EPA-650/2-73-024
July 1972
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY  SERIES


-------
                                       EPA-650/2-73-024
MEASUREMENT AND  CHARACTERIZATION
                 OF  PARTICLES
       IN  WET SCRUBBING  PROCESS
             FOR SOX  CONTROL
                        by

                    Donald A. Brooks

              Walter C. McCrone Associates, Inc.
                 2820 South Michigan Avenue
                  Chicago, Illinois 60616
                  Contract No. EHSD 71-25
                 Program Element No. 1A2013
              EPA Project Officer: D. Bruce Harris
                 Control Systems Laboratory
             National Environmental Research Center
              Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711

                     Prepared for

            OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                  WASHINGTON, B.C.  20460

                       July 1972

-------
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency and




approved for publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents




necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Agency, nor does




mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement




or recommendation for use.
                                 11

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                     page
  I.    Introduction                                                     1
 n.    Phase I                                                         2
        1.  Review of Duct Condition at the Scrubber Test Facility        2
        2.  Evaluation of the Andersen Stack Sampler                    9
              2.1     Prediction of Particle Collection Efficiency         9
              2.2     Sensitivity Analysis of the Particle Collection
                       Efficiency of Size Selective Particle Sampler     16
              2. 3.     Experimental Evaluation of the Andersen
                       Stack Sampler                                  20
        3.  Design of a Parallel Cyclone Size Selective Sampler          26
              3.1.     Conceptual Design of the Sampler and Train        26
              3.2.     Operation of Sampler                             31
              3.3.     Uses of Data from Size Selective Mass Sampler    32
              3.4.     Introduction to Cyclone Design                    36
              3.5.     Theory of Cyclone Optimization                   45
              3.6.     Experimental Evaluation of a Sampling Cyclone    53
        4.  Review of Laboratory Equipment                            57
              4.1.     Wind Tunnel and Lab Prep                        58
              4.2.     ITMC Evaluation                                 64
        5.  Field Test: Kansas Power and  Light Company                65
             5.1.    Background                                      65
             5.2.    Experimental Plan                                65
             5.3.    Description of KPL Tests                         66
             5.3.1.  Time Priorities                                  66
             5.3.2.  Completed Tests                                 66
             5.4.    Series Cyclone Efficiency                         70
             5.5.    Probe Deposition                                 70
        6.   Field Test: Shawnee Power Plant                           71
        7.   Deposition of Particles in a Horizontal Sampling Tube        76
        8.   Prediction of Sample Bias Due  to Non-Isokenetic Aspiration   82
        9.   Evaluation of Filters for Parallel Cyclone Samplers          86
HI.   Summary of Phase H                                             89
      References                  ...                                 91
                                   ill

-------
                          FIGURES

No.                                                     page

1        Particle Size Distribution at the Wet Scrubber
           Inlet                                        8

2        Particle Collection Efficiency of the Andersen
           Stack Sampler , Flow Rate =  0.25 cfm           12

3        Particle Collection Efficiency of the Andersen
           Stack Sampler, Flow Rate =  0. 5 cfm            13

4        Particle Collection Efficiency of the Andersen
           Stack Sampler, Flow Rate =  0. 75 cfm           14

5        Particle Collection Efficiency of the Andersen
           Stack Sampler, Flow Rate =  1. 0 cfm            15

6        Comparison Size Distribution Obtained from
           Three Andersen Impactor Samples  and a
           Microscopically Sized Filter Sample at KPL     21

7        Particle Deposits on Stage 6 of  the Andersen
           Impactor                                     24

8        Deposition in and Around Jets on Stage 4           24

9        Layout of Size Selective Gravimetric Sampler      27

10       Components of Size Selective Sample Showing One
           of the Seven Flow Streams                     28

11        Top View of Cyclone Set Showing Tangential
           Outline on Cyclone T-3A                       30

12       Hypothetical Particle Size Distribution and
           Collection Efficiency Curve for a Wet Scrubber  33

13       Schematic Drawing of a Cyclone Showing Relevant
           Dimensions and Velocities                     37

14       A Comparison of the Ideal and Actual
           Collection Efficiency                          39

15       The Relationship Between a, A, and b/r3 from
           the Measurements of Muschelknautz and Brumer 44

16       Dependence of the Wall Friction Coefficient  x on
           the Re-Number and the Relative Wall Roughness
                                                        49
17      Pressure Loss Coefficients of Sharp- Edged
           Outlet Pipes as a Function of the Relative
           Inner Peripheral Velocities and the Re-Number
           According to Measurements                    51
                              iv

-------
                     Figures (Continued)

                                                        page

18      Overall View of the Wind-Tunnel Test Facility     58

19      Modified Auto Transmission Installed on the
           Wind Tunnel                                  59

20      Climet Light-Scattering Particle Counter with
           the New Photomultiplier Power Supply and a
           Digital Volt Meter for Setting Precise
           Discriminator Levels                         63

21      The Pilot Scrubber                              72
22      Size Distribution of TVA Samples Collected
           with Small Cyclone                            75

23      Schematic Arrangement of Equipment for
           Particle Deposition Study                      78

24      Arrangement of Equipment to Clean Particles
           Deposited in the Sampling Tube                 79

25      Deposition of Particles in Horizontal Sampling
           Tube as a Function of Particle Size and
           Sampling Conditions                           81

26      Comparison of Predicted Nozzle Bias with the
           Same Sampling Time and Nozzle  Cross Section  83

27      Predicted Range of Nozzle Bias for  5-^m
           Particles Sampled with 1/8 in.  Nozzle at
           Various Given Velocity Ratios at 90%
           Confidence Level                             84

28      Predicted Range of Nozzle Bias for  5-/Ltm
           Particles Sampled with 1-in. Nozzle at Various
           Given Velocity Ratios at  90% Confidence Level  85

29      Pressure Drop Vs. Flow Rate for Several Filters
           in Typical Filter Holders with Teflon Backup
           Filter to Reduce the  Pressure Drop            88

-------
                       TABLES

No.                                                     page
1       Compositions of Flue Gas in Scrubber Inlets
           and Outlets, Based on 0% Excess Limestone
           Injection                                     3

2       Compositions of Flue Gas in Scrubber Inlets
           and Outlets Based on 0% Excess Dolomite
           Injection                                     4

3       Composition of Flue Gas in Scrubber Inlets
           and Outlets Based on 150% Excess Limestone
           Injection                                     5

4       Compositions of Flue Gas in Scrubber Inlets
           and Outlets, Based on 150% Excess Dolomite
           Injection                                     6

5       Ranges of Stream Gas Variables in the Wet
           Scrubber Inlets and Outlets                     7

6       Particle Size Distribution at the Wet Scrubber
           Inlet                                         7

7       Particle Size Collected with 50% Efficiency by
           Each Stage of the Andersen Stack Sampler at
           Four Different Flow Rates                     10

8       Changes of Air  Velocity and Viscosity Due to
           a Temperature Variation of 100 °F              19

9       Summary of Andersen Sampler Data from Kansas
           Power and Light Company Field Test           22

10      ERC Andersen Stack Sampler Tests--2/um
           Mono-Disperse Aerosol  (Fluorometric Analysis
           of Collected  Dye)                              25

11A     Particulate Sampling Equipment and Cost Summary 29

11B     Dimensions and Geometry of a Small Cyclone
           Based on U.S. P.H.S. Design                   43
12      The Computer Printout for  the Optimization
           Calculations for Cyclone T-2A                  54

13      Cyclone Dimensions                              55

14      Parameters for Cyclone T-1A with Q = 1 cfm        55

15      Amount of Water Required to Maintain a Given
           Humidity in the Wind Tunnel                    60
                            VI

-------
I.  Introduction
       This final report is submitted in fulfillment of our contractual agreement
under EHSD 71-25, modification 3.  The estimated period of performance for the
Scope of Work under this contract was originally August 15, 1970 through August 15,
1971.  However,  mod 3 resolved some previous  mutual  misunderstandings by ex-
tending the contract period to July 7, 1972.  This amendment,(3), also deleted the
request for submission of a final report and required that only a draft final report
be submitted.  Although this report has been submitted as a draft final report, we
consider it of printable form and quality.

-------
 II. Phase I
     1.  Review of Duct Condition^
        Since the main purpose of this project is to develop a size selective par-
 ticulate sampler for measuring and characterizing the particles in the wet scrub-
 bing process for SOX control, an understanding of duct conditions is necessary
 before the sampler is actually designed.  The sampler should not only be capable
 to fractionate the particles in the desired range,  but also be able to tolerate the
 physical conditions—such as temperature, pressure, etc.,  imposed by the gas
 being sampled.
        The wet scrubbing process for SOX removal consists of two steps—the
 injection of pulverized limestone or dolomite into the furnace and the scrubbing
 of the flue gas to remove SC>2 and particulate samples.  The composition of flue
 gas in the scrubber inlet, therefore, would depend on the quantity and type of al-
 kali injected into the furnace and that in the outlet would depend on the particle
 removal efficiency of the scrubber.  Thus, our first step in this project is to ob-
 tain information on the process variables of wet scrubbing and  the efficiency of
 the scrubbers which will be installed in the TVA test station.
                                                                            1 2
       With regard to process variables, Bechtel's Phase I and Phase II Reports '
 provide a good information source. Our study  of the reports,  however, revealed
 a lack of some  data necessary for the definition of sampling interfacing.
       Hoping to elicit this information,  we developed individual  sets of questions
 for Bechtel, the TVA and scrubber manufacturers and.through  the assistance of
 our project officer, we received much of the  information we requested from
 Bechtel and the TVA.  In regard to questions posed on the scrubbers, the data is
very limited since most of the scrubber manufacturers were unable to answer
our questions either due to their lack of information or unwillingness  to disclose
proprietary information. Based on the information presented in Bechtel's Re-
port and what we collected, the flue gas compositions are listed in Tables 1 through
 4.  The ranges of several important stream gas variables which effect sample
 designs were also computed and are listed in Table 5.
                                    -2-

-------
Table 1
Compositions of flue gas in scrubber inlets and outlets, based
on 0% excess limestone injection.  (Extracted from Process
Flow Diagram M-101, with totals corrected.)
Inlet
Component
S02
C02
N2
A
02
H20
CaO(s)
CaSO4(s)
Flyash
Inerts
TOTAL
mw
64.06
44.01
28.02
39.95
32.00
18.02
56.08
136.15
—
—
—
mph
7.6
411.8
2,314.7
28.4
142.4
258.9
7.6
2.0
**
**
3,173.4
Ib/hr
487
18,121
64,858
1,135
4,555
4,665
426
265
735
50
95,297
Outlet
mph
0.8
411.1
2,314.7
28.4
140.6
543.5
0.1
0.0
**
**
3,439.2
Ib/hr
49
18,091
64,858
1,135
4,500
9,791
4
3
7
1
98,439
  **  not included in totals
                                   -3-

-------
    Table 2
Compositions of flue gas in scrubber inlets and outlets based on
0% excess dolomite injection,   (extracted from Process  Flow
Diagram M-104, with totals corrected.)
Inlet
Component
S°2
C°2
N2
A
°2
H2°
CaO(s)
CaSO (s)
MgO(s)
MgS04(s)
flyash
inerts
TOTAL
mw
64.06
44.01
28.02
39.95
32.00
18.02
56.08
136. 15
40.32
120.38
—
—
mph
7.6
411.8
2,314.7
28.4
142.4
258.9
3.8
1.0
3.8
1.0
**
**
3,173.4
Ib/hr
487
18,121
64, 858
1,135
4,555
4,665
213
133
153
118
735
46
95,219
Outlet
mph
0.8
411.4
2,314.7
28.4
140.6
543.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
**
**
3,439.5
Ib/hr
49
18,106
64, 858
1,135
4,500
9,792
2
1
2
1
7
0
98,453
** not included in totals
                                        -4-

-------
                 Composition of flue gas in scrubber inlets and outlets based on
  Table 3        150% excess limestone injection (extracted from Process Flow
                 Diagram M-108,  with totals corrected).
Inlet
Component
S°2
C02
N2
A
°2
H2°
CaO(s)***
CaSO4(s)
flyash
inerts
TOTALS
mw
64.06
44.01
28.02
39.95
32.00
18.02
56.08
136.15
—
—
—
mph
7.6
426.1
2,314.7
28.4
142.4
258.9
21.9
2.0
**
**
3,202.0
Ib/hr
487
18,752
64, 858
1,135
4,555
4,665
1,230
265
735
126
96,808
Outlet
mph
0.8
424.4
2,314.7
28.4
140.6
543.4
0.2
0.0
**
**
3,452.5
Ib/hr
49
18,678
64, 858
1,135
4,500
9,792
12
3
7
1
99,035
** not included in totals
*** including Ca(OH)  as CaO
                                      -5-

-------
    Table 4
Compositions  of flue gas in scrubber inlets and outlets, based on
150% excess dolomite injection (extracted from Process Flow
Diagram M-115, with totals corrected).
Inlet
Component
SO
2
C02
N2
A
°2
H2°
CaO(s)***
CaS04(s)
MgO(s)
MgS04(s)
flyash
inerts
TOT A 15
mw
64.06

44.01
28.02
39.95
32.00
18.02
56.08
136.15
40.32
120.38
—
—
—
mph
7.6

426.1
2,314.7
28.4
142.4
258.9
10.9
1.0
11.0
1.0
**
**
3,202.0
Ib/hr
487

18,752
64,858
1,135
4,555
4,665
614
133
443
118
735
116
96,611
Outlet
mph
0.8

425.3
2,314.7
28.4
140.6
544.6
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
**
**
3,454.6
Ib/hr
49

18,717
64,858
1,135
4,500
9,817
6
1
4
1
7
1
99,096
**  not included in totals

*** including Ca(OH) as CaO
                    I*
                                        -6-

-------
        Table 5
Ranges of stream gas variables in the wet scrubber inlets
and outlets
Variables
Temperature (°F)
Pressure (psia)
Velocity (fpm)*
Particle concentration
(grains/ft3)
Air density (grains/cm3)
Air viscosity (poise)
Relative humidity (%)

Particle size distribution

* calculated from

Inlet
300
14.3
3,440
5-10
0.000813
0.00023
1.76
As shown in
Table 6 and
Figure 1

v- 9
Outlet
328 (preheated)
250 (reheated)
13.3
3,440
0.05-0.5
0.000812
0.00022
7.73 (reheated)
90.5 (preheated)

Unknown**



                      where  Q = 30,000 cfm

                              D = 40 m. = LLQ/12 ft.

        ** Although the actual particle size distribution in the scrubber outlet is unknown,
           it is reported by Bechtel that particles larger than 5 Mm will not get through
           the scrubber.
        Table 6
Particle size distribution at the wet scrubber inlet
Cumulative percent, by weight     12.5     25      37.5     50     62.5    75

Particle size, Mm                 5.3      7.2     8.8     11     13.5    17
                                                             87.5   100

                                                             23.5   —
                                          —7—

-------
I
00
         100
90

80

70
60
50
40
30

20

10
          0
             0
                  •_^
                  •4-1
                  ct
                  "a
                  3
                                                            Median value = 11
                                                            Std. deviation = 1.93
                                                      Particle size
                          I
                                                                                         _L
                                                                                             I   i  t
                 2        3

                 FIGURE 1
10
20
30
40   50  60  70 8090  100
                                        Particle size distribution at the wet scrubber inlet
                                        (Reproduced from Figures 3-14 in Bechtel's Phase II Report)

-------
     2.  Evaluation of the Andersen Stack Sampler
        Since impactor stages can be used to separate particulate matter from a
dust laden gas, we reviewed the feasibility of using cascade impactors as a size
selective particulate device to collect particles of various size ranges both at
the inlet and outlet of the wet scrubber.   One of the most promising samplers
of this type available off-the-shelf is the  Andersen Stack Sampler.  Although  cer-
tain information regarding the performance of this sampler has been provided
                             3  4
by its manufacturer and others '  ,  information on its particle collection efficiency
and particle fractionation capability for various stack conditions involved in the
wet scrubbing process for SO  control is still lacking.  This information is im-
                            X
portant because it predetermined the possibility of using such a device for this
particular sampling job.  We feel, therefore, that  a performance evaluation of
the Andersen Stack Sampler  is desirable.
        Our evaluation was performed in two parts; the theoretical prediction of
the cascade impactor performance and the field test at Kansas Power and Light
Company.   Each of these are briefly described below.
      2.1.   Prediction of particle collection efficiency
        The particle collection efficiency  is a function of jet diameter of the cas-
cade impactor, gas viscosity, particle density and average jet velocity.  Thus,
for a given duct condition, the size of the jet and flow rate determine the collection
efficiency of a single  impaction stage (since the flow  rate determines the jet vel-
ocity).
        In predicting the particle  collection efficiency of the Andersen Stack Sampler,
the hole sizes in each stage of the sampler were obtained from its manufacturer.
Based on the size and number of  holes in each plate,  the jet velocity of each stage
was computed for each of four different flow  rates—0. 25, 0.5, 0. 75 and 1. 0 cfm.
Since these flow rates were those originally used by the manufacturer in calibrating
the sampler, they  were considered to be the  most desirable ranges for the sam-
pler in this project.  By applying the equation describing the particle size collected
                  5                                                       5
with 50% efficiency  (X   ) and the equation describing the collection efficiency , we
                     50
were able to obtain the X  and collection efficiency curves at the four different
                        oO
                                     -9-

-------
 flow rates for each stage of the Andersen Stack Sampler.  The results are tabulated


 in Table 7 and shown in Figures 2-5.
     .           Particle size collected with 50% efficiency by each stage of

                the Andersen Stack Sampler at four different flow rates
                                      X   of each stage,
                                       ou
  Flow rate, cfm
      0.25               11.0    6.9    4.7    3.2    2.1   1.1    0.7    0.5



      0.50                7.8    4.9    3.3    2.3    1.5   0.8    0.5    0.3



      0.75                6.3    4.0    2.7    1.9    1.2   0.6    0.4    0.3



      1.00                5.5    3.4    2.3    1.6    1.0   0.5    0.3    0.2
       These predictions show that, at a given flow rate,  X   decreases progressively
                                                        50

as the jet diameter decreases. In contrast, for a given impaction stage, the X
                                                                          uu

decreases progressively as the flow rate increases.  According to the design cri-

                                                                     o
teria of the wet scrubber for SO  removal presented in the Bechtel report , about
                              A

50% by weight of the particles in the scrubber inlet are above 11 Mm, and all par-


ticles  in the outlet are below 5 Mm.  Thus,  the data detailed in Table 7 suggest


that the Andersen Stack Sampler could be a good size-selective sampler at the  wet


scrubber outlet for any flow rate from 0. 25 to 1.0 cfm.  Within this range, however,


the instrument will collect more than 50% of the total particulate matter sampled


at the inlet on its first stage.  Although it might still operate as a size-selective


sampler in this case, the first five stages of the sampler would be quite overloaded


in comparison with the others, and an equal eight-stage size-selective sampling


could hardly be expected.  This trouble can be minimized by sampling at a lower


rate and by using several sampling cyclones of appropriate sizes in front of the


impactor to remove the course particles.
                                    -10-

-------
       On the basis of the theoretical prediction, it is concluded that the Andersen
Stack Sampler is suitable for size-selective particle sampling both at the inlet and
outlet of the wet-scrubber for SO  control if a proper sampling flow  rate is used.
                               A
A flow rate of 0.75 cfm, as originally recommended by  the manufacturer of the
Andersen Stack Sampler, is reasonable to use.
                                   -11-

-------
1.0
0.9






1
to

0.8
% 0.7
rf
O*
g 0.6
0*
0
| 0-5
Q
1 0.4
D
0
39 0.3
•
•

•

-

•
-
 0.2  .
 0.1 .
                         345       6      7      8     9      10     11     12    13     14
                           FIGURE 2   Particle collection efficiency of the Andersen Stack Sampler
                                           Flow rate =0.25 cfm

-------
1.0
0.9  -
0. 8  _
0.1  .

2? 0.7
r-r-
cT
o 0.6
o*
o
, ? °'5
1-1 3
CO O
1 **>
o 0.4
n
a
o
f\ n

-
<
-<


m

i
ol o
Q'

i




I
4
•a
'
•


1 0
to
5

1
1


l

                                                                                                                   11
                             FIGURE 3    Particle collection efficiency of the Andersen Stack Sampler
                                               Flow rate = 0. 5 cfm

-------
   1.0
   0.9
   0.8,.
   0.7
o
a  0.6
   0.4
   0.3
   0.2
   0.1
                    FIGURE 4      Particle collection efficiency of the Andersen Stack Sampler

                                      Flow rate = 0. 75 cf m

-------
C71
I
                         FIGURE 5        Particle collection efficiency of the Andersen Stack Sampler
                                              Flow rate =1.0 cfm

-------
      2. 2.  Sensitivity analysis of particle collection efficiency of size selective
            particle samplers
        The particle collection efficiency of a size selective sampler,  whether it
 is a cyclone,  an impactor,  or an elutriator, is dependent upon the mass flow rate,
 gas velocity and density, particle density and so forth.  For a given sampler, the
 relation can be expressed as follows :

                              x50=f(Q, l.H.p)                       Eq. (1)

 where
                X_  = particle size collected with 50% efficiency;
                 50
                  Q = mass flow rate;
                  t, = gas density;
                  M = gas viscosity; and
                  p = particle density.

       The gas density and viscosity is dependent upon gas temperature. Thus,
 equation (1) can be expressed as follows :
                                         T,/>)                         Eq.  (2)

where
                  T = gas temperature.

       This equation indicates that in order to maintain a constant particle fractioning
ability of a sampler,  the flow rate, gas temperature and particle density must be
kept constant.  However,  in actual stack or duct conditions,  these three variables
can vary to some extent.  We therefore considered it necessary to examine sensi-
tivity of the impactors, cyclones and elutriators to small changes in these three
variables .
                                    -16-

-------
       The analysis was made independently to examine the effects of small variations


in the density of aerosol,  temperature and flow rate to the variation of X   or Z  ,  and
                                                                     o U     o 0

the aerodynamic particle size collected with 50% collection efficiency.  An example


is given here to illustrate the sensitivity of the process.
       The X   of the impactor can be expressed as follows
             50
and simplified to:
where
                 D = the impactor jet diameter as slit width;



                U  = the gas jet velocity;
                 o


                 V- = the gas jet viscosity;



                 P = the particle density; and



                 B = a constant of proportionality
                                                                      Eq. (3)
                                                                      Eq. (4)
       Using equation (4) we can express the changes in X   corresponding to small
                                                       o u

changes in D,  A*, p and U  as follows:
                        o
                     8X
                        50
          :50 .    3X50  .    3X50
                                                            AU
(  »   f =     I  BD  }"•*
I	 I   AD * I —77- I    AM
                       L\
  DpU
                       BDAt
                             V0.5
^/   -^»   -•
   O/          \   0
                                                                      Eq. (5)
                                   -17-

-------
 and dividing both sides by X   , we have:
                          50
                                                                      Eq.  (6)

                        "50



       To obtain the percent change in X   we multiply this expression by 100:
                                      ou


                                                     AU
Equation (4) can be rearranged to obtain Z  .
                                        50

This is as follows :
substitutes into equation (4).


We obtain
and




                   % change in ZgQ = 50 \^- - ^ - -^-              Eq. (10)

                                       I              o J



       Equations (7) and (10) are convenient for analyzing the effects of small


changes in variables.


       First we will examine the effect of aerosol density variations.  Assuming


all other variables are constant, we have:



                                              Ap
                         % change in X   =  -50 -75-                    Eq (11)
                                     oU



       The density of flyash particles, however, may range from 1 gm/cc to over


6 gm/cc.  Since this is not a small change, equation (11) cannot be used since Ap


must be small enough so that the second order terms are neglible.
                                   -18-

-------
       To determine the percent of change in X  corresponding to the change in
                                            *5U
 p from 1 gm/cc to 6 gm/cc, we use equation (4).
                 % change in X   = lOo                               Eq. (12)
                                           X50(P=1)

                                = 100 (!-- = 60
       Therefore, if  p increases from 1 gm/cc to 6 gm/cc,  X   decreases 60%
                                                           o(J
in comparison with its value at  p = 1 gm/cc.
       Now, suppose we want to examine the effect of a 100 T temperature increase
relative to the collection efficiency of the sampler.  We can use equation (10) by
holding the slit width and the mass flow rate constant.  Hence, we have:
                                         r       AU  1
                      % change in ZgQ = 50 -^- - -^                 Eq. (13)
                                         I         o J
       The changes of air velocity and viscosity due to a 100°F temperature increase
are given in Table 8 below:
  _, ,           Changes of air velocity and viscosity due to a temperature
  1 able 8       variation of 100 T

Item
Temperature (T)
Viscosity, M, (lb /ft/sec)
Air velocity, U , (ft/sec)
o
Original
Condition
300
1. 16 x 10"5
100

Final
Condition
400
1.75 x 10"5
113

       The percent change in Zcn is therefore,
                             ou
                 % change in Z5Q = 50  ^-      =-2.15
                                  -19-

-------
        Thus, the change is about -0.02% per °F increase in temperature.
        Based on the results using the technique illustrated above,  it was determined,
 for cyclones and impactors, that if the particle density is increased from 1 gm/cc
 to 6 gm/cc with a constant flow rate and temperature, X   decreases 60% in com-
                                                     50
 parison with its value at 1  gm/cc.  At constant mass flow rate, variation of tem-
 perature within ±100°F would introduce ±2% variation in Z   , the aerodynamic
                                                      ou
 particle size collected with 50% efficiency.  For elutriators, variation of tempera-
 ture within ±20°F will introduce the same percent of variation in Z  .  For all
                                                              50
 types of samples, precise  control of the flow rate is more important than temperature
 control. On the basis of our analysis, the following has been concluded:
        (1)  Sampling cyclones, impactors and elutriators are not suitable
           for actual size  analysis on aerosols containing a wide range of
           particle densities.
        (2)  Precise aerodynamic particle size analysis is possible and is
           mainly dependent upon precise mass flow rate and temperature
           control, with precise mass flow  rate control of particular concern.
        These conclusions indicate that presice flow rate and temperature control
are necessary in particle sampling.  Therefore, during sampling development,
these ideas were seriously  considered.
      2.3.  Experimental evaluation of the Andersen Stack Sampler
       Three tests were made with the Andersen sampler during our Kansas Power
and Light Company field test.  The procedures used during these tests and the analysis
of the results are reported  in another section.  The three tests were performed using
sampling times of 10, 4 and 1 minute.  If significant particle re-entrainment occurs
as the dust builds up on the collection stages, the three indicated size distributions would
differ considerably by being shifted toward smaller particle sizes with longer sampling
time.  For comparison purposes, a microscopically determined  size distribution was
also obtained from a high flow rate filter sample.  The four distributions  are shown in
Figure 6, but their comparison is complicated by another factor  besides re-entrainment.
The calculated grain loadings from the three Andersen sampler tests indicate that dust
concentrations in the stack  changed considerably during the three tests. The Andersen
                                   -20-

-------
 9.0
  8.0
  7.0
  6..0
  5.0
y
Hj
r^

O*
04.0
-•
g
o
ff
>-s
^3.0
3
  2.0
  1.0
                                                      Andersen Impactor
                                                        1 min. sample
                            Microscope filter sample
                                                       Andersen Impactor
                                                         4 min. sample
                                                           Andersen Impactor
                                                             10 min.  sample
              0.1  0.2  0.5  1
5     10    20   30  40  50  60  70   80

  Percent cumulative mass less than size
90
95
98   99
99.8 99.9   99.99
                      FIGURE 6   Comparison size distribution obtained from three Andersen impactor samples

                                   and a microscopically sized filter sample at KPL

-------
sampler tests were performed with the 10 minute run first, the 1 minute run last.  On
the day of the testing,  no soot-blowing operations were performed in the boiler since
these would interfere with the emission tests being performed by York Research.  By
the late evening, while performing our Andersen sampler test, soot build-up in the
boiler became a problem and it is likely that this led to successively higher grain
loadings in the stack.
        These conditions help explain the size distribution and grain loading data
shown in Table 9. A much greater percentage of large particles were present
during the 1 minute run.
      .          Summary of Andersen Sampler data from Kansas Power
                 and Light Company field test
Item
Sampling time (min)
Total sample weight (mg)
Flow rate through sampler
Run 1
10
26.15
1.28
Run 2
4
21.685
1.21
Run3
1
14.245
0.995
   (ACFM for 760 °R and 22%
    HO by volume)
     ^                  3
   Grain loading (grain/ft               0.0464        0.13 22        0.3 25 8
   at stack conditions, dry)
       Despite these difficulties, it is possible from the data collected to infer that
particle re-entrainment did occur in the Andersen sampler.  The difference in the
shape of the distribution below 1.9 /xm between the 4 min and 10 min runs indicates
that re-entrainment caused an increase in the weight of the samples collected on
the lower  stages during the 10 min run.  By comparing the impactor distributions
with the microscopically determined distributions,  it is obvious that the impactor
data significantly overestimates the concentration of small particles.  Therefore,
the only plausible explanation is particle re-entrainment.
                                   -22-

-------
       Four other difficulties were encountered in using the Andersen impactor:
         (1) It was difficult to weigh the sample catch on plates having 25 g
            tare weight;
         (2) it was very difficult to clean the collected particulate matter from the
            plates;
         (3) visual inspection of the plates indicates that a significant amount
            of particulate matter was collected in and around the jet holes
            (see Figures 7 and 8);  and
         (4) from 4-8% of the total  sample catch was impacted on the zero
            stage by the entrance nozzle to the  impactor.
                                                     6
       The Environmental Research Corporation report on the evaluation of the
Andersen impactor was reviewed to determine if any of their results confirmed
those reported above.  However, the main purpose of their evaluation was to
determine the reproducibility of the results  obtained from the Andersen sampler
for several samples  taken under identical conditions. The results with a poly-
dispersed aerosol having a mass medium diameter of 0. 64 /im indicate that the
Andersen impactor produces  reproducible results.  Tests with mono-dispersed
aerosols of 1-to-l mixtures of uranine and methylene blue  may indicate that
particle re-entrainment occurs and that the  calibration  constants for the impactor
are not accurate.  Unfortunately, aerosols of this type have densities which vary
from 15-20%,  depending upon the concentration of solvent in the aerosol generator
and variations in water content of the bulk materials. Although the aerosol den-
                                              7
sity was  not reported by ERC, the work of others  indicates that this aerosol has
a density varying from 1.2 to 1.43.  This variation is large enough to account for
some of the particle  re-entrainment results, but it does not account for others.
For example,  results shown in Table 10 indicate that significant re-entrainment of
2-^im particles from stage 5 to stage 6 occurred at 0.5  cfm flow rate.  This same
result could have been produced by  a change in aerosol density of the magnitude
indicated above.   However, this  does not account for the significant amount of mass
collected by the filter after the impactor during the same runs.  Clearly,  for this
type of test to be  conclusive,  it must be performed using aerosols  of constant den-
sity and their size must be monitored during the test.
                                    -23-

-------
                      FIGURE 7

Photo shows particle deposits on stage 6 of the Andersen
Impactor.  Deposition around jet holes is clearly visible.
                      FIGURE 8

Photo shows deposition in and around jets on stage 4.
                     -24-

-------
   Table 10
ERG Andersen Stack Sampler Tests—2/nm Mono-disperse
Aerosol (fluorometric analysis of collected dye)

Percent
of Total
Collected Mass


Stage
Filter
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
(1.0
5-minute
sample
3.7
1.0
1.0
4.8
57.8
30.2
0.3
	
0.3
0.7
cfm)
15-minute
sample
14.7
4.6
1.2
1.0
47.0
29.4
0.3
	
0.3
1.4
Percent
of Total
Collected Mass
(0.5
10-minute
sample
0.7
	
	
4.9
92.0
0.9
0.1
	
	
1.2
cfm)
30-minute
sample
3.3
	
1.0
45.6
48.4
1.0
	
	
	
0.7
       The failure of the Andersen impactor to perform adequately during the field
test led to the consideration of other types of samplers. We concluded that an
arrangement of small sampling cyclones might be feasible since cyclones are
capable of collecting a large amount of sample.  Our goal during the rest of this
porject was then two-fold:  first we had to eliminate the major sources of sampling
errors in the complete sampling — for example,  deposition in the transport tube,
sample bias  due to non-isokinetic sampling, arid poor filter performance; and,
secondly we  had to design and evaluate a new type of cyclone sampler.
                                 -25-

-------
     3.  Design of a Parallel Cyclone Size Selective Sampler
      3.1.  Conceptual design of the sampler and train
       A conceptual design for a parallel cyclone sampling train is shown in Figures 9
and 10; it consists of three units:  (1) the sample box, (2) a control unit which con-
tains pumps and gas metering equipment, and (3) a coolant supply system which sup-
plies coolant for the water vapor traps for all sampling trains being used.  The
components used in the sampling train are listed in Table llA.
       The coolant system uses a  small refrigeration unit to cool a water/glycol
mixture which is  being pumped through the water vapor traps and back to the re-
frigeration unit.  This eliminates the inconvenience of using ice to cool the traps.
       Particulate samples will be removed from the stack by a 3-ft x 1/2-in
diameter pitobe containing a thermocouple and s-type pitot tube for measuring
stack velocity and temperature. The nozzle of the probe will be designed so  that
a minimum of dust deposition occurs in the bend.  This  will be achieved in a  half-
inch probe by using a 4-in radius of curvature.  Our dust deposition experiments
indicate that a minimum  deposition will occur in a 1/2-in probe when used at the
flow rate planned.
       When sampling at the scrubber inlet, a cyclone precollector is used to pre-
vent large particles from entering the small cyclones,  since in the small cyclones
high gas velocities are obtained and could lead to the loss of the  large particles
by particle interaction and/or bounce.  The outlet of the precollector functions as
a gas manifold to divide the gas flow into seven branches.  Since the gas flow
in the precollector outlet is a vortex, the best aerodynamic method of dividing the
flow is seven tangential outlets, as shown in Figure 13A.  An inverted cone  in the
middle of the outlet manifold is used to  maintain the vortex motion. The seven outlet
flow rates are arranged so that the total flow into any quadrant of the manifold is
equivalent to that of any other quadrant.  For sampling at the scrubber outlet, the
precollector body is replaced by an adapter which connects the probe to the outlet
manifold.
                                   -26-

-------
Flow
Duct
Probe
       Pitote
    o-
 Thermo-
  couple
                                       Coolant supply connectors
                    Flow control valves
IT
                                   1.963
                         Cyclone pressure
                          drop indicator
                       Sample box
                                                     -Water trap
                                                                     Umbilical connector
                                                                      Bypass valve
                                                                                          Dry gas meter
                                                                                            Manometer
                                                                                            Control box
                       FIGURE 9
       Layout of size selective gravimetric sampler

-------
       Probe
to
00


ByF
>

(
V
I
                                                                                             CONTROL UNIT
                                                                                      Bypass valve
                                                                                          Pump
 Dry
 gas
meter
                                                                            Umbilical connector
                                                                                                      nometer
     Thermocou
                                                           COOLANT  SUPPLY UNIT

                                           FIGURE 10  Components of size selective sample showing one of the
                                                           seven flow streams

-------
Table 11A    Particulatc sampling equipment and cost summary
Sampling Train Components
Sampling probe (pitobe)
Probe nozzle
Seven stage cyclone with precollector
Gas flow valves
Gas manifold and tubing
Temperature controller and probes
Heater and blower
1/2 inch quick disconnect
Magnehilic pressure guage
Silicone o-ring
Insulated sample box
Condenser
Control Unit
Umbilical connector
By -pass valves
Control pump (no. 0322)
Gas pump (no. 0822)
Orifice meter
Dual column manometer
Dry gas meter
Electrical switches and accessories
Toggle valve
Pipe fittings
Box
Gas meter thermometer
Pyrometer
Coolant Supply Unit
Refrigerator, pump and heat exchanger
(can be used simultaneously with all
seven samplers)

Quantity
1
1
1
7
1
2
1
4
6
1
1
1

1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1

1


TOTAL
Cost
$ 125
25
3500
56
100
90
35
64
164
40
150
150

150
32
89
160
32
187
100
50
5
50
150
20
45

1000


$6569
                              -29-

-------
                            Outlet manifold of T-3A
Filter
 Stage O
                  Stage
                                                 Stage 4
                FIGURE 11   Top view of cyclone set showing tangential
                               outline on cyclone T-3A
                                       - 30 -

-------
       The seven parallel stages consist of six cyclones followed by filters and a
filter stage.  The pressure drop across each cyclone is indicated by magnehelic
differential pressure gauges.  Each cascaded cyclone-filter is made of three parts:
a collection pot where collected particles are trapped, the cyclone body, and a
cover plate-filter holder combination which contains the outlet pipe of the cyclone
and filter.  All three parts are connected by flanges with o-ring seals.  This sys-
tem functioned perfectly during the TVA field test. Flow control in the seven
stages is maintained by valves on the exhaust side of each stage. The cyclones are
maintained at 275 °F by a thermostatically controlled heater/blower in the sample
box.
       The control unit contains the pumps with by-pass valves, dry gas meter,
pyrometer, manometers and an orifice meter.   The design is similar to that used
in the EPA mass train.  The pump size is  based on the pressure drop requirements
of the filters.  One pump supplies the vacuum for the six cyclones while a second smalle:
pump is used on the filter.   Both pumps exhaust into the dry gas meter.  Instan-
taneous flow rate measurements are made with the orifice meter/manometer.  A
second manometer is used to measure the  velocity pressure produced by the  pitot.
      3.2.  Operation of the sampler
       Two flow conditions must be satisfied while sampling:  isokinetic conditions
must be maintained, and a constant cut point for the small cyclones must be main-
tained.  The first condition can be maintained by varying the flow rate through the
filter stage of the sampler from 0 to 2 cfm.  This will vary the total sampler flow
rate from 4 to 6 cubic feet per minute without affecting the flows through the  six
cyclones.  Isokinetic conditions are maintained by the  same method used in the
EPA particle train.  We have determined that the most economic and precise way
of maintaining constant cut points  in the cyclone is to maintain constant pressure
drop across them.  By adjusting the flow rate with the control valve, the operator
can maintain  a constant pressure drop throughout the sampling period.  It is  clear
then that for isokinetic sampling two people will be required to perform sampling:
one to maintain isokinetic conditions and one to maintain constant cut points in the
size-selective sampler.
                                   -31-

-------
       After a thirty minute sampling period has been completed, the sampler will
be shut off and the parallel water vapor trap will be removed and transported to the
laboratory.  There the filter will be removed, dried in a desiccator, weighed and
the amount of water collected in the water vapor trap measured.  The filters can
be used as the substrate for x-ray fluorescence  analysis of the chemical constituents
of the particulate matter collected to determine  the size distribution of calcium
moieties.  If the precollector is being used, the particles collected in its collection
pot will be weighed.  To determine the total mass collected, the filter sample from
stage 0 and the precollector catch,  if there is one, can be used.  To determine
                                             g
the size distribution, a  mathemetical procedure  can be used to convert the filter
weights to a size distribution.
      3.3. Uses of data from the size selective mass sampler
       As an example of how this data can be used, two hypothetical distributions are
shown in Figure 12.   A differential and cumulative distribution for the scrubber inlet
and scrubber outlet are shown.  The distribution for the inlet is an extrapolation
of data obtained from a Bahco analysis of TVA flyash limestone mixtures.  If we
assume a scrubber mass collection efficiency of 98% and the outlet particle size
distribution as shown, it is possible to calculate the scrubber size efficiency
curve as also shown. The calculation is :
where
       A = the fraction of particulate mass in the scrubber inlet of size X;
       B = the fraction of particulate mass in the scrubber outlet of size X;
       K = the fractional mass removal efficiency of the scrubber; and
       E = the scrubber collection efficiency of particle size X.
                                   -32-

-------
  5. 5

5   5
5-4.5
,§.3.5

    3

  2.5

    2

  1.5

    1


  0.5

    0
                     -Differential distribution at inlet
                                                                 -Cumulative distribution at inlet
            •Differential distribution
                 at outlet
                                                                                     Cumulative distribution at outlet
                                                                                                            Scrubber size
                                                                                                             efficicncv curve
                                                                                Percent mass'
         0.05-0.1-0.2-0.5-1

                  FIGURE  12
                                       5     10     20    30  40  50   60  70   80     90     95    98   99
                                         Hypothetical particle size distribution and collection effiency curve
                                               for a wet scrubber
99.8 99.9   99.99

-------
        There  is actually another way of handling the particle size data which is
 simpler and more accurate.  All particle collectors—whether scrubbers, cyclones-
 or lungs—select particles based on the  particle settling velocity and not
 its diameter.  It is possible to calculate particle diameters from settling velocities
 if the particle  density  p  , gas density p ,  and gas viscosity n are known.  For par-
                                       o
 tides of one micrometer or smaller, an additional term — the particle slip correction
 factor—must be calculated which allows for particle slip.  The effect of these com-
 plications is readily apparent by comparing the collection efficiency equations for
 cyclones when  stated for settling velocity W* and particle diameter d   :
                                                                  i)U
                                        V
                                w* =
                                      Uf/r.g;
where
                        V  = the radial velocity;
                        U. = the peripheral velocity; and
                          g = the acceleration of gravity.
where
                          5 = the mean free path in the stack gas.

Similar equations can be written for the collection of a wet scrubber.  Since the gas
stream conditions and particle density will be different for the inlet and outlet streams,
it will be necessary to measure these parameters while sampling if particle size
data is used for scrubber efficiency determinations. It would be  difficult and expen-
sive to obtain experimental values for the slip correction factor although estimates
can be calculated.  Since cyclones are settling velocity selectors, the particle size
data obtained with them would contain fewer uncertainties  if it were used in the
form of particle settling velocities instead of particle diameters.
                                    -34-

-------
       The isokinetic experiments to improve the accuracy of our theoretical model
will be performed during Phase A of our work plan.  We will use  the light scattering
particle counter to sample, size and count particles  in wind tunnel tests.  Such a
test can be performed in approximately 160 man hours.
      Manpower requirements
       According to Bechtel's data,  a typical test with the scrubbers will require
8 hours.  Sampling may begin as soon as steady state conditions are reached.
Preparations for sampling include cleaning and assembling equipment and loading
preweighed filters into the sampler.  This will require about one  man hour per
sample and the task can be performed by either sampling personnel or a lab  tech-
nician.  Transporting the sampling unit to the sampling point and  allowing the cyclones
to reach operating temperature  requires about 15-30 minutes.  After a sample has
been collected, the reverse of the above steps is  required with about the same time
requirements.  The only difference is that cleaning the equipment is unnecessary.
A total of about 3 man hours per sample will be required before and after sampling
and the lab analyses will require one  man hour per sampling.

                    Summary of Manpower Requirements
	Operation	       No. of Men       Total Man Hours
Sampling
   1.  Clean and assemble equipment             2                  1
   2.  Adjust equipment                         2                    1/4
   3.  Sampling                                2                  1
   4.  Filter removal and transport to lab         1                    1/2
                                                                   2-3/4
Laboratory Analysis
   1.  Preweigh filters                          1                    1/4
   2.  Dry and reweigh filters                    1                    1/2
   3.  Calculate and report data                  1                    1/4
                                   -35-

-------
      3.4.  Introduction to cyclone design
        The major advantage of using a cyclone as a size selective sampler is its
 ability  to collect a large sample without re-entrainment. This property is inherent
 in the way of cyclone functions.  Gas enters the cyclone through  the side by tangential
 inlet pipe and leaves the cyclone through an axial exit pipe.  This arrangement pro-
 duces a vortex in the body of the cyclone which exerts considerable centrifugal force
 on particles suspended in the air stream.  For a particle to be collected by the
 cyclone, the centrifugal force  acting on it must be greater than the opposing viscos
 forces  of the gas.  When this occurs, the particles accumulate at the walls where
 a downward secondary flow of the gas causes them to be collected at the bottom of
 the cyclone in a collection pot  and  all that is required to collect a given mass of sample
 is a large enough collection pot.
        The prediction of cyclone performance is the greatest difficulty in  the use of
 cyclones in a size selective  sampler.  The major difficulty  is the inability to  cal-
 culate flow conditions in a cyclone.  A few  methods of making these calculations after
 considerable simplification of  the flow pattern have been developed.  As a result,
                                                                                 3
 no sound theoretical methods are available for determination of the effects of change
 in cyclone geometry on particle efficiency.
        In one simplified theoretical approach, the centrifugal force acting on a
particle in a simple vortex is calculated and set equal to the momentum of a particle
falling in still air with a terminal velocity of w.   Under these  circumstances where
the  two  forces acting on the particle are exactly equal,  we would expect that a particle
would have exactly equal probability of escaping or being collected by the cyclone.
In other words,  particles with this settling velocity are collected with 50% efficiency.
The  equation thus derived in equation 17, where v is the radial velocity, u. is the
peripheral velocity at i, r  is  the radius of the exit pipe, and g is the gravitational
                         £t
constant (see Figure 13).  By substituting Stoke's law for the settling velocity of the
particle, equation 7 can be derived for particle diameter d   (see equation 18),  where
                                                        D U
M is  the gas viscosity, p  is the particle density, p   is the  gas density  and the last
                       r                         O
term in parenthesis in the denominator is a simplified form of the slip correction
factor.  As  might be expected, the greatest difficulty in using these equations is
the  uncertainty in knowing the  two velocities in the cyclone.  Using the empherical
                                     -36-

-------
FIGURE 13  Schematic drawing of a cyclone showing relevant dimensions and velocities



                                   -37-

-------
data to be described later, it may be possible to use these equations with reasonable
accuracy.
       In an ideal cyclone all particles smaller than d   would escape the cyclone while
                                                   ou
all those greater would be collected.   This would lead to a vertical collection efficiency
curve.  Actual cyclones on the  other hand have S-shaped collection efficiency curves
having a straight central portion whose slope varies with cyclone geometry in an un-
known way (see Figure  14).
       The first task in a  systematic design of a size selective sampler was to de-
termine its operating constraints.  The calculated gas viscosity, density,  temperature,
humidity and particle density determined in the process variable study were used for
all calculations in the design of the cyclones.
       The major factors affecting the number of stages used in the size selective
sampler are  the range of the size  distribution to be sampled and the line width or
size resolution of each  stage.  The line width of the cyclone  is the experimental
uncertainty in knowing exactly  the collection efficiency  curve for the cyclone.

                          Cyclone Design Equations
                                        V
                                 W* =     r                          Eq. (17)
                                  18UV r
                                  	r-2	                  Eq. (18)

                                                                        . (19)
                              a*      2     2
                               d50

                            K= 0.4043+ 0.28G3Q                     Eq. (21)
                                    -38-

-------
N  C

w  .2

<«  "o

0  g

•g  -
0)  0)
<+H  03
-w  M
a  «
0  o
o  o
100





 75




 50




 25




  0
	/I


     r!  I
                  D,25% -1 I1- D,75%

                        D,50%


             Particle Diameter, D (micron)
   FIGURE 14   A comparison of the ideal and actual

                      collection efficiency
                   -39-

-------
        At best the cut point for each stage can be one line width apart over the
entire range. A more reasonable spacing, however,  would be three line widths.
In the case of a cyclone, two factors affect its resolution:  the error in controlling
the collection parameters  and the error in the calibration method.  The error in
controlling the collection parameters of the cyclone can be estimated using the method
                     g
of sensitivity analysis  described elsewhere.
        If the performance of a system can be predicted mathematically,  it is possible
using this technique to determine the variability in the operation of the system using
equation 19,  where a  is the standard deviation of the function of F(x,y) and standard
                    r
deviations a  and a  are encountered in the parameters concerning the operation of
the system.  By applying this equation to the mathematical model for the prediction of
d   , it  is possible to estimate the standard deviation of the cut-off point.  By as-
 o U
suming that cyclone dimensions do not vary, and ignoring the variations in particle
density and slip correction factor,  it is possible to derive equation 20 for the standard
deviation in d ... where the terms on the  right are the fractional errors in knowing
             o U
the absolute gas viscosity  and flow rate in the cyclone.  By assuming the flow rate
can be controlled to within 2-3% and the viscosity is known within 1-10% of the actual
values,  the variation in d   will be 2.25-10.5%.
                        oO
        For d  equal to  1  Mm, the variation in collection parameters produce a
             o u
standard deviation of 0. 02-0.1 Mm, which clearly indicates that scanning electron
microscopy will be required for calibration of the collectors.  By using the epidiaescope
described elsewhere in conjunction with the SEM, it is possible to size particles with
an accuracy equal to the resolution limit  of the SEM, or ~0.025 Mm.  However,  a
large number of particles  will have to be  counted to obtain this accuracy and a more
reasonable calibration error would be 0.1 Mm.  The sum of these errors,  then,
reduces the size of the resolution of the cyclone with d   equal to 1 Mm to  0.1-0.14 Mm.
                                                    OU
A larger d  , the size resolution will be  limited by the errors in flow and viscosity
          o u
measurements.   For d   equal to 4.5 Mm, the  size resolution will be about 0.14-0.49 Mm.
                     5 U
A more rigorous development of the sensitivity of the cyclone cut-off point to vari-
ations in the  operating parameters  indicates that the variations in wall friction may
be as significant as viscosity and flow rate changes.  Wall friction variations are
due to the deposition of particles on the cyclone walls  causing  increase drag on the
                                     -40-

-------
rotating gas.  The pressure drop across the cyclone will indicate the variations in
these parameters, therefore, the most logical way of maintaining constant d   is to
                                                                        oO
maintain a constant pressure drop across the  cyclone.
        By spacing a number of cut points along the particle size distribution obtained
during the Kansas Power and Light field test,  we determined that a size selective
sampler having seven stages and the d   's as  indicated in the optimization section,
                                    ol)
would be optimum.   Each stage is placed three line widths apart and the calculated
percent mass and surface area of the particles collected by each stage is indicated
in the table.
       Again using the size distribution obtained from the KPL test and assuming a
particle concentration of 0.1 grain/cfm,  it was possible to calculate the necessary
flow rate for each stage to collect a minimum of 10 mg during a 30-minute sampling
period.  The more efficient stages of the sampler must have a flow rate of at least
0.75 cfm to collect the necessary sample.
       Since there will be a large population of particles greater than 5 Mm in
diameter at the scrubber inlet, it will be necessary to use a precollector to remove
these particles.   The selection of the cut point for the precollector must be made with
care since a compromise must be achieved between two conflicting requirements.
The large particles must be prevented from enetering the small cyclones for large
particles.  On the other hand, d_0 for the precollector should not be so small that
                              50
there is considerable overlap between efficiency curves of the precollector and those
in some of the stages in the sampler.
       Using published collection efficiency curves  , it was possible to arrive at
a reasonable compromise between the two contradictory requirements for the
precollector.  By setting the D  for the  precollector equal to D   for stage 1, the
                             50                             90
overlap between the collection efficiency  curve for stage 1  and the precollector will
be small and the quantity of particles greater than 10 Mm entering the small cyclones
will be minimized.  From the published data we  estimated  that D  would be 1.5 times
                                                             *J U
greater than D  for stage  1 which leads  to a D   for the precollector of 6. 75 Mm.
              O U                             1} U
D  for the precollector will be slightly larger than 10 Mm.
                                   -41-

-------
       This produced some overlap with stage 1, but the small error caused can
be corrected by using the particle size information obtained by weighing the pre-
collcctor catch.
       Now that the design criteria for the sampler have been developed, it is
necessary to determine the geometry and size of cyclone which meet these  requirements.
In order to develop as accurate a method as possible for a design of cyclones,  a
considerable literature  search was performed.   Our early attempts at cyclone design
were based on the prediction equation developed by Rosin and Rammler.  This includes
the number of turns the gas makes in the cyclone to estimate the cut-off point of the
cyclone  .   A cyclone was designed and constructed using the  geometric configuration
                                     12
given by the U. S.  Public Health Service   (see Table 11B).  Although no direct method
exists for measuring the number of turns of the gas in a cyclone,  an attempt was
made to estimate it based on the pressure drop across  the cyclone.
       The results of the pressure drop tests on the  small cyclone proved un-
satisfactory as no sound relationship between the pressure drop in the cyclone and
the number of turns could be developed.  As a result, equations using the number of
gas turns in the cyclone for predicting performance were abandoned.  We also de-
                                                                   13
termined that the prediction model for pressure drop developed by First   could not be
used for small cyclones since it was only possible  to fit First's equation to our
data for pressure drop by allowing a constant of proportionality, K, in the equation
to vary with flow rate.
       By fitting a least squares polynomial to the pressure drop data, we found that
K varied with Q according to equation 21.
                             ,   r      i ^              u   13,14,15,16    ,   .
       After reviewing the work of several German researchers            , a design
technique was developed which allowed the adjustment of all cyclone parameters and
the optimization of cyclones for the collection of specific size particles.
                                   -42-

-------
                 Dimensions and geometry of a small cyclone based on U.S.P.H.S.
                 design (for definition of variables, see Figure 15)

                             r  =0.142"
                             h  = 6r  =0.850"
                              o     1
                             r  =4r  = 0.568"
                             h  = 16r = 2.272"
                             h  = 16r = 2. 272"
                              i*      JL
                             r  = 2r  =0.284"
                              ft     J.
                             r, = r, = 0.142"
                              4    1
       The optimization process consists of adjusting the various dimensions of a
cyclone so that the energy losses in a cyclone are minimized while maintaining a
constant cut-point.  There are three advantages to be gained by using such an op-
timization process: first of all, no more work  than necassary is expended by the
cyclone air stream to remove particles of a given size.  A minor result of this
is smaller pump size  requirements.   More importantly,  greater energy losses
could yield increased  turbulance in the cyclone  and large deviations from predicted
performance.  We would also expect that a cyclone with minimum turbulence would
have a very sharp collection efficiency curve.   Lastly, the optimization design
method combines all the dimensions of the cyclone together.  For example, adjust-
ments in one dimension allow more convenient construction, as appropriate adjust-
ment of other dimensions can be made to maintain a constant cut-point.
       This theoretical approach is similar to an empherical method developed
            17
by Stairmand   for determining the optimum geometry for a cyclone.  Stairmand
injected a dye  into  an  operating, transparent cyclone and observed its vortex.
By adjusting various cyclone  dimensions he was able to obtain a  stable vortex.
The instabilities in the vortex indicate an increase in the energy loss for a given
collection efficiency in the cyclone.
                                    - 43 -

-------
                     0.2  0.4   0.6  0.8
FIGURE 15  The relationship between a ,  A, and b/r  from
              the measurements of Muschelknautz and Brumer.
                            -44-

-------
      3.5.  Theory of cyclone optimization
       The following discussion on the theory of cyclone optimization will be limited
to a rudimentary discussion of the major features.  A critical review of the flow
in a cyclone leading to the determination of the collection efficiency has been given
by First.  Extensive measurements of flows in cyclones made with a directional
pitot are also reported by First.
       To use the optimization process, one needs to know the basic relationships
concerning flow and pressure drop  in cyclones.  Experimental investigations have
shown that flow  into the separating  chamber through a tangentially attached pipe
causes the jet to be constricted and therefore results in an increase in  gas velocity
practically without any energy loss.  Mathematically, the constriction  is  described
by
                                       V
                                  Ua=^f                           Eq. (22)

Earth  derived a  correction factor, a, from an analysis of impulse and friction
moments which  relates the geometry of the inlet to the  constriction,
                                     V •  r
                                *=-^7~                          Eq. (23a)
                                      a'   3
or
                                       r3
                                  a1 =a—                          Eq. (23b)
                                         e
Measurements by  Muschelknautz  and Brumer have shown that the ratio  of  inlet to
outlet cross sectional areas, A, effects  the value  of a.

                                   A = —                           Eq. (24)
                                       a2
The  values of a used  in our designs are taken from the  data in reference 10 for  slot-
shaped inlets  (see Figure 15).  Muschelknautz suggested that a for a circular inlet
is determined using the equivalent slot width given by the length of the side of a
square having the  same area as the circle.  However, by replacing the  height and
                                     - 45 -

-------
width dimensions of a slot by the diameter of a circle, one degree of freedom is removed
and a can no longer be determined independent of A.  Thus, a trial and error method
must be used.
       To use equation 17 to determine the critical settling velocity W*,  it is necessary
to calculate the radial velocity,  v , and the peripheral velocity at i, u..  The mean
value of v  is easily calculated from

                                 V  = 0  Q                           Eq.  (25)
                                  r  27rr2h2
       Measurements have shown that v  departs considerably from its mean value
near the bottom of the outlet pipe.  This is one likely cause of the "S" shape of the
collection efficiency curve.
       The value of u.  can be estimated from an analysis of the moments of flow in
the cyclone.  The moment of momentum,  M.,  required to produce a given u.  is the
momentum supplied by the inlet gas, M ,  less the momentum losses,  M ,  due to
                                     c                              r
wall friction.  By modeling a cyclone so that the friction surface  is unrolled and
approached by the gas as  if it were a flat plate, the wall friction moment is obtained
as
                         M  =X-u.u • Trhr.r  (y/g).                    Eq. (26)
                          r      i a     i a
This serves to define the coefficient of friction, X .  From this analysis, an equation
for u. is obtained
     i
                                           77"
                                                                    Eq. (27>
                             v.   a, a + hr TT\
                               i           e
Introducing the dimensionless parameters
                                      u.
                                 U. =—-                            Eq. (28a)
                                       i
                                      ro
                                  R = -=•                            Eq. (28b)
                                  A=—                            Eq. (28c)
                                      - 46 -

-------
                                      -T                             Eq. (28d)
                                  H. =—                             Eq. (28e)
                                       3
and substituting equation 23b into equation 27, a dimensionless equation  is obtained

                                U = — - -                       Eq. (29)
This clearly illustrates the effect of wall friction and the inlet correction factor on
cyclone velocities.  Until measurements by Muschelknutz proved otherwise, X. was
assumed to be a constant.  Frictional losses are dependent on the dust loading of
the gas and the roughness and surface area of the walls.  For small cyclones the
frictional losses caused by the suspended dust is an order of magnitude smaller
than wall friction based on experimentally verified calculations for typical dust loadings.
       Muschelknautz    has attempted to use a Nikurodse diagram to represent the
relationship between wall friction coefficients and the Reynolds number, Re, of  the
flow in a cyclone.  The Reynolds number at the cyclone walls, Re  , is  calculated
                                                              R
by ratioing the mass inertia and viscosity forces causing the wall friction of the flat
plate representing the  cyclone walls. This leads to the equation

                                     2r   v /Y ,
                         Be  = -   e   a - -                   Eq. (30)
                           'R  2h(rR[lMva/Um)2j
which can be transposed using the dimensionless cyclone parameters and the
following relations
                                                                    Eq.  (31a)
                                u   =\]u u                          Eq.  (31b)
                                 m  Y  a i
                                 v  = v./R(R-l)                      Eq.  (31c)
                                  3.   I
                                      - 47 -

-------
to                                     „
                                       Re.

                                         1                          Eq. (31d)
                           2H(R-1)[ 1 + o'A/UR (R-l)2)]
where Re. is the Reynolds number of the outlet pipe calculated.


       Based on measurements of the velocity of compressed air, oil, and water in


small cyclones, the relationship between Re  and X is shown in Figure 16.  Ac-
                                         K

cording to these measurements, wall roughness  has no affect on X for Re  < 100
                                                                     R

and the following equation can be fitted to the data,



                        x =Q(1.1787  -0.627 in ReR)                 ^ (JJ2)





During field trials with a small cyclone at TVA,  we found that the pressure drop


across the cyclone dropped steadily although  the flow rate remained constant.  A


build-up  of particle deposits on the walls was also observed,  indicating that wall


roughness may have an effect on X even for this  range of Re0.
                                                        K

       The total pressure loss for a cyclone  consists of the losses in the separating


chamber, Ap  , and the losses  in the cylinder volume below the outlet tube,  Ap.:
            6                                                            1



                                  P2  2        P2 2

                       Ape = ^a + T V "  ^i+ TUi *                Eq' (33a)





                       Ap. = (p. + ~uf) - (p  + -^vf)                Eq. (33b)
                          1     L   Lt   \     111   £t  I
                        Ap = Ap + Ap.                              Eq. (33c)
                                6     1



The pressure loss in the separation chamber was calculated by Earth as the difference


of the speed in the intake and discharge of the assumed friction surface:
                                                                    Eq.  (34)
                                     - 48 -

-------
   10
     -1
 a
 o
o
o
4->
a
£  10
a>
o
   10
     -3
                                  A
n
            4
                                                                   III
                                                                = 6x1)
                                                         2.6 x 10~5 to (
                                                                       ,-3
                            x H
                                -4
                                 Re0,  Reynolds Number
                                    ri
                 FIGURE 16    Dependence of the wall friction coefficient \
                               on the Reynolds number and the relative wall
                               roughness ks/ro. The relative wall roughness
                               is the ratio of particle diameter deposited on
                               the wall to the cyclone radius.

             Range I:  Measurements with silicone  oil M20
             Range II: Measurements with water
             Range HI: Measurements with compressed air of 2 to 13 atm.
                                         - 49 -

-------
 By defining a dimensional pressure drop coefficient as
                                  =	0	                        Eq" (35)
                                    Y-vV2g
 and substituting equations 28, 29 and 34, we get

The much larger loss of the outlet pipe pressure, Ap., and the corresponding loss
coefficient t,. are determined from the measurements of Muschelknutz.  The de-
pendence of the loss coefficient on Re. and U is shown in Figure 17.  To allow
computer assistance in the calculative procedure,  a polynomial was fit to the
curve for Re. = 2000.
                         Api                           2
                    t,. =—	 = 2.571 + 2.542u  + 1. 724u             Eq. (37)
                      1  vf/2g
which fits the data to within ±6%.  The values of Re. for the cyclones designed for
the sampler were all close enough to 2000 to allow the use of equation 37.
       Specifying the three parameters H, R, and  U completely defined a cyclone
since all the other variables can be derived from the above relationship  if Re. or,
more properly, the flow rate,  is given.  Several types of cyclones having different
values of the three free parameters,  different size and pressure loss can be de-
signed which will solve a particular dust removal requirement.  The choice of cyclone
type then must be based on size and pressure loss.  To determine which cyclone
from a group having equal volume has the  lowest pressure loss, two parameters are
introduced which  serve as evaluation criteria for designing an optimum cyclone:

                                                                    Eq. (38)
                                      *v*
                                     U*V
                                B* =-                          Eq.  (39)
                                   -50-

-------
          100
                                             E
                                         v\
          to
                                    Cjiculated zee. to
                                71	W.BJilh/7/  p
FIGURE 17        Pressure loss coefficients of sharp-edged
                  outlet pipes as a function of the relative
                  inner peripheral velocities and the Re num-
                  ber according to measurements.
                          -51-

-------
 The representative velocity v* is calculated from

                                 v*=—&j-                          Eq. (40)

 where

                                r* =  (r h)                           Eq. (41)

 This velocity is related to the frontal face area of a cyclone of diameter r* and
 is proportional to the actual velocities  in the cyclone.  The parameter £*  indicates
 the effect of an increased pressure loss due to the result of an increased removal
 efficiency, as reflected by larger v*'s.
       Comparing two cyclones of the same radius, (e.g., equal face area and equal
 gas throughput and therefore equal v*; also  identical separation performances as
 expressed by the settling velocity, W*(  of the particles collected with 50% efficiency)
 the respective  separation index, B*, will also bo identical, therefore, the unit
 having a lower pressure loss or £* has to be considered as better.  By proper substitution
 of the above equations,  the performance can be  obtained in the form:

                                                                     Eq. (42)
                               B*=	r-TT                       Eq. (43)
                                   4H.HR U
                                      i

       The optimization process consists of first estimating the wall friction coefficient,
X, and then selecting values of  B*, H, R, H. to solve equation 43 for U.  Once U has
been determined,  t,  and  A  T can be determined.  By successive iterations based on
values of H and R and H.,  values of £* can be scanned to find the minimum.
       After the dimensionless cyclone has been designed,  it is necessary to calculate
the required cyclone radius to collect particles of a given settling velocity for a given
flow rate, Q.  The following relationship between these variables has been derived:
                                            1/3
                            r  (QW*R/277gB*)                         Eq. (44)
                             O

                                    -52-

-------
All cyclone dimensions can now be calculated.  The value of Re   calculated for the
cyclone is then used to estimate a new value of X to evaluate the original estimate.
If X is not accurate, the optimization process is repeated using the new value of X .
       Values of B* are chosen arbitraily.  From inspection of equation 23  it is
clear that small values of B* correspond to small values of W*.  In other words,
to collect small particles, a cyclone must be designed which has  a small B*.  Com-
plete freedom of choice does not exist however if R is too small or x  too large for
a given B*, as the cyclone inlet area approaches  zero.  To obtain high spinning
velocity in such a cyclone the design procedure requires the inlet velocity to approach
infinity.
       An example of the optimization procedure is given below by the computer output
(Table 12) for the design of cyclone T-2A.   In this case the minimum  value of £* occurs
for R = 3 and H = 23.  However, by accepting slightly less (6%) than optimum perfor-
mance, a shorter and therefore more easily constructed cyclone  is obtained by using
R = 3.5 and H = 13.
       Table 13 gives the values of important parameters for the three cyclone types
designed by this method.
      3.6.  Experimental evaluation of a sampling cyclone
       The TVA field trial was the first experimental test of the  optimization process
as applied to  small cyclones.  A high efficiency cyclone designated T-1A was designed
and constructed for the test.  The important dimensions for this cyclone are listed
in Table 14.   Since X  is dependent on the Reynolds Number in the cyclone, both  X
and U vary with flow.   Cyclone T-1A was designed during the early development
stages of the  optimization procedure and as a result of some errors the cyclone  is
not optimum.  The value of a' was assumed to be 1 based on past experience with
cyclones  having R = 3; however, this is not  accurate for R = 8. Actually a'  is less than
1 and thus the indicated inlet radius is far too small.
                                   -53-

-------
Table 12.     The computer printout for the optimization calculations for cyclone
             T-2A.  The numbers inputed after the question are the values of R,
             B*,  \ ,  and (I-I-H.).  The five columns of output are the values of H
             scanned and the corresponding values of the parameter  £*, the di-
             mensionless pressure drop  C>  inlet ration A a' and peripheral velo-
             city U.
What are R, B, Lambda, and H-H. (must be
i
H XI*xl04 Zeta
5 1.9 ******
21 1.7 25.327
23 1.5 19.858
25 1.4 16.249
27 1.3 13.729
29 1.2 11.893
31 1.2 10.503
33 1.1 9.435
35 1.1 8.584
37 1.1 7.897
39 1.1 7.333
What are E, B, Lambda, and H-H. (must be
H XI*xl04 Zeta
5 3.3 ******
11 1.9 40.734
13 1.4 23.665
15 1.1 16.485
17 1.0 12.679
19 0.98 10.375
21 0.96 8.854
23 0.95 7.787
What are R, B, Lambda, and H-H. (must be
H XI* x 104 Zeta
5 8.0 ******
7 4.5 ******
9 1.7 32.064
11 1.2 17.941
13 1.1 12.563
15 1.0 9.814
17 1.0 8.177
What are R, B, Lambda, and H-H. (must be
H XI*xl04 Zeta
5 15.0 ******
7 3.2 59.925
9 1.6 21.321
11 1.3 13.152
13 1.2 9.741
15 1.2 7.909
< 5) ?

FA1
-.195
.367
.428
.489
.550
.611
.671
.732
.792
.853
.913
< 5) ?
FA'
-.168
.325
.465
.602
.738
.873
1.007
1.141
< 5) ?
FA'
-.117
.192
.447
.687
.921
1.152
1.381
< 5) ?
FA'
-.104
.318
.671
1.004
1.329
1.650
2.5, 1E-4, .038, 4

U
8.944
1.059
.957
.873
.803
.743
.691
.647
.607
.572
.541
3, 1E-4, .038, 4
U
7.454
1.899
1.541
1.297
1.121
.987
.882
.797
3.5, 1E-4, .038, 4
U
6.389
3.117
2.130
1.628
1.321
1.118
.961
4, 1E-4, .041, 4
U
5.590
2.728
1.863
1.425
1.156
.973
                                   -54-

-------
Table 13
Cyclone Dimensions
Cyclone Type
Parameter
B*
«*
R
H
A ,
a
u
C
hl
h2
h3
h4
rl
r2
r3
r4
b
e
Table 14






T-1B
2.5 x 10~5
6.2xl04 1
7
17
2.167
0.961
12.56
0.306
0.996 .
0.230
	
0.080
0.077
0.536
0.092
	
24°
Parameters for cyclone
H = 15
R = 8
Hi = 11
U = 1. 133
B = 2.5 x 10~5
X = 0.040
A = 2. 24
T-2A
1C'4
. 1 x 104
3.5
13
0.921
1.321
15.45
0.826
1.859
0.620
	
0.198
0.207
0.723
0.250
	
1415'
T-1A with
r3 =
r2 =
rl =
4 =
hl =
e =
T-3A
7.5 x 10~4
1.3 x 103
2
7
0.822
1.992

2.708
2.031
2.031
1.720
	
0.677
1.500
0.677
0.750
22°
Q = 1 cf m
0.559"
0.070"
0.177"
0.209"
0.768"
0.279"
31°
                                -55-

-------
        The results and procedures for the TVA trials are fully reported elsewhere.
 The theoretically predicted cut-off point was 0.43 Mm and 1 cfm with a pressure drop
 of 33. G" of HO.  The actual values  achieved were 0. 74 Mm and 26" of HO.  The
             M                                                       ^
 possible causes for this descrepancy are two-fold.  According to theory and the
 measurements  of Muschelknautz, the cut-off point of the cyclone varies with (1/r  )  '  .
                                                                             tt
 These reported measurements were made for cyclones having values of R = 2 to 4.
 In data obtained by First for cyclones with R = 1.5 to 3, the total mass efficiency
                              0.2
 for a cyclone varies with (1/r )   .   However, these two results are not directly
                            £1
 comparable because of differences in the way cyclone performance was measured.
 It is possible however that beyond some point an  increase in R (smaller r ) will
                                                                     Lt
 not actually produce a proportionate increase in efficiency as  predicted by theory.
 Measurements  of cyclone  T-2B with R = 3 will  reinforce this point.
       Another difficulty is the undersized inlet pipe.  Since a' is smaller than assumed,
 A and therefore r, must be larger to obtain the optimum value of A  ,. The smaller
                1                                              a
 r  causes the inlet velocity to be much higher than required.  Ideally, the inlet
 velocity should equal  the peripheral  velocity, u., of the vortex which is set primarily
 by r  and Q.  The flow in the cyclone will be undisturbed if these conditions are set.
    o
 It may be possible that the increased inlet velocity produces enough turbulence to reduce
 the efficiency of the cyclone.  The lower than predicted pressure drop in the cyclone
 may indicate that this is not the case since increased turbulence should increase the
 pressure drop.
       A theoretical evaluation of the effect of  increasing the wall friction,  X ,  indicates
 that this factor alone  cannot account for the reduced pressure  drop.   However, as
pointed out earlier, X was  found to be a function of wall roughness in these small
cyclones.   The  measurements of Muschelknautz show that  X is only a function of
Re_. when Re   > 100.  Even at a flow rate of 1  cfm, Re  = 28.5 for cyclone T-1A.
   K        1\                                        i\
       A measure of  the steepness of the collection efficiency curve for a device
 is given by the  geometric standard deviation of the collection efficiency S where
                       Particle diameter at 50% efficiency
                      Particle diameter at 84.13% efficiency
 We arc pleased to reveal that the optimization procedure for the cyclone design produced
 a very steep efficiency curve having  a geometric standard deviation of 0.94.  This
                                    -5G-

-------
                                                      17 18  19
 surpasses the performance reported for several cyclones  '   '   as well as for
                  20
 inertial impactors
     4.  Review of Laboratory Equipment
      4.1.  Wind tunnel and laboratory preparation
       Several modifications were made to the wind tunnel after it was  moved from
 Gainesville, Florida and reassembled in our facility at 2600 South Michigan Avenue,
 Chicago,  Illinois, to allow better performance (see Figure 18).  The sections of wind
 tunnel are supported by small screw jacks and sealed together using silicon rubber
 o-rings.  Two difficulties in tunnel operation were experienced  in Florida:
       1)  to obtain low velocities in the wind tunnel, the opposed vane damper
           had to be shut completely which caused high particle deposition on
           the damper, and
       2)  short-term variations in air velocity in the tunnel interfered with
           turbulence measurements.
 An old auto transmission was therefore modified and connected to the fan drive to
 allow a reduction of air velocities without the use of the damper (see Figure 19).
 In addition, to determine the source of the velocity variations., a tachometer was
 installed on the prop to measure prop speed.   The two highest gears in the car's
 transmission produced velocities of 4372 and 3012 feet per minute at room temperature.
 Using the tachometer, we determined the prop speed in high gear varied from 1880
 to 1876 rpm in a period of from 5-8 seconds.  This corresponded to a velocity
 variation of 53. 9  to 54. 6 miles per hour at room temperature  and accounted for
 approximately half of the velocity variations encountered in Florida.  The other
half was due to temperature variations caused by the large dead band in the temperature
 controller used on the heat exchanger. A new solid-state temperature controller
was installed which reduced the temperature dead band from 10T to 1°F.  The old
controller has been installed as a redundant safety device and  senses the temperature
 inside the heat exchanger by turning off the gas supply and setting off an alarm when-
ever the heat exchanger rises above its safety limit, 550T. This prevents burn
out of heat exchanger even  if the gas supply is accidentally left on after the wind tunnel
has been turned off.  A second solid-state tempcratui-e controller has been installed

                                   -57-

-------
FIGURE 18  Overall view of the wind-tunnel test facility
                      - 58 -

-------
FIGURE  19  Modified auto transmission installed
                on the wind tunnel
                - 59 -

-------
as a dew point sensor to control humidity in the wind tunnel.  The dew point sensor is
an ordinary thermal couple surrounded by glass wool which is soaked in water from
a small reservoir.  Air from the wind tunnel  is withdrawn by a small probe and blown
over the wet bulb.  The dew point in the wind  tunnel is controlled by regulating the
amount of water fed into the tunnel from a small reservoir with a  solenoid valve con-
trolled by the dew point sensor.  The amount  of water which must be added to the
wind tunnel to obtain the conditions that will exist at the scrubber  of the  TVA has been
calculated  and is shown in Table 15.
   Table 15
Amount of water required to maintain a given humidity in
the wind tunnel
Position
Inlet
Outlet.
before reheating
after reheating
Dry
Temperature (°F)
300

128
250
Wet
Temperature (°F)
112

124
137
Relative
Humidity (%)
1.76

90.5
7.73
Amount
of Water
Required (ml)
257

570
612
       The participate concentrations which occur at the scrubber site will be simu-
lated in the wind tunnel by adding glass beads.  The amount of glass beads required
to obtain the expected dust loadings are detailed in Table 16.
       Since the size-selective sampler will be calibrated using microscopic techniques
counting single particles, it is important that the glass beads enter the sampler as
single particles and not as agglomerates.  Agglomeration causes errors in the collection
efficiency calibrations and occurs for particles smaller than 5 ^m due to electro-
                                                           21
static charging.  A bi-polar ion generator described by Whitby   has been added to the
wind tunnel to neutralize electrostatic  charges on the particulate matter.  This de-
                                                           +11                 3
vice uses a Corona discharge  to create an air jet containing 10    bi-polar ions/cm
which are injected into the wind tunnel.
                                   -GO-

-------
       Table 16
Amount of flyash and limestone required in the wind tunnel to
maintain a given particle concentration
                                      Inlet
                                                  Outlet
    Condition
    Particulate    Weight of flyash     Participate    Weight of flyash
   Concentration   and limestone      Concentration    and limestone
      (lb/ft3)        needed (g)           (lb/ft3)        needed (g)
  0% excess limestone
     injection

  0% excess dolomite
     injection

150% excess limestone
     injection

150% excess dolomite
     injection
      8.2x 10
             -4
     7.8x 10
             -4
     1.3 x 10
             -3
     1.2x 10
             -3
 93

 88


147.5


133.6
8.35x 10
                         -6
7.23 x 10
         -6
1.22x 10
         -5
l.llx 10
         -5
0.95

0.82


1.39


1.26
                                       -61-

-------
        Two difficulties in obtaining a satisfactory sample of glass beads have been
 encountered and solved. The beads obtained from a manufacturer must be separated
 to obtain uniform density by using the density gradient tube.  The density gradient
 separation technique developed during a previous contract had to be modified because
 absorbed vapor on the glass beads altered the density of the tube and a gradient
 could not be maintained. Oven drying the beads removed the absorbants.
        We also found that these beads contained no particles smaller than 0.9 Mm in
 diameter.  A sample of glass beads was purchased from Particle Information Service
 which contained a large number of submicrometer particles, the smallest of which
 is 0.3 Mm in diameter. A spinning riffler was designed and constructed to produce
 a uniform mixture of glass beads. The riffler was constructed from a discarded ro-
 tating display table and seven pie-shaped plastic dishes. A vibrating hopper filled
 with glass beads feeds the material into the pie-shaped dishes which are rotating
 beneath the hopper.
       Since the size  resolution of most size-selective sampler is quite high,  it was
 necessary to improve the Climet light scattering particle counter for sampler testing
 (see Figure 20).  The resolution was improved in two ways:  the old tungsten filament
 light source has been  replaced by a quartz iodine lamp with about twice the illumination
 and a new photo multiplier high voltage power supply has been installed with a far
better voltage stability than the old supply.  These modifications reduce the signal
 to noise ratio and therefore improve the size resolution by a factor of 3.  The orifice
 in the sampling section of the  Climet has been increased from 0.42 to 0.72 inches in
 diameter to allow use of the Climet at flow rates of 0. 8 cfm.
       Since we found  that optical microscopy could not be successfully used with
the automatic image analyzer  for particle size distribution analysis in the submicro-
meter range, it was necessary to construct an epidiascope attachment for the analyzer
to view photomicrographs taken with the scanning electron microscope and determine
the particle  size distribution of the particles in the  micrograph.  The epidiascope
uses a 50 mm camera lens  to  image 35  mm  negatives on the face of the  TV camera
tube.  The 35 mm negatives are held in  a special negative carrier and illuminated
by transmitted light.  A size standard is included on each film roll taken with the
                                   -G2-

-------
            p  *  »   *
FIGURE 20   Climet light-scattering particle counter
             with the new photomultiplier power supply
             and a digital volt meter for setting pre-
             cise discriminator levels
                       - 63 -

-------
 scanning electron microscope and allows calibration of the HMC and eliminates the
 source of inaccuracy.  Any size standard can be used, but for these analyses we
 used a 5 Mm diameter electron microscope aperture.   A prime calibration of the SEM
 is made using a replica diffraction grading of known accuracy.  In this way size
 distributions of particles greater than 0.05 Mm can be  obtained with an accuracy of ±5%.
      4.2. EMC evaluation
       As was reported in our March progress report, the FIMC automatic image
analyzing computer was ordered and installed in March.
       The computer was connected to a Leitz research polarizing microscope equipped
with a special set of plan apochromat objectives.   This scope allowed the computer
to resolve details in the sample much better than would be possible with ordinary achro-
mats or fluoride  objectives.
       So that the instrument could be evaluated correctly, we prepared several
different type samples in several different mediums.   Each sample was counted
several times and finally the same areas were sized and compared.  Different types
of illumination—bright field, dark field and monochromatic light—were also used.
       Through experimentation we found that the best medium is  a viscous liquid
with a high refractive index (n); but yet relatively inert and noncorrosive.
       The best medium was Aroclor®5442,  a chlorinated polyphenol resin manu-
factured by Monsanto Laboratories.  The refractive index is 1.662 which is actually
not high enough for this type sample.  We have found that the small particles, less
than 0.5 Mm,  cannot be  detected by the computer because the light  rays are not
diffracted enough to provide good contrast between the  particle  and background
light.
       Statistically the  I1MC unit has an overall accuracy  of about  7% and this is
only achieved under good sample preparation techniques.
       Because the system is connected to a light  microscope,  there is automatically
a 1-3% increase in the particle  size due to the diffraction rings surrounding the
particle.  However,  these diffraction rings prevent a perfect image at the edge  of
the particle.   There  is no  way to negate these  rings without losing  the image quality
required to activate the automatic image analyzer.  With good plan aprochromatic
                                   -04-

-------
objectives and low magnification,  these rings are reduced in size with a 0.5-1.0%
increase in size of the particle and with good plan aprochromatic objectives and
high magnification the size increase is 1-2%, and with an achromat objective the
increase is 3-4%.
       Another factor which must be considered is  the sample preparation.  The
samples for analysis must be taken from different areas of the filter so that the
cumulative sample analyzed is as  accurately representative as possible.  The com-
puter contains a built-in particle size discrimination factor.  Line voltage variation,
internal binary noise, discriminator settings and operator error add together an-
other 3% to the total of 7%.
       One of these problems we have been able to  eliminate. By using a scanning
electron microscope (SEM) for the image requirements,  the associated error re-
duces to less than 0. 25% for the image requirements.
    5.  Field Test: Kansas Power and Light Company
      5.1  Background
       The Kansas Power and Light Company (KPL), Lawrence, Kansas,  uses a
pulverized coal boiler with injected limestone and wet scrubber to control SO
emissions.  This unit,  designed by Combustion Engineering, Inc., was under
test by APCO's division of compliance, Durham, North Carolina.  Emissions
testing for compliance was performed by York Research on  22-26 March 1971.
Waldon Research also had permission to test SO monitors the same week we
                                             £i
performed our experiments.
      5. 2.  Experimental plan
       Our experiments were planned to obtain:
       1)  The amount of particle deposition in sampling tubes as a function
          of  their size and flow rate,
       2)  changes in particle mass and size distribution due to  an isokinetic
          sampling,
       3)  the accuracy of the Andersen Stack Sampler as a size selective
          impactor, and
       4)  the size range  efficiency of two cyclone  samplers.
                                   -05-

-------
      5.3.  Description of KPL tests
        5.3.1.  Time priorities
        R. Battles, H. Humecki and T. Smith of McCrone Associates met with
 Mr. J. Rohm of APCO, coordinator for all testing, and Mr. M. Funston, plant
 manager for KPL, 22 March 1971 at KPL.  Mr. Rohm informed us that York
 Research would test at both scrubber outlet stacks, occupying all the sampling
 ports all day Tuesday and until noon on Wednesday and Thursday.  Walden Research
 would be sampling the inlet during this time and the outlet on Wednesday, Thursday
 and Friday afternoons, simultaneously with us, and at noon on Friday the unit would
 be switched from coal to gas.
        This allowed us a day and a half at the outlet and two days at the inlet.   Our
 original sampling time plan  required three  days at the outlet with a day and a
 half at the inlet.  This time  discrepancy plus several equipment breakdowns cut
 heavily into completing all the planned tests.
       5.3.2.  Completed tests
       The sequence of tests were arranged to conform to the time available.   Our
 tests  and operating experiences are  described below in chronological order.
       (a) Tuesday—cyclone samplers at inlet
       Our sampling train consisted of two  external cyclones in series, followed
by a filter.  We intended sampling the scrubber inlet for one hour with this train,
using a one-half inch diameter nozzle and probe at a 5.5 cfm sampling rate.  The
nozzle diameter and sampling rate were chosen—based on our preliminary dust de-
position data—to minimize particle deposition in the probe.  At this  sampling rate
the large cyclone would have a 50% collection efficiency of 5 microns and the second
cyclone would collect particles down in the submicron size range.  Both these
cyclones and the filter holder were placed inside the sampling box on loan from APCO.
For a water trap, we connected a heat exchanger,  three bubblers and a silica gel
trap in series.  A 5 cfm carbon vein pump was followed by a dry gas meter and a
calibrated orifice meter.
       The ducts to the sampler scrubber inlet were horizontal and, since there
                                   -66-

-------
was no room to insert the probe into the side of the duct, dust collection with the
cyclones could not fall into the collection pots; but instead remain inside the cyclones.
This consequently caused a re-entrainment of the particles collected.  Since our
large cyclone was designed for laboratory use,  it is actually inconvenient for field
use because of the method for fastening the cover.  If it is necessary for a  cyclone
to be taken apart for cleaning, an easily removable clamp should be used to hold
the cyclone together,  We obtained a 49-minute  duration cyclone and back up filter
sample from the  inlet.
       Several other minor problems were encountered; these resulted from the
design of these particular cyclones.  The pressure  drop across the sampling train
was so great that it was impossible to sample at a rate greater than 2.5 cfm.  Another
problem was that our freon cooled heat exchanger plugged with ice due to high humidity
of the inlet gas.   Also, the swivel adapter connecting the 0.50 inch probe to the 1.0
inch inside diameter cyclone  inlet caused significant deposition at their junction.  A
considerable quantity of dust  deposited immediately before the adapter. Also, the
transition from the very large outlet diameter of the first cyclone to  the small inlet
diameter of the second cyclone  caused some deposition.  The practice  of using a
probe nozzle whose diameter is smaller than the transport tube diameter causes in-
creased dust deposition in the tube, and should not be used for accurate sampling.
This dust deposition is mainly due  to the decreased velocity  through the carrier tube.
       (b)  Tuesday—Andersen Sampler at the inlet
       After we had completed  sampling with the series cyclones,  we connected  the
large cyclone in front of the Andersen sampler.  A 0. 25 inch inside diameter probe was
used with a 0.75 cfm flow rate to minimize deposition in the sampling tube.  We
attempted sampling with this  train  at the scrubber inlet, but the large cyclone  came
apart.  As a result, further attempts to sample with the large cyclone at the scrubber
inlet were abandoned.
                                   -67-

-------
       (c) Wednesday—Andersen sampling at outlet
       Wednesday afternoon we were able to move our equipment to the scrubber
 outlet and begin sampling with the Andersen Stack Sampler.  The sampling train
 consisted of a 0. 25 inch probe and nozzle connected to the inlet of the Andersen
 Sampler followed by a filter and two heat exchanger cyclones to remove water
 vapor.  The heat exchanger cyclones were cooled with a bottle of freon.  The sam-
 pling port and position we used was the same as port number 3 sampled by York
 Research, and was 23.6  inches inside the stack.
       The Andersen Stack Sampler was used for three sampling times:  1, 4 and
 10 minutes at a flow rate of 0.75 cfm.  Several difficulties were encountered in
 sampling with this train. The Andersen Sampler and back-up filter were heated
 with temperature controlled heating tapes and since the sample box had no thermal
 baffling,  it was necessary to surround the impactor and filter holder with glass
 fiber insulation to prevent overheating the other components in the sampling box.
 Since the heating tapes were secured with metal clamps, it was cumbersome re-
 moving the tapes from the then hot components so the impactor plates could be removed.
 Also the  thermal couple for the temperature controller was located at the outlet
 of the filter holder.  As  a result,  unless gas is coming through the filter holder,
 the  thermocouple is isolated from the Andersen impactor and filter holder.  Thus,
 the  temperature of the impactor and filter holder will be considerably higher than
 the  set point of the temperature regulator.  The 0. 25 inch diameter probe used for
 sampling with the impactor was cleaned between each of the three runs and little
 deposition was observed.
       The small cyclone heat exchanger froze and plugged during the four minute
 sampling run, necessitating a rerun. Although the gas temperature stayed between
 SOT and 40 T,  the small inlet diameter caused the plugging,  since the freon flowed
 through the small (second) cyclone cooling jacket and then through the larger cyclone
heat exchanger.  The two cyclones were connected in series, both for freon coolant
 and for sampling gas, however, it was  impossible to maintain a temperature in the
 first cyclone lower than  100°F, even when the second cyclone indicated a temperature
 of SOT.  The cooling jackets should have  been connected in parallel.  Alternately, a
                                   -68-

-------
 higher boiling freon could be used to prevent clogging the heat exchangers.  The life
 of the 12 pound freon bottle was roughly one sampling hour.
       Upon changing the impactor plates, we observed that the particles formed small
 mounds just below each jet.  Each plate was placed in a petri dish along with its
 spacer ring for transport for lab analysis. This method of packing the particle
 loaded plates is not completely satisfactory since some of the particles  could be
 dislodged during transportation.  If time permitted, a transporter container could
 have been made to hold the entire set of plates and spacers similar in a way as they are
 held in the impactor.
       (d)  Thursday—Particle deposition in probes at the outlet
       On Thursday morning the sampling trains were assembled so that two deposition
 studies could be performed. Two large filter holders were placed side by side in
 the APCO sampling box and the probes were connected to the filter holders with
 swagelock fittings.  One sampling train consisted of the APCO pump and dry gas
                                  r
 meter, while the other was a standard RAC train.  Two bubblers, connected in series,
 were used in each train to remove water vapor.  By Thursday afternoon York Research
 had completed their sampling and we had completed assembly of the two sampling
 trains.  We attempted to calibrate the orifice meter in the APCO train,  but the dry
 gas meter failed.  After some searching we were able to find a small wet test meter
 that Combustion Engineering had used, and we then finally calibrated the orifice meter
 at 0.75 cfm.  As a result of the dry gas meter failure, we were not able to accomplish
 any simultaneous iso- and aniso-kinetic sampling Thursday.
       The week before our field sampling we tested the dry gas meter  in the APCO
 train and determined that it was in error by 2.5%.  We also discovered  two leaks
 in the APCO train which were corrected.  It was necessary to operate the RAC
 unit some 30-60  minutes in the field to free the dry gas meter in that train. This
problem has never been observed in the lab, but only occurs when temperatures
 are low, but still above freezing.
                                  -69-

-------
        (c) Friday—Particle deposition in probes at the outlet
        On Friday morning we started early and were able to perform a number of probe
 deposition studies.  One tube was used at a flow rate of 0.75 cfm at position number
 3 in the stack for a sampling time of 30 minutes.  One filter sample was also collected
 using a 0.375 inch diameter probe at the flow rate of 3  cfm and a sampling time of
 30 minutes.  Since this filter sample was fairly representative of the particles in
 the stack,  it was used to determine the particle size distribution.
      5.4.  Scrjes cyclone efficiency
       As  we have already discussed, only one 49 minute test run was completed with
 the series  cyclones at the inlet on Tuesday since we found that the system had several
 problems—one of which is design.  The cyclones were  designed to be used in an
 upright position during the sampling.  However, since the inlet port was on top of the
 duct, it was necessary to lay the sampling train on its side.  As a result we found
 a great amount of particle deposition inside of each  cyclone.  The transport tubes and
 connections also aided in particle deposition.   This  allowed particle re-entrainment
 and reduced the cyclone's efficiency.  Nearly all of the small particles were allowed
 to pass through as well as some of the large particles.
       We  have reached these conclusions by direct observation of the deposition
 and a comparison of the laboratory tested efficiency of 85% and the  less than 30%
 efficiency found in the KPL test.
       From these conclusions we feel that the field test efficiency could have
 been increased to a realistic efficiency given more time to better prepare ourselves
 about the actual source.
      5.5.  Probe deposition
       On Thursday and Friday we performed  tests  with four probes of different
diameters to  learn about probe deposition.  As we had learned from our laboratory
tests, particle deposition is decreased as the probe  transport tube diameter decreases.
                                    -70-

-------
       This was found to be true in the field test at KPL when the tubes are horizontal.
We also found that there is an increased particle deposition when the same tube is
held vertically.  The highest efficiency obtained was with a small transport tube used
with the proper nozzle diameter and held in a verticle position during sampling.  The
efficiency was determined to be approximately 98% for a 0.25 in tube held horizontally
and 87% for a 0.50 in tube which held vertically.
    6.  Field Test: Shawnee Power Plant
       A field test of the small cyclone was carried out to prove the viability of
cyclones as size selective samplers.  The test was conducted on the Zurn pilot
plant scrubber connected to unit 10 of Tennessee Valley Authority's Shawnee Power
Plant.  The pilot plant is a cyclone and scrubber connected in series to the precipitator
inlet.  During the tests limestone was injected into the boiler at a stoichiometric
ratio of 1 to 3.
       All  our sampling was  done using a standard RAG sampling train at the outlet
of the scrubber (see Figure 21).  A special 3/8 in I.D. x 2 ft long stainless  steel,
heated probe was used to heat the gas  to 275 T before  it entered cyclone T-1A.   The
dimensions of this  brass cyclone are given elsewhere  in the report.  The particles
escaping the cyclone were collected on a 90 mm, 0.25 Mm,  Solvinert filter.  These
filters were selected for evaluation because of the high tare weight and their ability
to withstand high temperatures.  The cyclone and filter holder were housed  in the
RAC sample box and heated to 275°F during sampling to prevent water  condensation.
Small pressure taps were connected to the inlet and outlet of the cyclone so  that
the pressure drop could be monitored while sampling.
       Several samples were collected,  but were later discarded because of equipment
malfunctions.  Another problem encountered was the short running time of the scrubber
during most of the  experiments.  One sample was successfully taken which allowed
an evaluation of the cyclone's performance.  During this  sample the stack gas was 127°F,
contained 9. 70% water vapor by volume and the flow rate through the cyclone was
l.Olcfm.
                                   -71-

-------
FIGURE 21  The pilot scrubber.  The sampling equipment
            used for testing the sampling cyclone is shown
            at top center and bottom left.
                     - 72 -

-------
       The sample filter was dried and weighed and the particles in the cyclone were
removed and weighed.  The cyclone collected 17.4% of the particles. Both samples
were dispersed on aluminum stubs for analysis with the Cambridge Stereoscan
scanning electron microscope.  A high contrast 35 mm film was used for the photo-
micrographs.  These photomicrographs were in turn analyzed using the epidiascope
attachment to the I1MC.   A calibration standard was photographed on each roll of
film.  The particle counts were made in groups; two hundred particles each from
five portions of the sample.  The five number distributions were converted to weight
fractions using the geometric mean particle size of each interval.   The five sets
of data were averaged and the standard deviation determined.  The  standard de-
viation estimates all the errors encountered in the counting process, including ran-
dom variations,  operator error, and instrument variations.  The results for the
filter sample and cyclone catch are shown in Tables 17 and 18 and Figure 22.
                                    - 73 -

-------
  Table 17
Filter catch size distribution*
Lower
Size
0.030
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.600
0.700
0.800
Upper
Size
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.500
0.600
0.700
0.800
0.900
Geometric
Mean Size
0.055
0.141
0.245
0.346
0.447
0.548
0.648
0.748
0.849
* The size distribution data and
filter

Lower
Size
0.058
0.383
0.766
1.150
1.535
1.923
2.305
2.690
3.070
and cyclone
Table 18
Upper
Size
0.383
0.766
1.150
1.535
1.923
2.305
2.690
3.070
3.450
catch.
Number
Fraction
0.122
0.337
0.282
0.151
0.079
0.020
0.011
0.001
****
Standard
Deviation
0.020
0.038
0.013
0.032
0.024
0.004
0.005
0.001
****
error statistics for the 1000


Weight
Fraction
0.001
0.040
0.171
0.254
0.280
0.132
0.114
0.007
****
particles

Standard
Deviation
0.000
0.010
0.029
0.047
0.062
0.012
0.050
0.017
****
counted from the

Cyclone catch size distribution*
Geometric
Mean Size
0.149
0.542
0.939
1.329
1.718
2.105
2.490
2.874
3.254
Number
Fraction
0.398
0.264
0.140
0.097
0.046
0.025
0.016
0.011
0.004
Standard
Deviation
0.021
0.021
0.026
0.018
0.006
0.010
0.003
0.001
0.003
Weight
Fraction
0.001
0.029
0.081
0.152
0.156
0.153
0.166
0.173
0.090
Standard
Deviation
0.000
0.007
0.027
0.005
0.012
0.040
0.035
0.010
0.044
The size distribution data and error statistics for the 1000 particles counted from


the filter ami cyclone catch.
                                      - 74 -

-------
                                                    Cyclone efficiency curve
o
N
CO

s
3
o
w
UI
rt
 30



 20





 10




  5




  2



  1


0.5



0.2


0.1


0.05




0.01
               Distribution of filter catch
                                                      Distribution of cyclone catch


                                                                           •3E	
                                                                               I
                      .3   .4   .5

                     FIGURE 22
                                 . (i   .7    .8   .9  1.0  1.1   1.2

                                 Size distribution of TVA samples collected

                                          with small cyclone

                                         -75-
                                                                         1.3   1.4   1.5  l.«   1.7

-------
        Calculating the size efficiency curve from the two weight fraction distributions is
 straightforward.   The mass fractional collection efficiency is defined as
                               M. - M        M
                           K = --2- =
                                   i        c     o
 Where M.,  M , and M  are the masses entering,  collected by,  and leaving the cyclones.
 The fractional collection efficiency for particles of size X is defined similarly

                                       X
Where X  and X  are the mass of particles of size X that are collected by and escape
        C      O
the cyclone.

                                X  = C M                           Eq. (29a)
                                  c    x  c

                                X  = O M                           Eq. (29b)
                                  oxo

C and O  are the mass fractions of particles of size X found in the cyclone and
  X     X
filter catch as given by the two mass distributions.  Therefore
                             EX = - ~T*~                      Eq- (30)
                              x   c  +o  Vs
                                   x    x  k

    7.  Deposition of Particles in a Horizontal Sampling Tube
       Sampling errors also result from particle deposition in the sampling line
down stream of the sampling probe.  Therefore another problem in designing a
size selective sampler is how to design a  sampling line which will minimize particle
deposition.
       Three mechanisms contribute to the total  particle deposition in a horizontal
tube:  diffusional deposition, gravitational settling and turbulent deposition. Each
of these mechanisms  is a function of several variables such as the length and size
of sampling tube, sampling time, particle size and characteristics,  Reynolds number
                       21
of the gas, and flow rate

                                   -7G-

-------
       Since many variables are involved in particle deposition, the total transport
tube problem is very difficult to analyze theoretically.  Therefore, empirical data
will be of most value for a practical solution to the deposition problem.
       The purpose  of the preliminary experiment was to obtain information to serve
as a guide to design  a detailed field test.  It is not designed to test the significance  of
relative effect of each variable on deposition but to observe the tendency of deposition
due to variations of several important variables.
       Three types of polydisperse aerosols were tested in this experiment: the
mixture of flyash and limestone particles, fine glass beads and coarse glass beads.
The weight average sizes of these aerosols were about 11, 24 and  85 micrometers
respectively.  Figure 23 shows the schematic arrangement of equipment for  the par-
ticle deposition study.  When each experiment was completed, the  nozzle,  bend
and the tube were thoroughly cleaned with a specially  designed cleaning tube  as il-
lustrated  in  Figure 24.  A special tip with six 1/32 inch nozzles around its periphery
was attached to one end of a 3/8 in diameter x 10 ft long tube.  This end of the tube
was stuck into the sampling tube and the other end was conected to the exhaust end
of the pump  with rubber tubing.  By circulating the air through the system  at the
rate of about 5.5 cfm and moving the cleaning tube back and forth several times in
the sampling tube, the  air jet created by the nozzle was able to knock out the par-
ticles deposited in the tube.  The particles trapped in the nozzle, bend and tube and
collected by the cyclone and filter are respectively collected and weighed and the
percentage of particles that pass  through the  transport tube  is computed.  The ex-
periment for each aerosol was repeated several times by using various flow  rates
ranging from 0. 7 to  5.1 cfm and two different sizes of nozzle and transport tube:
1/2 and 1  in.
       In  summary,  the experiments were performed with the following conditions:
       a.  A mixture of flyash and limestone particles passing through a
          1 in tube with a 90°-bend of small curvature (radius of curvature=
          diameter  of  tube).
       b.  A mixture of flyash and limestone particles passing through a
          1 in tube with a 90° bend of large curvature (radius of curvatures
          8X diameter of tube).
       c.  A mixture of flyash and limestone particles passing through a
          1/2 in nozzle and 1/2 in tube.
                                    -77-

-------
                                                 FILTER
                   10'SAMPLING
                       TUBE
         90° BEND
CO
I
   AIR
   IN
•i>
                                    CYCIDNE
                ACOUSTIC
                DUST  FEEDER
                                                                               By-pass valve
                                                                                                   ORIFICE
                                                                                                    METER
                                      DRY GAS METER
                                                                     -MANOMETER
                                                                                         BY-
                                                                                         PASS
                                                                                        VALVE
                                                 FIGURE 23
                                Schematic arrangement of equipment for particle
                                     deposition study

-------
CLEANING TUBE
                            6-1/32" NOZZLES
                                                                             FILTER
                         FIGURE 24      Arrangement of equipment to clean particles deposited in
                                               the sampling tube

-------
       d.  A mixture of flyash and limestone particles passing through a
           1/2 in nozzle, a cyclone and a 1/2 in tube.
       e.  Fine glass beads passing through a 1/2 in nozzle and a 1/2  in
           tube.
       f.  Coarse glass beads passing through a 1/2 in nozzle and a 1/2 in
           tube.
The results of the experiments under various experimental conditions are shown in
Figure 25.
       From these experiments we observed that for certain types of particle samples
with a given sampling line the deposition increases progressively as the flow rate
                                                             22
decreases.  This is just contradictory to what Sehmel observed.    In  his study of
methylene blue-uranine particle deposition in a 10 ft vertical tube,  Sehmel reports
that the percent deposition within the tube increases progressively as the flow rate
increases.  Such differences are probably due to the differences in the  adhesive
characteristics, density of the particles and flow rates.  Methylene blue-uranine
is water soluble and has a density of 1.5 gm/cc  while the glass beads and flyash
are insoluble in water and have a density of about 2.5 gm/cc.  The flow rates
used ranged from 0. 7 to 5.1 cfm and are much lower than the 0.5 to 50 cfm
used by Sehmel.  We also concluded from our preliminary experiment that when a
1/2-in sampling tube with a 1/2-in nozzle is used to sample  the particles at the
scrubber inlet, a flow rate of about 2.5 cfm is required to minimize deposition.
Whereas, at the outlet about 5.5 cfm is needed.   If a flow rate of 0. 75 cfm is used with the
Andersen Stack Sampler, as recommended by its manufacturer, a transport tube with
an inside diameter of > 0.5  in should be used for minimum deposition.
       The findings obtained from this preliminary dust deposition experiment were
applied in our field test at KPL.  A one-half inch diameter nozzle and probe were
used for sampling at the wet-scrubber inlet. At a flow rate of 2.5 cfm only 4.6%
(by mass) of the particles deposited in the probe with the most depositable particles
in the range from 1 to 6 micrometers.
       One point that deserves special mention is the segregation of particles in
the sampling nozzle and the transport tube.  Visual  inspection of the samples col-
lected in the deposition  experiment indicates that particles trapped in the nozzle
were mainly limestone and those deposited in the transparent tube were mostly
flynsh.
                                    -80-

-------
        100
I
oo
                                                       Flyash + Limestone
                                                       1/2 in. tube with 1/2 in.
                                                       nozzle.
                                                                                                        Flyash + Limestone
                                                                                                       1 in.  tube
                                                                                                       90° bend with large
                                                                                                       curvature, 8D
               Large glass beads
               (Flex lite 140  mesh)
                1/2 in. tube with
                V2 in. nozzle
                                                      Fine glass beads
                                                      (Potter Bros. no. 5000)
                                                      1/2 in. tube with 1/2 in
                                                      nozzle.
                                                 Flyash + Limestone
                                                 After  cyclone
                                                 1/2 in.  tube with
                                                     in.nozzle.
                                                                                                              Flyash + Limes-
                                                                                                              tone
                                                                                                              1 in. tube
                                                                                                              90°  bend with
                                                                                                             small curvature,
                                                                                                             i n
         40  _
30
         20  _
10  _
                          FIGURE 25
                                     Deposition of particles  in horizontal sampling tube as a
                                      function of particle size and sampling conditions

-------
       Although our preliminary experiments on dust deposition provide valuable
 information on the design of a sampling line, we  recommend that further analyses
 be performed to obtain a sampling line with minimum deposition.  Since porous
                                                          23
 wall tubes have been recommended by previous investigations   we recommend that
 such a tube be considered and tested.  Such a tube has been obtained and a study
 can begin once the research funds are available.
    8.  Prediction of Sample Bias Due to Non-isokinetic Aspiration
       For particle  sampling in a stack and/or duct it is generally considered
 necessary to have isokinetic sampling conditions  in order to obtain a representative
 sample.   Studies on  sampling bias due to anisokinetic conditions can be found in
                   24, 25, 26
 various publications         .  A general conclusion from these studies is that
 the magnitude of sampling bias is related to particle size, diameter of sampling
 probe and degree of  variation from isokinetic condition.
       In the Bechtel report on sampling and analytical determinations for an alkali
 scrubbing test facility, they mention that particles larger than five micrometers
 do not get through the scrubber, and consequently that errors due  to size classi-
 fication are not introduced by anisokinetic procedures.  On the basis of this  in-
 formation, the report concludes that isokinetic sampling is not needed at a wet
 scrubber  outlet.  In order to justify this statement and determine if isokinetic  sam-
pling is really not necessary at the scrubber outlet  in this project, we performed a
 theoretical analysis of the predictive errors  of particle sampling at the wet
 scrubber  outlet.  The mathematical model describing the sampling bias presented
                     21
 in our previous report   was used to predict the bias.  The  ranges of the process
variables  mentioned  in the previous section of this report were  used to compute
the values of those variables involved in the model.   The prediction was made for
1, 5, and  10-^m particles sampled with 1/8 and 1 in nozzles, the reasonable upper
and lower limits of the proposed probe size.  The results,as shown in Figures 26,
27 and 28, show the variation of nozzle bias with velocity ratio.
                                   -82-

-------
                                                                            10 urn
          8   -
                    i      I      l       I      I       I
                                                                                 I      I
              1    1.2   1.4    1.6   1.8    2.0    2.2    2.4    2.6    2.8    3.0
                            •          Velocity ratio
0.4    0.6
                                            1-in.  nozzle diameter
                                    	1/8-in.  nozzle diameter
FIGURE 26      Comparison of predicted nozzle bias with the same sampling time
                      and nozzle cross section
                               -83-

-------
                                8  L
I
CO
                                                                                                        + 1.645
                                                                                                        Standard
                                                                                                        deviation
                                                                                                        Mean
              0.4     0.6
                      FIGURE 27
Predicted range of nozzle bias for 5-^m particles sampled with
1/8 in.  nozzle at various given velocity ratios at 90% confidence
level
                                                                  - 1.645
                                                                  Standard
                                                                  deviation
                                                                3.0

-------
I
oo
OT
I
               0.4    0.6
1.6    1.8    2.0    2.2
      Velocity ratio
                                                                                                         - 1.645
                                                                                                         Standard
                                                                                                         deviation
                                                                                                          Mean
                                                 - 1.645
                                                 Standard
                                                 deviation
2.4    2.6    2.8    3.0
                             FIGURE 28     Predicted range of nozzle bias for 5-^m particles sampled
                                            with 1-in. nozzle at various given velocity ratios at 90%
                                            confidence level

-------
        Numerically, the analysis indicates that errors due to anisokinetic sampling
 are not very significant.  For example,  at the 90% confidence level the nozzle bias
 for 5 Mm particles would be within -2 and +8.3% if one uses a 1-in nozzle with sam-
 pling velocity ranging from 0.6,and 3 times the free stream velocity.  With a
 1/8-in probe the bias would be much less.
        The problem of whether isokinetic sampling is required at the wet scrubber
 outlet depends on how much nozzle bias is considered acceptable.  Considering the
 errors  introduced by other factors in sampling particles, (e.g.,  the readings of
 manometer and  flowmeter scales) the error due to anisokLnetic sampling may be
 insignificant.  We concluded,  therefore, that  isokinetic sampling may not be needed
 at the wet scrubber outlet if it  is proved that particles larger than 5 micrometers
 do not get through the scrubber and that other errors are more significant.  We
 recommend, however, that a field test be made to test the validity of this theoretical
 determination.
    9.  Evaluation of Filters for Parallel Cyclone Samplers
       Since a filter will be the particle  collection substrate for  the size  selective
 sampler, filter  selection is an important factor.   There are several desirable
 qualities that a filter for this application should have.  It must be able to operate
 at temperatures of 250-300°F,  it must have a  very high particle collection ef-
 ficiency for submicron particles,  it must withstand the attack of  corrosive gases,
 and it must allow accurate weighing of the particles collected on  the filter.  In
 addition, a low pressure drop is desirable since this allows the use of smaller
 diameter filters and smaller pumps.
       A preliminary evaluation of three types of filters was performed to determine
 if any of these materials met all of the above requirements.  The filters tested
were: a 90-mm diameter Solvinert filter made by Millipore Corporation with a 0. 25
pore size,  a 110-mm diameter high efficiency glass fiber filter made by Gelman,
 and a 47-mm Nuclcpore filter made by General Electric  Corporation with a pore size
 of 0.4 Mm in diameter.  All three of these filters meet the corrosive gas and tem-
 perature stated  above.  The weight stability of the Solvinert and glass fiber filters
                                    -86-

-------
were tested to determine the amount of sample which must be collected to obtain
3cr accuracy  in the sample weight.  Fifteen of the 90-mm Solvincrt filters were
dried in an oven for two hours at 135°C and then each weighed twice.  The arithmetic
mean of the weight deviations and the standard deviation in the mean was calculated.
For a confidence level of 99%, the weight deviation was 0.201% or approximately
0.6  mg, since the filters has a tare weight of approximately 300 mg.  Therefore,
to obtain a 3cr accuracy of 1% using these filters, a sample of 60 mg must be col-
lected.  Glass fiber filters are very fragile and can lose considerable weight
during sampling and subsequent filter handling.  Three of the Gelman filters
were loaded  into a filter holder ten times each and weighed  to determine the amount
of weight loss due to the assembly procedure.  The weight loss at a 99% confidence
level was 0.126% or about 1 mg for a 800 mg tare weight filter.  Using  these fil-
ters, approximately 100 mg of sample must be collected to  obtain the 1% accuracy.
Greater weight loss  can be expected during the actual use of these filters  due to
blow-off of glass fibers during sampling and water moisture variations.
       The pressure drop characteristic of the Solvinert and the  Nuclepore filters
were tested in holders having stainless steel screen supports and Teflon back-up
filters.  The Teflon  filters decreased the pressure drop by  reducing the area re-
striction of the stainless steel screen.  The 0. 25- Mm Solvinert filter was  tested in
                                      2               2
a filter  holder having an area of 0.06 in , while a 1.5  in  filter holder was used to
test the 0.4 Mm Nuclepore filters.  The pressure drop curves determined for these
two filters are shown in Figure 29.  By using  the manufacturer's information,  it
was  possible to extrapolate this  data to filters of different sizes and pore  diameters.
       Besides having a lower pressure drop, the Nuclepore filters have two
other advantages over the Solvinert filter:  low tare weight and greater strength.
The  Nuclepore 47-mm filter weighed only 20 mg.  The Solvinert filters  are very
brittle and were difficult to handle during the field test at TVA.  We do not expect
there will be a weight stability problem with the Nuclepore filters because of their
low tare weight.  The Pallflex Products Corporation's Ultipore 0.35 filter may also
be usable.  The manufacturer's data shows that the pressure drop-flow  rate curve for
a 47-mm filter is the same as for the 0.5 Mm-90 mm Solvinert filter.  The weight
stability for this filter and the Nuclepore filter need to be evaluated.
                                   -87-

-------
3

2.5 .
2   .
          1.5
2.5  3     45
   Pressure drop
6  7  8 9  10
—>(in. of Hg)
1.5
    FIGURE 29     Pressure drop vs.  flow rate for several filters
                   in   typical filter holders with teflon backup fil-
                   ter to reduce the pressure drop.
                             -88-

-------
 m.   Summary of Phase II
           An automatic particle monitor is attractive mainly because manual
 collection and analysis of four particulate samples in eight hours from six gas stream
 is difficult and costly as it introduces high manpower requirements and a great
 possibility of missed or improperly treated samples. An automatic monitor would
 provide, or at least approach, continuous monitoring, more timely data, and
 additional information about the particles such as their iron,  sulfur and magnesium
 content.
           A conceptual design for an automatic particle monitor system  which is
                                                                             25
 technically and economically feasible has been developed and reported previously.
 The monitor will sample six points simultaneously using a cascaded cyclone and slot
 impactor to size-selectively collect the sample; a /?-ray mass gauge and an x-ray
 fluorescence spectrometer to analyze the mass and composition of the particle-size
 fractions collected; and a computer to control the monitors as well  as collect and
 analyze the data. Six particle-collection and -analysis subsystems will be controlled
by two computers.  At the inlet of each of the three scrubbers,  one particle size
 fraction will be collected and analyzed each minute while only one analysis every two
to three minutes will be feasible at the outlet of the scrubber. The /3-ray  mass gauges
will require 10-30 sec counting times for each size fraction analyzed.  After mass
 analysis, the particles will be moved to the x-ray fluorescence  analyzer where an
analysis of the elemental composition will be made after a 10-sec count.  One of
the major functions in data reduction will be the elimination of interferences in the
x-ray fluorescence  spectrometer due to particle-size and matrix-composition variations;
this will be accomplished by physical and/or mathematical methods.
           The major advantage of the design is the use of proven techniques. )9-ray
absorption and x-ray fluorescence are well understood phenomena and have been used
in many process control applications.  Particle sampling and collection using cyclones
and impactors are being thoroughly investigated under the same contract for which the
automatic monitor is being developed.  The integration of these techniques with
computer control is certainly feasible.
                                     -89-

-------
           The maximum cost for constructing and maintaining the automatic
 monitor is estimated to be $358, 710. The estimated cost for manual sampling
 includes the development program for the manual methods and the equipment and
 manpower required for sampling during 30 weeks of scrubber tests but excludes
 the cost of analyzing the collected samples and training the sampling personnel.
 This cost alone is $425,228.  If the  demonstration program lasts longer than 30
 weeks and if the two cost items excluded are added, the total cost for using the
 manual method will be  much greater. Based on the figures described, the automatic
 monitor is economically feasible (see Table  19).
           From the cost data for the automatic monitor,  several conclusions about
 cost reductions have been made.  The large number of duplicate components make
 searching the market for the least expensive components important.  In addition,
 a design which eliminates a few components will be considerably cheaper; as is
 shown, a more efficient computer system which would reduce the number of compo-
 nents for that system is feasible.  In this way, price reductions of $20, 000 to $30, 000
 can be achieved without any sacrifice in instrument performance.  By reducing
 instrument performance or the number of sampling points to be measured simul-
 taneously,  even larger  reductions in hardware and development costs can be achieved.
                        Table 19  Cost Data Summary
                                                     Cost Comparison
   Item                                      Manual method   Automatic method
Hardware,  (including replacement parts)
Labor:
    Development Program
Sampling manpower
    (assuming 30 weeks
    demonstration program)
Cost of chemical analysis
of collected samples
                   Total
$156,728         $173,768

 104,000           184,942
            (includes repairs at TVA
             during demonstration
             program)
 164,500         automatic
unknown          automatic
$425,228         $358,710
                                    -90-

-------
References

 1.    Bechtel Corporation, Alkali scrubbing test facility, Phase I: preliminary
       engineering, report to NAPCA, NAPCA contract PH 22-68-67 (May,  1969).

 2.    Bechtel Corporation, Alkali scrubbing test facility, Phase II: Design  engineer-
       ing, design criteria, report to NAPCA, NAPCA contract PH 22-68-67 (May,
       1970).

 3.    S.  M. Blacker, Evaluation of the Andersen Stack Sampler,  A report of field
       test, NAPCA,  1970.

 4.    Environmental Research Corporation: Report of results of Andersen Stack
       Sampler evaluation tests,  Submitted to HEW,  1970.

 5.    Walter C. McCrone Associates, Inc., Particulate measurements for fossil-
       fuel combustion sources.  A report to NAPCA on the state of the art, sec-
       tion 6,  NAPCA contract CPA  22-69-130 (July, 1970).

 6.    Environmental Research Corporation, "Report of Results of Andersen Stack
       Sampler Evaluation  Tests," December 2, :970.

 7.    Schemel, G. A. ,• "The  Density of Uranine Particles Produced by a Spinning
       Disc Aerosol Generator. "J.  of Amer.  Indust. Hygiene Assoc., September,
       October 491-492.

 8.    Wiland, Geisel,  "Calculating  the Particle Size Distribution of a  Duct by
       Means  of Fractional Separation Efficiency Curves and  Total Efficiency Curves,"
       Staub-Reinhart,  Luft. 28,  25-28 (1968).

 9.    Hilbert Schenck, Theories of  Engineering Experimentation, 50-53, McGraw-
       Hill Book Co., (1968).

10.    Muschelknautz,  E.,  and K. Brunner, "Experiments with Cyclones," Chem.-
       Ing. -Techn., 39, pp 531-538  (1967).

11.    Rosin,  P.,  and E. Rammler, Journal of Inst. of Fuel, T_, p. 29 (1933).

12.    "Air Pollution  Engineering Manual," PHS publication,  99-AD-40, U. S. Dept.,
       HEW (1967).

13.    N. W.  First, "Fundamental Factors  in the Design of Cyclone Dust Collectors,"
       Sc. D. discertation,  Harv. Univ.  (1950).
14.    W. Barth, "Calculation and Design of Cyclone Separators on Basis of Recent
       Investigations," etc.
15.    Muschelknautz, E.,  and W. Krambrock, The aerodynamic coefficients of the
       cyclone separator as based on recent, improved measurement,  Chem. Ing.
       Tech. 42, 247-255 (1970).
16.    Muschelknautz, E.,  Design of cyclone separators in the engineering practice,
       Staub-Rcinholdt Luft 3J), 1-12 (1970).
                                    -91-

-------
17.    Stairmand, C. J., The design and performance of cyclone separators,
       Trans.  Inst.  Chcm.  Engrs.  29,  356-383 (1951).
18.    Lipman, M. and A. Kydonicus, A  multistage aerosol sampler for extended
       sampling intervals, Am. Ind.  Hyg. Assoc. J., 730-7 (1970).
19.    Freudcnthal,  P., High collection efficiency of the Aerotec-3 cyclone for sub-
       micron  particles, Atmos. Environ. 5,  151-4 (1971).
20.    Cochman, J.  C., and II. M.  Moseley,  Simplified method for determining
       cascade impactor stage  efficiencies, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J., 62-67 (1967).
21.    Walter  C. McCrone Associates,  Inc.,  Participate measurements for fossil-
       fuel combustion sources.  A report to NAPCA on the state of the art,  sections
       3, 4 and 5 NAPCA contract CAP 22-69-130 (July, 1970).
22.    G. A. Sehmel,  Particle sampling bias  introduced by Anisokinetic Sampling
       and deposition within the sampling line, American Industrial Hygiene Asso-
       ciation Journal, Nov-Dec., 1970.
23.    Personal communication with Meryl Jackson, Freeman Laboratory, Chicago.
24.    W. Strauss, Industrial Gas Cleaning, Pergamon  Press Ltd.,  First Edition,
       1966.
25.    N. A.   Fuchs, The Mechanics of Aerosols,  Pergamon Press, Ltd., 1964.
26.    S. Badzioch,  Correction for Anisokinetic Sampling of Gas-borne Dust Par-
       ticles, Journal of the Institute of Fuel,  March, 1960.
                                    -92-

-------
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
 SHEET
                   1. Report No.
                     EPA-650/2-73-024
                                                2.
                                                                3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle
Measurement and Characterization of Particles in Wet
  Scrubbing Process f or SO.. Control
                           A
                                                               5* Report Date
                                                                  July 1972
                                                               6.
7. Author(s)
                                                               8. Performing Organization Kept.
                                                                 No'  MA Proi 2001
9.'"Performing Organization Name and Address
WaUer C. McCrone Associates, Inc.
2820 South Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60616
                                                               10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
                                                               11. Contract/Grant No.

                                                                  EHSD 71-25
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
EPA, Office of Research and Development
NERC-RTP,  Control Systems Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
                                                                        .epprt & I
                                                                  Covered Final
                                                               8/15/70-7/7/72
                                                               14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts The report gives results of the development of a technique for size-
selective, high-capacity particulate sampling to be used in measuring and
characterizing the particles in the wet-scrubbing process for SOx control. It
provides information on both wet-scrubbing system process variables,  and the
efficiency of scrubbers to be used at the TVA test station. The sampler,  existing as
a manually operated bench-scale prototype,  is capable not only of fractionating the
particles in the desired range, but also of tolerating the process stream environment.
A preliminary evaluation indicated not only that existing hardware did not meet all
requirements, but that automatic sampling was more cost effective (despite higher
initial costs) than manual sampling,  by at least 16 percent.  However, program
economics resulted in the decision to design a manually operated model.
 17. Key Words and Document Analysis.
 Air Pollution
 Particle Size
 Measurement
 Sampling
 Sulfur Oxides
 Cost Effectiveness
 Washing
 Scrubbers
 Wind Tunnels
 17b. Identificrs/Opcn-Endcd Terms
 Air Pollution Control
 Particulates
 Characterization
 Particle Collection
 Cascade Impactors
17e. COSAT1 Field/Group
                    13JJ
                           17a. IVscriplors
                               Field Tests
                               Dust Filters
                               Dust
                               Dust Collectors
                               Fly Ash
                               Cyclone Separators
                               Elutriators
                               Flue Gases
                               Wet Scrubbing
                               Andersen Stack Sampler
                               14B'
18. Availability Statement
                    Unlimited
                                                     19..Security Class (This
                                                       Report) '
                                                         UNCLASSIFIED
                                                     20. Security Class (This
                                                       Page
                                                         UNCLASSIFIED
                                                                        21- No. of Pages
                                                                             100
                                                                         22. Price
FORM NTIS-3S (REV. 3-72)
                                      -93-
                                                                         USCOMM-DC M9S2-P72

-------
    INSTRUCTIONS  FOR COMPLETING  FORM NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
   Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for' the Federal  Government,
   PB-180600).

    1.  Report Number.  Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation  selected by the performing
       organization or provided by the sponsoring organization.  Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only. Examples
       FASIiB-NS-87 and FAA-RD-68-09-

    2.  Leave blank.

   3.  Recipient's Accession Number. . Reserved for use by each report recipient.

   4.  Title and Subtitle.  Title  should indicate clearly and briefly ilic subject coverage of the report, and be displayed promi-
       nently.  Set subtitle, if used, in smaller type or otherwise subordinate it to main title.  When a report is prepared in more
       than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number and include subtitle for ihe specific volume.

   5.  Report Date, l-.uch report  shall carry a date indicating .11 least month and year.  Indicate the basis on which it was selected
       (e.g., date of issue, date of approval,  date of preparation.


   6.  Performing Organization Code.  Leave blank.

   •7.  Aothor(s).  Give namc(s)  in conventional order (e.g., John K. Doe, or J.Robert Doe).  List author's affiliation if it differs
       from the performing organization.

   8.  Performing Organization Report Number.  Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

   9.  Performing Organization Name and  Address.  Ciive name, street, city, state, and zip code.   List no more than two levels of
       an organizational hierarchy.  Display the name of the organization exactly as it should appear  in Government indexes such
       as  USGRDR-I.

  10.  Project/Task/Work Unit Number.   Use the project, task and .work unit numbers  under which the report was prepared.

  11.  Controct/Gronf Number.  Insert contract  or grant number under which report was prepared.

  12.  Sponsoring Agency Nome and Address.  Include zip code.

  13.  Type of Report and Period Covered. Indicate interim, final, etc., and, if applicable, dates covered.

  14.  Sponsoring Agency Code.   Leave blank.

  IS.  Supplementary Notes.  Kntcr information not  included elsewhere  but useful,  such as:  Prepared in cooperation with .  . .
       Translation of ...  Presented at i tinfert-ncc of ...  To be published in-. . .  Supersedes .  . .       Supplements

  16.  Abstract.   Include a brief  (200 words or less)  factual summary  of the most significant information contained in the  report.
       If the report contains a significant  bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.

  17.  Key Words and Document  Analysis,  (a).  Descriptors.  Select  from the Thesaurus of Kngincering and Scientific Terms the
       proper authorized terms that identify the major concept of the research and are  sufficiently specific and precise CO be used
       as index entries for cataloging.
       (b).  Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms.  Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators,  etc.  Use
       open-ended terms written  in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
       (c).   COSATI  Field/Group. Field  and Group  assignments are to be taken from the 1963 COSATI Subject Category List.
       Since the majority of documents arc muliidisciplinary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be the specific
       discipline, area of human  endeavor, or type of physical object.  The application(s) will be  cross-referenced with  secondary
       Field/Group assignments  that will  follow the primary posting(s).

  18.  Distribution Statement.  Denote relcasability to the  public or  limitation for reasons other than  security for  example  "Re-
       lease unlimited".  Cite any av.iilability to the  public, with address  and price.

  19 & 20. Security Classification.  Do not submit classified reports to the National  Technical

  21.  Number of Pages.   Insert  the total  number of pages, including this  one  and unnumbered  pages, but excluding distribution
       list, if any.

  22.  Price. Insert the price set by the  National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
FORM NTIS-3S (REV. 3-721                                          -94-                                  USCOMM-DC 14MZ-P72

-------