. Sci., 250:2164-2166, 1960.
60. Megaw, W.J., and A.C. Wells. A High Resolution Charge and
Mobility Spectrometer for Radioactive Submicrometer Aerosols,
J. Physics E., 1013-1016, 1969.
61. Maltoni, G.G., C. Melandri, V. Prodi, G. Tarroni, A. De-
Zaiacomo, G.F. Bompane, and M. Formignani. An Improved
Parallel Plate Mobility Analyzer for Aerosol Particles.
J. Aerosol Sci., 4:447-455, 1973.
62. Knutson, E.O. Extended Electric Mobility Method. In:
Proceedings of Symposium on Fine Particles, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, 1975. pp. 739-762.
95
-------
63. Markowski, G., and D. Ensor. Development of an In-Stack
Impactor/Precipitator for Sizing Submicron Particles. EPRI
FP-501, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Cali-
fornia.
64. Whitby, K.T., and W.E. Clark. Electric Aerosol Particle
Counting and Size Distribution Measuring System for the
0.015 to 1 Micron Size Range. Tellus, 18:573-586, 1966.
65. Liu, B.Y.H., K.T. Whitby, and D.Y.H. Pui. A Portable Elec-
trical Analyzer for Size Distribution Measurement of Sub-
Micron Aerosols. J. Air Pollut. Contr. Assoc., 24(11):1067-
1072, 1974.
66. Sem, G.J. Submicron Particle Sizing Experience on a Smoke
Stack Using the Electrical Aerosol Size Analyzer. EPA-600/2-
77-060, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1975. pp. 276-300.
67. Smith, W.B., K.M. Gushing, and J.D. McCain. Procedures
Manual for Electrostatic Precipitator Evaluation. EPA-600/
7-77-059, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina. 430 pp.
68. Cadle, R.D. Particle Size Determination. Interscience
Publishers, Inc., New York, New York, 1955. 303 pp.
69. Allen, T. Particle Size Measurement. Chapman and Hall
Ltd., London, England, 1975. 454 pp.
70. Godridge, A.M., S. Badzioch, and P.G.W. Hawksley. A Par-
ticle Size Classifier for Preparing Graded Sub-Sieve Frac-
tions. J. Sci. Instrum. 39:611-613, 1962.
71. GOetz, A., and T. Kallai. Instrumentation for Determining
Size and Mass Distribution of Submicron Aerosols. APCA
J., 12:479-486, 1962.
72. Goetz, A., H.J.R. Stevenson, and O. Preining. The Design
and Performance of the Aerosol Spectrometer. APCA J.,
10:378-838, 1960.
73. Gerber, H.E. On the Performance of the Goetz Aerosol Spec-
trometer. Atmos. Environ., 5:1009-1031, 1971.
74. Stober, W., and H. Flachsbart. Size-Separating Precipita-
tion of Aerosols in a Spinning Spiral Duct. Environ. Sci.
Technol., 3(12) :1280-1296, 1969.
96
-------
75. Sawyer, K.F., and W.H. Walton. The "Conifuge" - A Size-
Separating Sampling Device for Airborne Particles. J. Sci.
Instrum., 27:272-276, 1950.
76. Keith, C.N., and J.C. Derrick. Measurement of the Particle
Size Distribution and Concentration of Cigarette Smoke by
the "Conifuge". J. Colloid Sci., 14:340-356, 1960.
77- Tillery, M.I. Design and Calibration of a Modified Coni-
fuge. Assessment of Airborne Radioactivity, IAEA, Vienna,
1967.
78. Kaye, B.H. Symposium on Particle Size Analysis. Society
for Analytical Chemistry, Loughborough, England, 1966.
79. Allen-Bradley Sonic Sifter. U.S. Patent 3,045,817.
80. Pilat, M.J. Submicron Particle Sampling with Cascade Im-
pactor. In: Proceedings of the 66th Annual Meeting of
the Air Pollution Control Association, Chicago, Illinois,
1973. Paper 73-284.
81. Pilat, M.J., G.M. Fioretti, and E.B. Powell. Sizing of
0.02-20 Micron Diameter Particles Emitted from Coal-Fired
Power Boiler with Cascade Impactors. Paper presented APCA-
PNWIS Meeting, Vancouver, B.C., 1975.
82. Carpenter, T.E., and D.L. Brenchley. A Piezoelectric
Cascade Impactor for Aerosol Monitoring. Amer. Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. J., 33:503-510, 1972.
83. Chuan, R.L. An Active Cascade Impactor for Real Time Sizing
of Airborne Particles. Celesco Industries, Inc., Costa
Mesa, California, Bulletin AT-149. 3 pp.
84. Hounam, R.F., and R.J. Sherwood. The Cascade Centripeter:
A Device for Determining the Concentration and Size Distri-
bution of Aerosols. Amer. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 122-131, 1965,
85. Conner, W.D. An Inertial-Type Particle Separator for Col-
lecting Large Samples. J. Amer. Pollut. Contr. Assoc.,
16(1):35-38, 1966.
86. Loo, B.W., and J.M. Jaklevic. An Evaluation of the ERC
Virtual Impactor. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Report No.
LBL-2468, January, 1974.
97
-------
87. Loo , B.W., J.M. Jaklevic, and F.S. Goulding. Dichotomous
Virtual Impactors for Large Scale Monitoring of Airborne
Particulate Matter. In: Fine Particles, Aerosol Genera-
tion, Measurement, Sampling, and Analysis. Academic Press,
B.Y.H. Liu, ed., 1976. pp. 311-350.
88. Hodkinson, J.R. The Optical Measurement of Aerosols. In:
Aerosol Sci., C.N. Davies, ed. Academic Press, New York,
New York, 1966. pp. 287-357.
89. Shofner, P.M., G. Kreikebaum, H.W. Schmitt, and B.E. Barn-
hart. In Situ, Continuous Measurement of Particulate Size
Distribution and Mass Concentration Using Electro-Optical
Instrumentation. In: Proceedings of Fifth Annual Industrial
Air Pollution Control Conference, Knoxville, Tennessee,
April, 1975.
90. Gravatt, C.C., Jr. Real Time Measurement of the Size Dis-
tribution of Particulate Matter by a Light Scattering Method.
J. Air Pollut. Contr. Assoc., 23(12):1035-1038, 1973.
91. Chan, P.W. Optical Measurements of Smoke Particle Size
Generated by Electric Arcs. EPA-650/2-74-034, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1974. 49 pp.
92. Knollenberg, R. An In-Situ Stack Fine Particle Size
Spectrometer - A Discussion of Its Design and Develop-
ment. Presented at the Advances in Particle Sampling
and Measurement symposium (sponsored by the Process
Measurement Branch, Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
search Triangle Park, North Carolina), Asheville, North
Carolina, 1978. Session 3, Paper 2.
93. Cornillault, J. Particle Size Analyzer. Appl. Opt., 11(2):
265-268, 1972.
94. McSweeney, A. A Diffraction Technique to Measure Size Dis-
tribution of Large Airborne Particles. EPA-600/3-76-073,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, 1976.
95. Wertheimer, A.L., W.H. Hart, and M.N. Trainer. Optical
Measurements of Particulate Size in Stationary Source
Emissions. Presented at the Advances in Particle Sampl-
ing and Measurement symposium (sponsored by the Process
Measurement Branch, Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina), Asheville, North Carolina,
1978. Session 3, Paper 3.
98
-------
96. Hotham, G.A. Size of Respirable Aerosols by Pulsing UV
Laser Machine. Aerosol Measurement Seminar, Gaithersburg,
Maryland, 1974. 55 pp.
97. Simmons, H., and J. Dominic. A High-Speed Spray Analyzer
for Gas Turbine Fuel Nozzles. Presented at ASME Gas
Turbine Conference, Session 26, Cleveland, Ohio, March 12,
1969.
98. Farmer, W.M. Measurement of Particle Size, Number Density,
and Velocity Using a Laser Interferometer. App. Opt.,
11(11):2603-2612, 1972.
99. Robinson, D.M., and W.P. Chu. Diffraction Analysis of
Doppler Signal Characteristics for a Cross-Beam Laser Dop-
pler Velocimeter. App. Opt., 14(9):2177-2183, 1975.
100. Adrian, R.J., and K.L. Orloff. Laser Anemometer Signals:
Visibility Characteristics and Application to Particle
Sizing. App. Opt., 16(3):677-684, 1977.
101. Roberds, D.W. Particle Sizing Using Laser Interferometry.
App. Opt., 16(7):1861-1868, 1977.
102. Medecki, H., M. Kaufman, and D.E. Magnus. Design, Develop-
ment and Field Test of a Droplet Measuring Device. EPA-
650/2-75-018, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1975. 56 pp.
103. McFarland, A.R., R. W. Bertch, G.L. Fisher, and B.A.
Prentice. Fractionator for Size Classification of
Aerosolized Solid Particulate Matter. Environ. Sci.
Technol., 11 (8):781-784, 1977.
104. McFarland, A.R. Private communication.
99
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A literature search was made for articles, reports, and books
pertaining to particulate sampling from industrial process streams
with an emphasis on control device evaluation covering, in general,
the past two years. The bibliography was planned to be a supplement
to the list of references, naming some of the most recent publica-
tions and also those "classic" publications which are most often
cited by recent authors. The search included a subject search of
the Engineering Index, 1974-1976; Chemical Abstracts, 1976-1977;
Air Pollution Abstracts, July, 1974 - July 1976; The EPA Publica-
tions Bibliography, January-September, 1977; and other indices to
a lesser extent.
An extensive search was made of the references in the Environ-
mental Engineering Library of Southern .Research Institute, which
contained a major portion of the references listed in the bibli-
ography. Publications over three years old were generally not
included unless they contained information that was not found or
not superceded in recent papers. The list of references cited
in Sections II - IV of the manual are not necessarily duplicated
in the bibliography, however they should be consulted first for
information on particulate measurement.
The formats of the references generally fall into four
groups:
1. Reports on government contracts: authors, title, per-
forming organization or company, sponsoring government
agency, address of government agency, year of publication,
100
-------
number of pages, government report number (when appli-
cable or available), and National Technical Information
Service number (when applicable or available).
2. Books: authors, title, publisher, publisher's address,
year of publication, and number of pages.
3. Journal articles: author(s), title, name of journal,
volume number, issue number (if applicable), page
numbers, and year of publication.
4. Papers and proceedings of technical meetings: author(s),
title, name, location, and year of meeting, page numbers
or paper number (when applicable).
Contents of the bibliography are arranged alphabetically by
author under the following headings:
1. General References
2. Sample Extraction
3. Filter Media
4. Mass Concentration
5. Particle Size Distribution
6. Opacity - Transmissometers - Nephelometers
7. Analytical Technique
8. Control Device Evaluation - Field Tests.
A more extensive bibliography can be found in the companion
document Technical Manual; A Survey of Equipment and Methods
for Particulate Sampling In Industrial Process Streams,
EPA-600/7-78-043, March, 1978, by Wallace B. Smith, Paul R.
Cavanaugh, and Rufus R. Wilson.
101
-------
GENERAL REFERENCES
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
HANDBOOK ON AEROSOLS
US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON. 0. C., 1950.
107 PP.
CADLE, R. D.
PARTICLE SIZE DETERMINATION
INTFRSCIENCF PUBLISHERS. INC.. NEW YORK. 1955. 303 PP.
CALVERT, S.. AND R. PARKER
EFFECTS OF TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE ON PARTICLE COLLECTION
MECHANlSMSi THEORETICAL REVIEW
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RES. LAB.. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE
PARK, N. C.. 1977. 96 PP.
EPA-600/7-77.00?
CALVERT, S.. J. GOLDSCHMID, D. LEITH, AND D. MEHTA
WET SCRUBBER SYSTEM STUDY. VOL. I. SCRUBBER HANDBOOK
A'.P.T., INC.. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. N.C.. 1972, a?» PP
EPA*R2»72»119A PB 213 016
CALVERT. S.. J. GOLDSHMID. 0. LEITH. AND 0. MEHTA
WET SCRUBBER SYSTEM STUDY VOLUME II FINAL REPORT AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
A.P.T., INC'.. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C.. 1975. m PP
EPA-R2«72-H8R PB 213 017
CUSHING, K. M., w. E. FARTHING, L. G. FELIX. J. D. MCCAIN,
ANO w. B» SMITH
PARTICULATE SAMPLING SUPPORTf 1977 ANNUAL REPORT
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
N.C., 197«. 17« PP.
EPA»600/7*7fU009
DAVIES, C. N.. EDITOR
AEROSOL SCIENCE
ACADFMIC PRESS. NEW YORK, 1966,
-------
FUCHS, N. A.
THE MECHANICS OF AEROSOLS
THE MACMILLAN C0,t MEW YORK. 196U. 408 PP.
RCA CORP
APPENDICES TO HANDBOOK OF FABRIC FILTER TECHNOLOGY, VOL. II
6CA CORP. FOR NAPC ADMIN, U.S. OEPT. HEW, 1970, 208 PP.
PB 200 649
GCA CORP
BIBLIOGRAPHY. VOL. Ill, FABRIC FILTER SYSTEMS STUDY
GCA CORP. FOR NAPC ADMIN., U.S. DEPT. HEW. 1970, 179 PP.
PB 200 650
LIU. B. Y. H.. EDITOR
PRnCEEDlNGSi SYMPOSIUM ON FINE PARTICLES, MINNEAPOLIS.
MINN. 1975"
PARTICLE TECH. LAB., EPA, RESEARCH TRTANGLE PARK, N.C.,
815 PP., 1975
EPA.600/2-75-059 PB 249 5ia
MERCER, T. T.
AEROSOL TECHNOLOGY IN HAZARD EVALUATION
ACADFMIC PRESS, NEW YORK, N. Y.. 39<» PP., 1973
OGLFSBY, 8.. JR., AND G. B. NICHOLS
A MANUAL OF ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR TECHNOLOGY
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, NAPCA, CINCINNATI, OHIO
1970, 875 PP.
PB 196 380
RAGLAND, j. w., K. M. CUSHING, J. D. MCCAIN, AND w. B. SMITH
HP.25 PROGRAMMABLE POCKET CALCULATOR APPLIED TO AIR POLLUTION
MEASUREMENT STUDlESl STATIONARY SOURCES
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
N. C., 1977. 127 PP.
EPA-600/7-77-058
RAGLAND, J. W., K. M. CUSHING, J. D. MCCAIN, AND W. B. SMITH
HP-65 PROGRAMMABLE POCKET CALCULATOR APPLIED TO AIR POLLUTION
MEASUREMENT STUDIESI STATIONARY SOURCES
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK.
N. C.. 1976'. 122 PP.
EPA-600/8-76-002
103
-------
STATF OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOP MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUME I
THERMO-SYSTE*S, INC., EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C.
1071, 190 PP.
PB 202 665
STATE OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUME II
THERMO-SYSTEMS, INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C., 1971
225 PP.
PB 202 666
SFM, G. J,
STATE OF THF ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUME III
THERMO-SYSTFMS, INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N. C.
1972, 80 PP.
PR 233 393
SMITH, W. B., AND R. R. WILSON, JR.
DEVELOPMENT AND LABORATORY EVALUATION OF A FIVE-STAGE
CYCLONE SYSTEM
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK.
N.C'., 1978, 66 PP.
EPA-600/7-7fl.OO«
SMITH, W. B., K. M. GUSHING, AND J. 0. MCCAIN
PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR EVALUATION
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK.
N. C., 1977. 030 PP.
EPA-600/7-77.059
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE WORKSHOP ON SAMPLING. ANALYSIS. AND MONITOR*
ING OF STACK EMISSIONS
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INST..
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA, 1975. 3«6 PP.
WHITE, H. J.
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATION OF FLY ASH. PART I.
J. OF APCA, 27 (1), PP. 15-21, 1977
WHITF, H. J.
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATION OF FLY ASH. PART II.
J. OF APCA, 27 f2), PP. 110-120, 1977
104
-------
WHITE, H. J.
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATION OF F|_V ASH. PART III
J. OF APCA, 27 (3), PP. 206-217. 1977
WHITE, H. J.
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATION OF FLY ASH. PART IV
J. OF APCA. 27 (
-------
WATSON. H. H.
ERRORS DUE TO ANISOKINETIC SAMPLING OF AEROSOLS
AMER. IND'. HVG. ASSOC. QUARTERLY 15 (1). 195U
FILTER MEDIA
ADAMS. J.. A. BENSON, AND E. PETERS
PROPFRTIES OF VARIOUS PTITE* MEDIA SUGGESTED FOR IN-STACK
SAMPLING
ARTHUR D. LITTLE, INC., NEW YORK, N. V., 1970. 20 PP.
BENSON. A. L., P. L. LEVINS, A. A. MASSUCCO, AND
J. R. VALENTINE
DEVELOPMENT OF A HIGH.PURITY FILTER FOR HIGH TEMPERATURE
PARTICUl ATE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
ARTHUR D. LITTLE, I^C'., EPA, WASHINGTON. D. C., 1973, 80 PP.
EPA-650/2-70-032 PB 230 686
FELIX. L. G.. G. I. CLINAHD, G. E. LACEY, AND J. D. MCCAIN
INERTIAL CASCADE IMPACTOR SUBSTRATE MEDIA FOR FLUE GAS SAMPLING
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
N*. c., 1077, eq PP.
EPA-600/7-77-060
FORREST, J., AND L. NEWMAN
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF ATMOSPHERIC SULFUR COMPOUNDS FOR ISO-
TOPE RATIO STUDIES
ATMOS. ENVIRON.. 7, PP. 561*573. 1973
GELMAN, C.. AND J. C. MARSHALL
HIGH PURITY FIBROUS AIR SAMPLING MEDIA
ANNUAL MEETING, AMER. IND. HYG. ASSOC.. MIAMI, FLA, 1975
PP. 512-517
HEHEON ASSOCIATES
ON THE FILTRATION EFFICIENCY OF ALUNDUM THIMBLES AND OTHER
SAMPLING FILTERS
HEMEON ASSOC.. PITTSBURGH. PA.. 1973, 8 PP.
LIU, 8. Y. H., AND K. W. LEE
EFFICIENCY OF MEMBRANE AND NUCLEPORE FILTERS FOR
SUBMICROMETER AEROSOLS
ENVIRON. SCI. AND TECH.. 10 (4), PP. 3<»5-350, 1976
106
-------
LIINDGREN, D. A., AND T, C. GtJNDERSON
FILTRATION CHARACTERISTICS OF GLASS FTRER FILTER MF.DIA
AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES
UNIV. OF FLA.. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N. c.. 1976.
95 PP.
EPA-600/2-76-192 PR 257 132
LUNDGREN. 0. A.. AND T. C. GUNDERSON
EFFICIENCY AND LOADING CHARACTERISTICS OF EPA'S HIGH.
TEMPERATURE OUARTZ FIBER FILTER MEDIA
AMER. INO. HVG. ASSOC*. J. 36 (12). PPr. 866-872, 1975
NEUSTADTER, H. E.. s. M. SIDK, AND R. B. KING
THE USE OF WHATMAN«
-------
LILIFNFELO. P.
DESIGN AND OPERATION OF DUST MEASURING INSTRUMENTATION BA8FD ON
THE BETA«RAOIATION METHOD
STAUB REINHALTUNG DER LUFT, 35, PP. U58-465, 1975
NADER* J. S.
CURRENT TECHNOLOGY FOR CONTINUOUS MONITORING OF PARTICIPATE
EMISSIONS
J. OF APCA, 25 f8), PP. 8ia»82l. 1975
PILAT, M. j.. AND D. S. ENSDR
PLUME OPACITY AND PART1CULATE MASS CONCENTRATION
ATMOS ENVIRON., a. PP. 163-173, 1970
REISMAN, E.. W. 0. GERBER. AND N. o'. POTTER
IN.STACK TRANSMISSOMETER MEASUREMENT OF PARTICULATE OPACITY
AND MASS CONCENTRATIONS
PHILCO-FORD CORP.. EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C., 197a
H5 PP.
F.PA-650/2-7a-120 PB 239 864
SEM, G. J.
STATE OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUMf I
THERMO.SYSTEMS, INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C.
1971, 19fl PP.
PB 202 665
SFM, G. J.
STATE OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES'. VOLUME II
THERMO.SYSTfMS, INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C., 1971
2?5 PP.
PB 202 666
SEM, G. J.
STATE OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUME III
THERM0.8YSTEM8. INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N. C.
1972, 8
-------
SHOFNER, F. M.t G. KREIKEBAUM, AND H. w. 3CHMJTT
IN SITU CONTINUOUS MEASUREMENT OF PARTICLE MASS CONCENTRATION
6«TH ANNUAL MEETING. APCA. BOSTON. MASS., 1975, PAPER 75-U1.1
SMITH, W. B.. K. M. CUSHING, AND J. D. MCCAIN
PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR EVALUATION
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK.
N. C., 1977. 030 PP.
EPA.feOO/7-77-059
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE WORKSHOP ON SAMPLING. ANALYSTS. AND MONITOR.
ING OF STACK EMISSIONS
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE. ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INST..
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA. 1975. 3<»6 PP.
5. PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
BRINK, J. A., JR.
CASCADE IMPACTOR FOR ADIABATIC MEASUREMENTS
IND. AND ENG. CHEM., 50 («), PP. 645-fcti8, 1958
CADLE, R. D.
PARTICLE SIZE DETERMINATION
INTERSCIENCE PUBLISHERS. INC., NEW YORK, 1955. 303 PP.
CHANG, H. C.
A PARALLEL MULTICYCLONE SIZE-SELECTIVE PARTICULATE SAMPLING
TRAIN
. IND. HYG. ASSOC. J., PP. 538. 5«5. 197a
CHAN, P. W.
OPTICAL MEASUREMENTS OF SMOKE PARTICLE SIZE GENERATED
BY ELECTRIC ARCS
COLO. STATE UNIV.. EPA, WASHINGTON, D. C.. 197U. «9 PP.
EPA-fe50/2»7«-03« PB 236 580
CHAN, T., AND M. LIPPMANN
PARTICLE COLLECTION EFFICIENCIES OF ATR SAMPLING CYCLONESl
AN EMPIRICAL THEORY
ENVIRON. SCI. & TECH, 11 (fl). PP. 377-3*2.
109
-------
COHEN. J. J.. AND 0. N. MONTAN
THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS, DESIGN, AND EVALUATION OF A CASCADE
. IND. HVG. ASSOC. J.. PP. 95-lOa. 1976
CORNILLAULT. J.
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYZER
APPL. OPTICS, 11 (2), PP. 265-268, 1972
GUSHING, K. M., G. E. LACEY, J. D. MCCAIN, AND w. B. SMITH
PARTICULATE SIZING TECHNIQUES FOR CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATlONi
CASCADE IMPACTOR CALIBRATIONS
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
N. C.» 1976. 9
-------
GRAS8L, H.
APPL. OPT. 10 (11), PP. 2534-253A. 1971
GRAVATT, C. C'., JP-.
MEA8UR*MCNT OF THE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPATE
A LIGHT SCATTERING METHOD
J. OF APCA, 23 (12), PP'. 1035-1038, 1973
HABERL, J'. 8.
A LINEAR SCALF AITKEN NUCLEI COUNTER WITH AUTOMATIC RANGE
ScLEC * I ON
J. OF APCA, 2. 3 pp., 1977
HARRIS, D. B.
PROCEDURES FOR CASCADE IMPACTOR CALIBRATION AND OPERATION IN
PROCESS STREAMS
EPA, WASHINGTON, 0. C., 1977, 12i PP.
EPA-600/2-77»00«
HOCHSTRASSEP. J. M.
THE INVESTIGATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF CYCLONE OUST COLLECTOR
THFOWIES FOR APPLICATION TO MINIATURE CYCLONE PRESAMPLFRS
DISSERTATION. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, 1976, 266 PP.
HOTHAM, G'. A'.
SIZE OF RESPIRABLE AEROSOLS BY PULSING uv LASER MACHINE
AEROSOL MEASUREMENT SEMINAR, FDA AND NBS, GAITHERSBURG, MO.,
197
-------
KREIKEBAUM, G.. AND F. M. SHOFNER
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND FIELD PERFORMANCE FOR AN INSITU,
CONTINUOUS FINE PARTICIPATE MONITOR BASED ON RATIO-TYPE LASER
LIGHT SCATTERING
INTERNAL CONF'. ENVIRON. SENSING AND ASSESSMENT, (.AS VEGAS*
NFVAOA, 1975. 18 PP.
LEITH, D.. AND D. MEHTA
CYCLONE PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN
ATMOS. ENVIRON.. 7, PP. 527-5
-------
LUNA, R.
A STUDY OF IMPINGING AXI-SYMMETRIC JETS AND THEIR
APPLICATIONS
DISSERTATION. PRINCETON UNIV.. UNIv'. MICROFILM, HIGH
WYCOMB. ENGLAND, 117 PP. 1965
LUNOGREN. 0. A.
AN AEROSOL SAMPLER FOR DETERMINATION OF PARTICLE CONCENTRATION
A8 A FUNCTION OF SIZE AND TIME
J. OF APCA, 17 («), PP. 225-559. 1Q67
MARPLE, V. A.
THE AERODYNAMIC SIZE CALIBRATION OP OPTICAL PARTICLE COUNTERS
8V INERTIAL IMPACTORS
PARTICLE TECH. LAB. PUB. *306, PRESENTED AT AEROSOL MEASURE-
MENT WORKSHOP. U, OF FLA, GAINESVILLE. 1976. 13 PP.
MARPLE, V. A.
A FUNDAMENTAL STUDY OF INERTIAL IMpACTORS
DISSERTATION, UNIV. OF MINN., UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS, HIGH
WYCOMB, ENGLAND. 1970. 2(13 PP.
MATTHEWS, B. J., AND R. F. K£Mp
HOLOGRAPHY OF LIGHT SCATTERED BY PARTTCULATE IN A LARGE
STEAM BOILER
63RD ANNUAL MEETING, AICHE, SYMPOSIUM} CONTINUOUS PARTICULATE
MONITORING, NOV. - DEC. 1973
MAY, K. R.
AEROSOL IMPACTOR JETS
J. OF AEROSOL SCI., 6. PP. fl03-411t 1975
MEPECKI, H.. ET AL
DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, AND FIELD TEST OF A DROPLET MEASURING
DEVICE
KLD ASSOC.. INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. N. c., 1975
56 PP.
EPA. 650/2-75- 019 PB 2
-------
PILAT, *. J.. o. s. ENSOR. AND j. c. BOSCH
SOURCE TEST CASCADE IMPACTOR
ATMOS. ENVIRON., a, PP. 671-679, 1970
PILAT, M. J.. 6. M. FIORFTTI. AND E. B. POWELL
SIZING OF 0.0?-20 MICRON DIAMETER PARTICLES EMITTED FROM COAL-
FIRED POWER BOILER WITH CASCADE IMPACTOR8
PAPER PRESENTED APCA-PNWIS MEETING, VANCOUVER, B. C., 1975
RANZ, W. E., AND J. B. WONG
JET IMPACTORS FOR DETERMINING THE PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
OF AEROSOLS
IND. HVG. ft OCCUP. MED.. PP. «6«-077, 195?
RAO, A. K., AND K. T. WHITBY
NONIDEAL COLLECTION CHARACTERISTICS OF SINGLE STAGE AND
CASCADE IMPACTORS
AMER. INO. HVG. A8SOC. J., 3«. PP. 17«-179, 1977
SCHOTT, J. H., AND H. E. RANZ
JFT-CONE IMPACTORS AS AEROSOL PARTICLE SEPARATORS
J'. OF ENVIRON. SCI. ft TECH., 10 (13), PP. 1250-1256, 1976
SFM, G. J.
STATE OF THE ARTl 1971 INSTRUMENTATION FOR MEASUREMENT OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM COMBUSTION SOURCES. VOLUME II
THERMO.SYSTEMS, INC., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C., 1971
225 PP.
PB 202 666
SHE, C. V.
LIGHT SCATTERING PARTICLE SIZING TFCHNIOUES
SEMINAR! IN-STACK PARTICLE SIZING FOR PART. CONTROL DEVICE
EVALUATIONS, FPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C*. 1975, PP. 220-238
EPA.600/2-77.060
SHOFNER, F. M., G. KREIKEBAUM, H. W. SCHMITT, AND
B. E. BARNHART
IN SITU, CONTINUOUS MEASUREMENT OF PARTICULATE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
AND MASS CONCENTRATION USING ELECTRO-OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION
5TH ANNUAL INDUSTRIAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL CONFERENCE
KNOXVILLE. 1975. PAPER 75-fll.l
SINCLAIR, n.
A PORTABLE DIFFUSION BATTERYI ITS APPLICATION TO MEASURING
AEROSOL SIZE CHARACTERISTICS
. INo. HVG. A8SOC'. J., PP. 729.735. 1972
114
-------
SINCLAIR, 0.. R. J. COUNTESS, B. V H' LIU. AND 0 V H PUT
EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION OF*OIFFUSION *Ml*VT^Y ' '
J. OF APCA, 26 f7), PP, 661.665, 1976
SMITH, w. B., K. M. CUSMING, AND j. o*. MCCAIN
c«M^cn!E! M*NUAL FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR EVALUATION
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK!
N. C., 1977. «30 PP,
EPA-600/7-77-059
WTLLEKE, K.
PERFORMANCE OF THE SLOTTED IMPACTOR
15TH AMER, IND. HVG, CONF., MINNEAPOLTS, MINN., PARTICLE
TECH. LAB. PUB. 2«0, ?2 PP., 1965
6, OPACITY
BEUTNER, H. p.
MEASUREMENT OF OPACITY AND PARTICULATE EMISSIONS WITH AN
ON. STAC* TRANSMISSOMETER
J. OF APCA, 2fl f9), PP. 865«87l. I97fl
CONNER, W. D.
MEASUREMENT OF THE OPACITY AND MASS CONCENTRATION OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS BY TRANSMISSOMETRY
EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N. c., 1974, 39 PP.
EPA.650X2-7fl.12* PB 2«1 251
ENSOR, D. S.. AND M. J. PILAT
THE EFFECT OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION ON LIGHT TRANSMjTTANCE
MEASUREMENT
AMER. IND. HYG. ASSOC. J., 32, PP. 287-292, 1971
ENSOR, D. S., L. 0, BEVAN, AND C. MARKQWSKI
APPLICATION OF NEPHELOMETRY TO THE MONITORING OF AIR POLLUTION
SOURCES
67TH ANNUAL MEETING, APCA, DENVER, COLO., ma, PAPER 7
-------
HOOD, K. T.
OPACITY AND PARTICIPATE EMISSION RELATIONSHIPS FOR PULP MILLS
NATIONAL COUNC. OF THE PAPER INO. FOR AIR AND STREAM
IMPROVEMENT. INC.i 1976
MCRANIE, R. D.
EVALUATION OF SAMPLE CONDITIONERS ft CONTINUOUS STACK MONITORS
FOR MEASUREMENT OF SULFUR DIOXIDE. NITROGEN OXIDES AND OPACITY
SOUTHERN COMPANY SERVICES. INC.. 259 PP., 1975
REISMAN. E.. W. D. GERBER, AND N. 0. POTTER
IN-STACK TRANSMISSOMETER MEASUREMENT OF PARTICULATE OPACITY
AND MASS CONCENTRATIONS
PHILCO-FORD CORP., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C.. 19?4
115 PP.
EPA-650/2-74-120 PB 239 860
ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES
CAHILL, T. A.. L. L. A8HBAUGH, J. B. BARONE, R. A.
P'. J. FEENEY, AND G. W. WOLFE
ANALYSIS OF RESPIRABLE FRACTIONS IN ATMOSPHERIC PARTlCULATES
VIA SEQUENTIAL FILTRATION
J. OF APCA, 27 (7), PP. 675-678, 1977
HULETT, L. D.. J. M. DALE. .T. F. EMERY. W. 3. LVON, JR., AND
w. FULKERSON
TECHNIQUES FOR CHARACTERIZATION OF PARTICULATE MATTERl NEUTRON
ACTIVATION ANALYSIS, X-RAY PHOTOELF.CTRON SPECTROSCOPY, SCANNING
ELECTRON MICROSCOPY
WORKSHOP. SAMPLING, ANALYSIS, AND MONITORING OF STACK
EMISSIONS. EPRI SR-01. DALLAS, TEXAS, 1975, PP. 241*256
JACKO, R. B., D. W. NEUENDORF, AND K. J. YOST
TRACE METAL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN THE FRONT AND BACK HALVES
Of THE EPA STACK SAMPLING TRAIN
J'. OF APCA, 25 flO), PP'. 105B-1059, 1975
ROBERTS, N. J.
AEROSOL TRACE ELEMENT ANALYSIS USING NEUTRON ACTIVATION AND
X-RAY FLUORESCENCE
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LAB., U.S. AEC, 135 PP., 1974
116
-------
8. CONTROL DEVICE EVALUATION-FIELD TESTS
CALVERT. S.. C. JHAVERI. AND S. YUNG
FINE PARTICLE SCRUBBER PERFORMANCE TESTS
A.P.T., INC.. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLF PARK. N. c..
269 PP. ••*•••
EPA.650/2-70-093 PB 200 325
CARR, R., w. PIULLE, AND j. P. GOOCH
FABRIC FILTER AND ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORI FINE PARTICLE
EMISSION COMPARISON
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INST.. AMERICAN POWER CONF.,
CHICAGO, ILL.. 1977, 39 PP.
CASS, R. W.f AND J. E. LANGLEV
FRACTIONAL EFFICIENCY OF A STEEL MILL BAGHOUSE
GCA CORP.. EPA
EPA
CASS, R. W., AND R. M. BRADWAY
FRACTIONAL EFFICIENCY OF A UTILITY BOTLER BAQHOUSEl SUNBllRY
STEAM-ELECTRJC STATION
GCA/TECH., EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. N.C., 1976, 200 PP.
EPA-600/2-76-077A PB 253 903
COOPER, D. W.
DYNACTOR SCRUBBER EVALUATION
GCA CORP. FOR NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER, 1975
116 PP.
EPA.650/2-74.083 PB 203 365
DISMUKES, E. G.
CONDITIONING OF FLY ASH WITH SULFUR TRIOXIDE AND AMMONIA
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C
1975, 169 PP.
EPA.600/2-75-015 PB 247 231
ENSOR, D. S.. B. S. JACKSON, 3. CALVERT, C. LAKE,
D. V. WALLON. R. E. NILAN, K. 3. CAMPBELL. AND T. A. CAHILL
EVALUATION OF A PARTICULATE SCRUBBER ON A COAL-FIRED UTILITY
BOILE*
METEROLOGY RES. INC., EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C.
1975
EPA-600/2-75-074 PB 209 562
117
-------
ENSOR, D. S.. R. 6. HOOPER, AND R, W, SCHECK
DETERMINATION OF THE FRACT. EFFIC., OPACITY CHARACTERISTICS.
ENG. I ECON. ASPECTS OF FABRIC FILTER OPERATING ON UTILITV BOILER
METEOROLOGY RESEARCH, INC.. EPRI. PALO ALTO. CALIF
1976. 2?0 PP.
MCCAIN. J. o.
EVALUATION OF A REXNORD GRAVEL BED FILTER
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE. EPA. RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK. N.C
1076, 53 PP.
EPA-600/2»76-164 PB 255 095
MCCAIN, J. D.
EVALUATION OF ARONETICS TWO-PHASE JET SCRUBBER
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE. EPA. 1974. 43 PP.
EPA-650/2-74.129 PB 239 422
MCCAIN, j. D.
EVALUATION OF CFNTRIFIEO SCRUBBER
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE. EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK,
N.C., 1975
EPA-650/2-70.120A PB 243 626
MCCAIN, J. D., AND «, B'. SMITH
LONE STAR STEEL STEAM.HYDRO AIR CLEANING SYSTEM EVALUATION
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, M. w. KELLOG co., EPA, RESEARCH
TRIANGLE PARK, N, C., 1974, 03 PP.
EPA-650/2-74.028 PB 232 436
MCCAIN, J. n.. J, P. GOOCH, AND H. B. SMITH
RESULTS OF FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF INDUSTRIAL PARTICULATE SOURCES
ANO ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PERFORMANCE
J. OF APCA, 25 (2), PP. 117-121, 1975
NICHOLS, G. B., AND J. 0. MCCAIN
PARTICULATE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENTS ON THREE
ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR8
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, EPA,1975
EPA-fcOO/2-75-056 PB 248 220
PILAT, M. J.. AND F. MEYER
UNIV. OF WASH. ELECTROSTATIC SPRAY SCRUBBER EVALUATION
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON, EPA, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C..
1976, 74 PP.
EPA-600/2-76-100 PB 252 653
118
-------
SMITH, W. B., K. M. GUSHING, AND J. D. MCCAIN
PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR EVALUATION
SOUTHERN RESEARCH INSTITUTE. EPA, RESFARCH TRIANGLE PARK.
N. C., 1977, fl30 PP. '
EPA-600/7.77.059
VINCENT, J. H.
EVALUATION OF A LIGHT TRANSMISSION TECHNIQUE FOR TESTING A
TWO-STAGE ELECTROSTATIC DUST PRECIPITATOR
J. OF PHV. 0| APPL. PHVS. «, PP. 1835-18
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instruction! on the revene be/on completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-79-028
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Guidelines for Particulate Sampling in Gaseous
Effluents from Industrial Processes
6. REPORT DATE
January 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
R.R.Wilson, Jr., P.R.Cavanaugh, K.M.Gushing,
W. E. Farthing, and W. B.Smith
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
SORI-EAS-79-023
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Southern Research Institute
2000 Ninth Avenue, South
Birmingham, Alabama 35205
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE624
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2111, T.D. 10904
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Task Final; 1-9/78
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
is. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES T£RL-RTP project officer is D. Bruce Harris, Mail Drop 62,
919/541-2557.
16. ABSTRACT Tne repOrt lists 3^ briefly describes many instruments and techniques
used to measure the concentration or size distribution of particles suspended in
process streams. Standard (well established) methods are described, as well as
some experimental methods and prototype instruments. Instruments and procedures
for measuring mass concentration, opacity, and particle size distribution are
described. Procedures for planning and implementing tests for control device eval-
uation are also included.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Sampling
Dust
Effluents
Industrial Processes
Measuring Instruments
Size Determination
Opacity
Mass
Concentrating
Air Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Particulate
Gas Streams
Mass Concentration
13B
14B
11G
07A
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
IB. SECURITY CLASS (ThU Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
129
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thltptft)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 222O-1 (*-73)
120
------- |