EPA-600/2-76-086a
April 1976
Environmental Protection Technology Series
                                         FIELD  TESTING:
                                       APPLICATION  OF
                      COMBUSTION  MODIFICATIONS  TO
              CONTROL  POLLUTANT EMISSIONS  FROM
                      INDUSTRIAL BOILERS - PHASE  II
                                 ndustrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                                     Office of Research and Development
                                     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                               Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                      RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

       Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
       Protection Agency,  have been grouped into five series. These five broad
       categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
       environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
       planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
       The five series are:

           1.    Environmental Health Effects Research
           2.    Environmental Protection Technology
           3.    Ecological Research
           4.    Environmental Monitoring
           5.    Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

       This report has  been  assigned-to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
       TECHNOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and
       demonstrate instrumentation,  equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent
       environmental degradation from point and non-point .sources  of pollution. This
       work provides the new  or improved technology required for the control  and
       treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.


                           EPA REVIEW NOTICE


       This report has been re viewed by  the U.S. Environmental
       Protection Agency, and approved for publication.  Approval
       does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
       views and policy of the Agency, nor does mention of trade
       names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
       recommendation for use.

             Limitations On  Application Of Data Reported

The data cited in this report are  pollutant  emissions.  These emission

levels are  suitable  for use in estimating mean emissions from industrial

boilers as  a class and are  useful  in compiling areawide  emission inven-

tories.   However,  they are  not suitable for  predicting emissions from any

one boiler  or as regulatory limits or emission standards.  Use of

emissions as emission standards automatically  would place a large

proportion  of the industrial  boiler population in  noncompliance.


       This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
       tion Service. Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                        EPA-600/2-76-086a
                                        April 1976
                   FIELD TESTING:

APPLICATION OF COMBUSTION  MODIFICATIONS

      TO CONTROL POLLUTANT  EMISSIONS

     FROM  INDUSTRIAL BOILE RS--PHASE II
                           by

           G. A. Cato, L.J. Muzio, and D. E. Shore

                  KVB Engineering, Inc.
                  17332 Irvine Boulevard
                 Tustin, California 92680
                  Contract No. 68-02-1074
                   ROAPNo. 21BCC-046
                Program Element No. IAB014


            EPA Project Officer:  Robert E. Hall

         Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
          Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
             Research Triangle Park, NC 27711


                       Prepared for

       U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             Office of Research and Development
                   Washington, DC  20460

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section                                                           Page No.
         LIST OF FIGURES                                            y

         LIST OF TABLES                                            JX

         ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                           X
  1.0    SUMMARY                                                    1

         1.1   Objective and Scope                                   1
         1.2   Results                                                3

  2.0    TEST BOILER SELECTION                                     18

  3.0    INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST PROCEDURES                       21

         3.1   Particulate Size                                     23
         3.2   Smoke  Spot                                           26
         3.3   Plume  Opacity                                        28

  4.0-    BASELINE TEST RESULTS                                     29

         4.1   Nitrogen Oxides Emissions                            43
         4.2   Particulate Emissions                                54
         4.3   Particulate Size                                     60
         4.4   Hydrocarbon Emissions                                77
         4.5   Carbon Monoxide Emissions                            78
         4.6   Sulfur Oxides Emissions                              79
         4.7   Boiler Efficiency                                    80
         4.8   Plume  Opacity                                        81
         4.9   Nitrogen Dioxide Emissions                           85

  5.0    COMBUSTION  MODIFICATION TEST RESULTS                      87

         5.1   Mixture  Ratio Modification                           91

              5.1.1  Excess Oxygen or Air                           91
              5.1.2  Staged Combustion                             10°
              5.1.3  Air Register Adjustments                     135

         5.2   Enthalpy Modification                               146
              5.2.1   Combustion Air Temperature
              5.2.2   Flue  Gas  Recirculation                       150
              5.2.3   Firing Rate                                  16°
         5.3   Input  Modification                                  164
              5.3.1   Fuel  Properties                              I64
                     5.3.1.1  Fuel Nitrogen Content               154
                     5.3.1.2  Temperature                         169
              5.3.2   Burner Characteristics                       171
                     5.3.2.1  Burner Tune-up                      171
                     5.3.2.2  Coal Burners                        175
                     5.3.2.3  Oil  Burners                         176
                     5.3.2.4  Oil  Atomization Pressure            184
                     5.3.2.5  Natural Gas Burners                 186
                     5.3.2.6  Burner Size                         187
                                  111

-------
 Section                                                        Page No.
              5.3.3  Boiler Furnace Characteristics                191
                    5.3.3.1  Firetube  Boilers                     191
                    5.3.3.2  Furnace Volume and Area              191
         5.4   Particulate Emissions                                192
              5.4.1  Particulate Concentration                     192
              5.4.2  Particulate Size                              196
         5.5   Boiler Efficiency                                    202
              5.5.1  Effect of Excess Air                          202
              5.5.2  Effect of Staged Air                          204
              5.5.3  Effect of Burners Out of Service              204
              5.5.4  Effect of Combustion Air Temperature          204
              5.5.5  Effect of Flue Gas Recirculation              208
         5.6  General Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Correlation        208
 6.0    FUEL PROPERTIES                                           215
         6.1  Natural Gas                                          216
         6.2  Coal and Oil                                         218
        6.3  Fuel Sulfur Content                                  220
        6.4  Fuel Ash Content                                     223
        6.5  API Gravity                                          226
 7.0    BOILER DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS                             229
        7.1  Furnace and Burner Characteristics                   229
        7.2  Cost of Modification                                 229
 8.0    FUTURE RESEARCH                                           233
 9.0    REFERENCES                                                235
10.0    GLOSSARY OF TERMS                                         237
11.0    CONVERSION FACTORS                                         239
        APPENDIX A - BOILER EMISSION  MEASUREMENTS OF PHASE I      241

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                  Page
1-1.  Total oxides of nitrogen emissions  at baseload                4
1-2.  Solid particulate emissions at baseload                       5
1-3.  Effect of combustion modification methods  on  total
      nitrogen oxides emissions and boiler efficiency              11
1-4.  Effect of combustion modification methods  on  total
      nitrogen oxides and solid particulate emissions              12
2-1.  Field test site locations                                    20
3-1.  Interior and external views of mobile laboratory              22
3-2.  Detail of one stage and of precutter cyclone  for
      cascade impactor                                             24
3-3.  Field service type smoke tester                              27
4-1.  Total oxides of nitrogen concentration at baseload            30
4-2.  Solid particulate emissions at baseload                      31
4-3.  Total nitrogen oxides emissions at  baseload for coal-
      fired boilers                                                44
4-4.  Baseline total nitrogen oxide emissions for oil fired
      boilers                                                      48
4-5.  Baseline total nitrogen oxides emissions for natural
      gas fired boilers                                            50
4-6.  Baseline solid particulate emissions, coal fuel              55
4-7.  Baseline solid particulate emissions, oil fuel               58
4-8.  Baseline solid particulate emissions, natural gas fuel       59
4-9.  Schematic presentation of the biological fate and
      effects of inhaled inorganic particulates                    62
4-10. Baseline particulate size distribution, oil fuel             68
4-11. Baseline particulate size distribution, coal fuel            69
4-12. Baseline particulate size distribution, pulverized
      coal fuel                                                    70
4-13. Baseline particulate size distribution. No. 6 oil fuel       72
4-14. Baseline particulate size distribution. No. 6 oil            73
4-15. Effect of a dust collector on particulate size distribution  75
4-16. Effect of coal size and burner on particulate size
      distribution
                                                                    76
4-17. Percent of nitrogen dioxide in total nitrogen oxides
      concentration                                                 86

-------
                                                                     Page
 5-1.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       a decrease in excess oxygen                                     92

 5-2.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxide emissions due to
       a reduction in excess oxygen, coal fuel                         93

 5-3.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxide emissions due to
       a reduction in excess oxygen, oil fuel                          95
 5-4.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxide emissions due to
       a reduction in excess oxygen, natural gas fuel                  97

 5-5.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       a reduction in excess oxygen, firetube boilers                  99

 5-6.   Reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       reduction of combustion air at the burner                      101

 5-7.   Staged air installation at Location No. 38                     102A

 5-8.   Schematic diagram of staged air system installed
       at Location No. 38                                             103

 5-9.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged
       combustion air, natural gas fuel                               105

 5-10.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       staged combustion air,  natural gas fuel                        107
 5-11.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       staged combustion air,  natural gas fuel                        109

 5-12.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to
       staged combustion air,  No. 6 oil fuel                          110

 5-13.  Staged air installation at Location No. 19                     113

 5-14.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emission due to
       staged combustion air,  natural gas fuel                        115

 5-15.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged
       combustion air,  No. 6 oil fuel                                 117

 5-16.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged
       combustion air,  No. 6 oil fuel                                 118

 5-17.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged
       combustion air,  mixture natural  and refinery gas               120
 5-18.  Effect of excess oxygen on total nitrogen oxides
       emissions with and without staged air                          122

5-19.  Effect of overfire air  on total  nitrogen oxides
       emissions                                                      124

5-20.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to burners
       out  of service,  coal  and oil fuels                             130
                                VI

-------
                                                                    Page
5-21.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to burners
       out of service, mixture natural and refinery gas fuel         131
5-22.  General flame swirling flowfield                              136
5-23.  Peabody HT dual register burner                               140

5-24.  Effect of secondary air register setting on total
       nitrogen oxides; emissions                                     142

5-25.  Effect of tertiary air register setting on total
       nitrogen oxides emissions                                     143

5-26.  Effect of secondary air damper position on total
       nitrogen oxides emissions and smoke level                     145

5-27.  Effect of combustion air temperature and time within
       the primary combustion zone on total nitric oxides
       formation                                                     147

5-28.  Effect of combustion air temperature on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions, gas and oil fuels                           143

5-29.  Flue gas recirculation installation at Location No. 19
       for Test Nos. 192, 197, and 202                               152

5-30.  Effect of flue gas recirculation on the total nitrogen
       oxides emissions, natural gas fuel                            153
5-31.  Effect of flue gas recirculation and excess oxygen
       level on the total nitrogen oxides emissions, No. 6
       oil fuel                                                      155

5-32.  Effect of flue gas recirculation on the total nitrogen
       oxides emissions, mixed natural gas and No. 6 oil fuels       157
5-33.  Summary of flue gas recirculation test results with
       normal excess air                                             158
5-34.  Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions in a
       combined cycle boiler                                         161
5-35.  Effect of 'firing rate on total nitrogen oxides
       emissions, natural gas fuel                                   163

5-36.  Effect of fuel nitrogen content on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions                                              166

5-37.  Effect of fuel oil temperature on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions                                              170
5-38.  Effect of fuel oil temperature and of atomization
       pressure on solid particulate emissions, No. 6 oil
       fuel                                                          172

5-39.  Effect of oil atomization method and excess oxygen
       level on the total nitrogen oxides emissions                  179
                               VII

-------
                                                                  Page

5-40.  Effect of steam atomization pressure on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions and smoke level                            185
5-41.  Effect of burner heat release rate on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions for coal and natural, gas fuels             188
5-42.  Effect of burner heat release rate on total nitrogen
       oxides emissions, oil fuel                                  190
5-43.  Effect of combustion modificaiton methods on solid
       particulate emissions                                       193
5-44.  Effect of combustion modifications on particulate size,
       oil fuel                                                    198

5-45.  Effect of low excess air combustion modification on
       particulate size, coal fuel                                 200
5-46.  Effect of burner tune-up on particulate size, PS 300
       oil fuel                                                    201
5-47.  Effect on boiler efficiency of reducing the excess
       combustion air                                              203

5-48.  Effect on boiler efficiency of staged combustion air        205

5-49.  Effect on boiler efficiency of operating with burners
       out of service                                              206
5-50.  Effect on boiler efficiency of the combustion air
       preheat temperature                                         207

5-51.  Effect on boiler efficiency of flue gas recirculation
       and staged combustion air                                   209

5-52.  NO  correlation for boilers with ambient combustion air      212
         x
5-53.  NO  correlation for boilers with preheated combustion air   213
         x
6-1.   Total sulfur oxides emissions at baseload for oil
       and coal fired boilers                                      221
6-2    Ratio of sulfur trioxides to total sulfur oxides at
       baseload as a function of total sulfur oxides measured      222

6-3.   Effect of fuel ash  content on baseline solid particulate
       emissions for coal  and oil fuels                            224

6-4.   Effect of API gravity on baseload nitrogen oxides arid
       particulates emissions                                      227
                                Vlll

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES

                                                                     Paqe
1-1.  Boiler Emission Measurements At Baseline and Low NO
      Test Conditions                                    X              6

3-1.  Emission Measurement Instrumentation                             21

4-1.  Boiler Emission Measurements                                     34

4-2.  Nitrogen Oixdes Emissions From Mixed Fuels                       52

4-3.  Distribution of Particulate Size With Baseline Conditions         61

4-4.  Cascade Impaetor Data Summary                                    66

4-5.  Plume Opacity Observations                                       82

4-6.  Plume Opacity Observations                                       83

4-7.  Plume Opacity Observations                                       84

5-1.  Combustion Modification Methods and Effects                      88

5-2.  Combustion Modification Test Summary,
      Phase I and Phase II Tests                                       90

5-3.  Burners-Out-Of-Service Summary                                  128

5-4.  Effect of Air-Fuel Mixing By Changing The Air Register
      Setting                                                         137

5-5.  Effect of Dual Register Adjustments on NO^ and CO Emissions     140

5-6.  Effect of Fuel Oil Grade on Total Nitrogen Oxides Emissions
      and Conversion of Fuel Nitrogen to Total Nitrogen Oxides
      Emissions                                                       168

5-7.  Effect of Oil Atomization Method on Total Nitrogen Oxides,
      Particulate Emissions and Boiler Efficiency                     178

5-8.  Phase I Field Test Measurements                                 180

5-9.  Effect of Atomization Method on the Particulate
      Emission Levels                                                 195

5-10. Particulate Size Distribution With Combustion Modifications     197

6-1.  Fuel Analysis Summary, Gas Fuel                                 217

6-2.  Fuel Analysis Summary, Coal and Oil Fuels                       219


7-1.  Test Boiler Design Characteristics                              230
                                   IX

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
        The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Robert E. Hall,
the EPA Project Officer, whose direction and evaluations were of great benefit.
        Acknowledgement is also made to the active cooperation and advice of
Mr. W. H. Axtman of the American Boiler Manufacturers' Association and to
the ABMA members who offered a forum for discussion of the program and con-
structive criticism.  Also of assistance were the American Petroleum
Institute, the American Gas Association, and the Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory.
        Special thanks is due the following organizations who participated
in the program in various ways:
        Amoco, Texas City, TX
        Babcock and Wilcox Company,  Barberton,  OH
        Baltimore Gas and Electric,  Baltimore,  MD
        Commonwealth of Kentucky, Frankfort,  KY
        E. I.  du Pont de Nemours and Co.,  Wilmington,  DE
        Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester,  NY
        The Firestone Tire and Rubber Company,  South Gate, CA
        City of Fremont, Fremont, NB
        Great Northern Paper Co., Cedar Springs, GA
        Industrial Combustion, Inc., Monroe,  WI
        International Business Machines, White  Plains, NY
        Keeler Co.,  Williamsport, PA
        Kewanee Boiler Corporation,  Kewanee,  IL
        Lever  Brothers Co.,  Los  Angeles, CA
        Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company,  St. Paul, MN
        North  American Rockwell,  Los Angeles  Div.,  Los Angeles,  CA
        Peabody Gordon-Piatt,  Winfield,  KN
        Pineville Kraft Co.,  Pineville,  LA
        City of Piqua,  Piqua,  OH
                                  x

-------
Texaco, Inc., Wilmington, CA
Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino, CA
U.S. Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, MD
U.S. Navy Base, Charleston, SC
University of California, Davis, CA
University of California, Irvine, CA
University of California, Los Angeles, CA
University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Village of Winnetka, Winnetka, IL
                         XI

-------
                            SECTION 1.0
                              SUMMARY

1.1     OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
        Industrial combustion devices of all kinds contribute a large
fraction of the total air pollution from stationary sources.  Studies
have found as much as 40% of the stationary source total nitrogen
                                                                   (1,2,3)
oxides emissions originate from devices such as industrial boilers.
A similar figure was obtained for oxides of sulfur, while particulate
emissions were more than 80%.  Combustion modifications have been
demonstrated for utility boilers which can reduce emissions of NOx,
CO, and hydrocarbons while improving boiler efficiency.  Application
of these modifications to industrial combustion devices, if successful,
could have a profound impact on air quality and energy conservation.
        An objective of the field testing portion of the program was
to determine the level of emissions of pollutant gases, particulates,
and toxic elements and organics from industrial-sized boilers of 11
to 527 GJ/hr  (10,000 to 500,000 Ibs steam/hr) capacity.  It also was
an objective to determine the effectiveness of combustion modifications
to reduce emissions and the extent to which a reduction in one
pollutant such as total nitrogen oxides, might cause an increase in
other pollutants, such as particulates or hydrocarbons, or a decrease
in boiler efficiency.
        In addition, the program sought to establish what design and/or
operational changes that boiler manufacturers and operators could make
to reduce emissions and where future combustion research activities
should be concentrated.  The measurements of toxic emissions will be
used to determine if industrial boilers as a class are a significant
source of these pollutants.

-------
        The program was conducted in two phases, and this
document is the Final Report of the second phase.  The first phase
was one year in duration and involved the selection of forty-seven
representative industrial boilers for testing, construction of a
mobile flue gas analysis laboratory, and field testing for emissions.
Measurements were made of boilers operating normally and in certain
low-nitrogen-oxides-emission modes that could be obtained without
having to modify the boiler, such as reducing the amount of excess
air.  The pollutants of interest in Phase I in addition to oxides
of nitrogen were oxides of sulfur, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
carbon dioxide, smoke, and particulates.
        The Phase II activities were of fourteen months duration and
involved the intensive testing of nineteen individual boilers to measure
the sensitivity of boiler efficiency and emissions to combustion modifi-
cations that sometimes required retrofit of the boiler.  Examples
of such combustion modifications are overfire air ports and flue
gas recirculation.
        In addition to total particulate emissions data, the particle
size distribution from thirteen oil and coal-fired industrial boilers
was determined during Phase II.  The identity and quantity of
elemental metals originally contained in the fuel and organic
compounds released by the combustion process were established for
several boilers.  Also, the enrichment of certain sizes of particulates
by toxic elements was investigated.
        The program documentation consists of Phase I  (Ref. 4) and
Phase II Final Reports, and two Guideline Manuals.  One Guideline
Manual is for industrial boiler manufacturers to provide information
on total nitrogen oxides, particulates, and efficiency trends with
boiler design characteristics to aid them in designing new boilers
and modifying existing boilers to produce low nitrogen oxides
emissions.  The other Guideline is for industrial boiler operators

-------
and contains specific operating instructions and recommended steps for
reducing nitrogen oxides and particulate emissions from various types
of boilers.  The Final Report also contains recommendations for future
research.
        The results of the collection and analyses of toxic metals and
gases and of organic emissions are reported in a third report (Ref. 5).

1.2     RESULTS
        Measurements of pollutants were made when the boilers were
operating at 80% of capacity and normal control settings (called the
baseline setting) and when the combustion process was modified in a
way that reduced the total nitrogen oxides  (NO ) emissions.
                                              X
        The primary categorization of boilers when they originally were
selected was by capacity or size, and one objective was to determine if
the larger boilers had the larger emission factors.  It was found that
the total nitrogen oxides emissions from coal- and natural gas-fueled
boilers increased slightly with size but the emissions from oil-fueled
boilers did not.  The nitrogen oxides emissions, however, were very
dependent upon the fuel being fired regardless of the boiler size, with
coal fueled boilers being the greatest emitters of total nitrogen oxides,
        The particulate emissions were not at all dependent upon the
boiler size, but were strongly dependent upon the fuel type.  The
particulate emissions from coal were about ten times greater than
from oil and about one hundred times greater than from natural gas.
        The measured total nitrogen oxides and solid particulates
emissions at baseline are shown in Figures 1-1 and 1-2.  The emission
levels at baseline of the other pollutants are listed in Table 1-1.
The meaning of the abbreviations and symbols used is given at the end
of Table 4-1.

-------
CM
O
in
10 400 .
^
tn
C
200 .
0 .
co
W (N
H i 300 .
X
O tn
2!
0 ^ 200 .
H
j 100 .
g
H
0 .
200 -i
i
U)
Itf
"T" 100 .
Cn
C
0 -
ro
V
® 600
13
e 400
a
200
0
600
•
CN
O
«* 400
'a 200
•
0
(N
_ o /inn.
*
ro
fflj
>>
m ^ "7nn
T3 ^UU
B
ft
Q4
u 0
C
C


A A
A<

AA

A A
k



A



•
^-L
|Tv

•
•
•



COAL FUEL
4

t



OIL FUEL
t



^ •
- •
•
•
•

NATURi
_
1 "

\L GAS FUEL



100 200 300 40
10 Ib/hr of Steam
10
0 2C
0 300 400
                           GJ/hr of Equivalent Saturated Steam
                                         TEST LOAD
Figure 1-1.  Total oxides of nitrogen emissions at baseload.
                                                              6001-43

-------
COAL FUEL
 OIL FUEL
                                                         The length of  each
                                                         bar is the emissions
                                                         from each test.
 NATURAL
 GAS FUEL
                                          -\	»-
.0005  .001
                           -005  .01       r .05  0.1
                                   lb/10  Btu
                 .1    1    i—h
                                                          0.5   1.0
                                                                         5.0   10.0
                                     1U    20
                                                50   100   200    500  1000  2000   5000
                      ng/J of  equivalent saturated steam
                        SOLID  PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION

Figure 1-2.   Solid particulate emissions at  baseload.

                                   5
                                                          6001-43

-------
         Table 1-1.  BOILER EMISSION MEASUREMENTS AT BASELINE AND LOW NOx TEST CONDITIONS{l'3)

Test No.
Fro a- Thru
K'l only
102-103
104-106

111-112
113-115

116-121
122-125

126-130

134-139
140-142

143-148
149-152



156-159


165-168
169 only

170-175

176-179
180-185

186-189


!x>c
No.
1
1
1
27
"
29

29
28

28

30
32

32
33



13


35
31

20

37


38

Boiler
Capacity
GJ/hr
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
(29)
106
(100)
(100)
158
(150)
158
(150)
74
(70)
74
(70)

(260)
132
(125)
137
(130)
127
(120)
580
(550)

(250)
528
(SOO)
(200)
227
(215)
274
(260)
84
[80)
42
(40)

(45)
47
(45)

Test
Fuel
MG
12
NG
NG

'G

6
NG

6

oal
NO

NG
Ret.
as
NG

oal
il

oal
Coal



6

w*
6


Burner
(1)
Type
Ring
Steam
Ring
Ring

Ring

Steam
Ring

Steam

SpStk;
Ring

Ring
Spud

pud

Pulv.
Steam

Chert
Pulv.



Steam


Steam

No.
of
1
l
l
1
1

2

2
3

J

4
1

4
8

1

6
J
1
1
4



2


1

BASELINE
Test Load
GJ/hr
(lo3lb/hr)
18
(17)
18
(17)
25
(24)
(25)
79
(75)
(85)
127
(120)
126
(119)
31
(29)
31
(29)

(130)
87
(82)
81
(77)
aa
(83)
506
(480)
206
(195)
422
(400)
72
(68)
110
(104)
148
(140)

(62)
34
(32)

(40)
39
(36.5)
Excess
O
2.2
5. 3
0.9
6.6
9. 3
5.3

5.0
5.7

5.3

6.2
7.1

4.4
5.1

2.6

8.6

4.4
9.5
7.0

3. 3

4.3


3.0

TEST CONDITIONS AND
NOX12'
ng/J
39.6
M.7
(90.3)
36, 0
(74,5)
(85)
(111}
<4S8)
18,5
(154)
16S
(294)
108
(211)
US
(205)

(320)
81.6
(16C)
117
(230)
84.8
U4€)
96.4
(189}
216
(353)
57.18
ttO JJ
100
5*1
W)

(2&4)
-f
10.8
11.6
11.2
7.9
8.8
8.0

11.8
7.6

11.6

12.8
8.0

9.4
8.4

11.4

8.6

11.2
9.2
-

13. S

10* 112.6
u»s)

(220)
WJ
1 
0
'*&
(116)
0
(0)
a
fO)
0
(0>
0 .

JO)
0
(0)
62
1200)
a
0
tot
itx>
<322J
O
JO)
0
toj
9.3
135}
O
(0)
0
«H
O
lot
0
(0)
0
w
EMISSIONS '
HC(2)
ng/J
CPpnU
-
-
-

22
!125i
6.S
O
(0)
-

-
-
-
—
-
sox'21
ng/J
(ppn)
-
18fl
(241)
300
(384)
468
(626)
-
-
-
-
-
-
S13
(956)
947
(1114)
-
-
-
-
6 9i -
(39)1 -
-
-
0
(0)
5.3
(25)

-
1.6
(8)
-
-
_
-
-
-
760
(1000)
2V 815
(15) ; (1045)
1.6
(10)
-
-
738
(946)
Solid
Part.
ng/J
(Ib/KBtu)
-
7.31
(-017)
<*oui
-
";' 54.5™
	 _ -
_
-
-
-
127.3
(.296)
2279
(5.3)
1312
(3.05)
_
-
-
-
-
-
1122
(2.61)
&.B6
(.016)
(-31)
3014
(7.01)
31.6
{-(*«}
50,7
; (is)
B.5
US)
u
(35)
19

0
(0)
-
3.9
(20)


.
-
-



_
_
-
_
-
-
Part.
ng/J

-
(.0201 ,
»-•»
4*VVDj-



-

-

_

_
-
_



_
135




4U"v 	
f 056 >
34.8

_
_
J*. 0

T«.t
Type

LowAir
BrTune
BrTune
BrTune
BrTune



LowLoad

LowAir

LowLoad
LowAir
LowLoad



BOOS




Damper
LowAir


. t rR& 	
L LowAir
Low Air

£>FA
OTA

(1)  An  explanation  of the abbreviations and  units  used  is  given at the  end  of  Table  4-1.
(2)  The emissions of these  species are reported as dry at 3% excess oxygen.
(3)  The shaded data blocks  indicate tests where NO ,  CO and/or particulates were measured before
    and after combustion modification.
                                                                                               6001-43

-------
                                       Table  1-1.   Continued(1'3)



Test Mo.
Fro»-Thrxi
190-194

195-199

200-203

204-206

207-21?




Loc.
No.
19

19

19

19

39



Boiler
Capacity
GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
18.5
(17.5!
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.51
18.5
(17.5)
211
(200)



Tn«t
Fuel
NS

#6

16

SG +
16
NG +
RG


Burner
(1)
Type
Ring

Stein

Air

Ring,
Air
Spud

No.
Of
1

1

1

1

1

(1)
BASELINE TEST CONDITIONS ADD EMISSIONS
Test Lotd
GJ/hr
(I03lb/lir)
14.8
(14)
1.4.8
(14)
14.8
(14)
14.8
(14)
169
(160)
Excess
0-
%2
3.2

3.1

2.9

3.3

3.7

«0x'2'
ng/J
(pp«)
JO

ng/J



_

146
(187!
_

_

Solid
Part.
ng/J
(Ib/MBtu)


13.3
(.031)
13.3
(.031)
_

_

(1)
LOW NITROGEN OXIDES TEST CONDITIONS AMD EMISSIONS
Test Load
GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
14.3
(13.6)
14,8
(14)
14.8
(14)
14.8
(14)
169
(160)
Excess
Oj
%'
2.8

2.4

2.3

2.8

6.4

NOx'"
ng/J
(PP»)
8
m>
«i
iioer
6S
U16)
<9
{Ml
TJ
tun
(2)
CO
%2
10.2

13. t

13.6

11.8

7.4

co(J)
ng/J
(ppB)
37

-------
        Table 1-1 also lists the pollutant emission levels when the
boiler was operated such that the total nitrogen oxides emissions
were the lowest.  The column on the extreme right entitled Test Type
indicates the particular combustion modification that produced the
lowest nitrogen oxides emissions.  For example, for Tests 102-103
the lowest nitrogen oxides emissions occurred when the excess
combustion air was reduced.  For Tests 122-125 the lowest total
nitrogen oxides were found after a burner had been taken out of service.
When the emissions of total nitrogen oxides (NO ), carbon monoxide  (CO)
                                               jfc
or solid particulate (Solid Part.) were measured both before and after
the combustion was modified/ the data are delineated by shading the
entry in the table.

        The variation of the excess combustion air and the reduction
of the firing rate are combustion modification methods that were applied
to almost all boilers.  It is common in industry for there to be boiler
capacity that is used only occasionally for peaking or during overhaul
periods/ and it is possible to operate all of the boilers at a reduced
firing rate and still meet the normal demand for process steam.  The
other eight methods were applied only to those boilers that were
amenable to the particular modification/ and the method that produced
the lowest nitrogen oxides emissions is listed in Table 1-1.
        The range of total nitrogen oxides concentration that was
measured at the baseline load for each fuel type is listed below.
The table also lists the average nitrogen oxides and excess oxygen
concentrations at baseline load with normal boiler settings and with
the boiler settings that emitted the lowest total nitrogen oxides
concentration.   The Baseline Operation columns summarize the emissions
listed in the Baseline Test Conditions section of Table 1-1.  The

-------
Low NOx Operation columns summarize the emissions listed in the Low
Nitrogen Oxides Test Conditions section of Table 1-1.  All nitrogen
oxides measurements cited in this report in parts per million  (ppm)
have been normalized to "dry at 3% excess oxygen."




Fuel Type
Coal

No. 2 Oil

No. 5 Oil
(PS 300)
No. 6 Oil

Natural Gas

Range
Baseline
NOx
ng/J
(ppm)
100-562
(164-922)
36-101
(65-180)
112-347
(200-619)
107-196
(190-350)
26-191
(50-375)
Average
Baseline 0]
NOx
ng/J
jppm)
290
(475)
67
(120)
164
(293)
151
(269)
71
(139)
Deration

0
%
8.7

5.5

5.8

5.3

4.8

Low NOx Operation
NOx
ng/J
(ppm)
225
(369)
59
(105)
142
(254)
121
(216)
57
(111)

0
%
6.7

4.0

4.9

4.9

5.0

        Eleven combustion modification techniques were used to reduce
the emissions of the total nitrogen oxides.  These techniques were:
1.  Excess Combustion Air Reduction  7.  Boiler Firing Rate Reduction
2.  Staged Air Addition
3.  Burner Out Of Service
4.  Burner Register Adjustment
5.  Combustion Air Temperature
    Reduction
6.  Flue Gas Recirculation
 8.  Fuel Oil Viscosity Variation
 9.  Burner Tune-up
10.  Fuel Atomization Method Change
11.  Fuel Atomization Pressure
     Variation

-------
        While the principal objective of combustion modification was
 to reduce the emissions of total nitrogen oxides, the effect of the
 modifications on other emissions, such as hydrocarbons or the particulate
 emissions, and on boiler efficiency were considered too..  It was found
 that the combustion modification did not increase the hydrocarbon
 emissions to any extent, but it did have a significant effect on the
 particulate emissions and on the boiler heat loss efficiency.
        These effects are summarized for all of the combustion modifi-
 cation methods in Figures 1-3 and 1-4.  The effect on emissions and
 boiler efficiency of each of the methods of combustion modification and
 of each fuel type are discussed in detail in Section 5.0, Combustion
 Modification Test Results.
        The combustion modification effect graphs are divided into
 quadrants.  One is labeled "Best Quadrant" and a second "Worst Quadrant."
 The criterion for the Best Quadrant with solid particulate emissions is
 that the effect of the modification was to reduce the emissions of
 both the total nitrogen oxides and the particulates.  The Worst Quadrant
 is when the effect was to increase both emissions.
        In the case of boiler heat loss efficiency the Best Quadrant
 is when the total nitrogen oxides emissions decreased, but the
 efficiency increased.
        Excess Combustion Air:  The best combustion modification
 method on the basis of ease of implementation, emission reduction, and
 efficiency was to reduce the amount of excess air being fired.  In
 about 72% of the instances when the excess air level was reduced, the
nitrogen oxides emissions decreased and the boiler efficiency increased.
The nitrogen oxides decreased by up to 38% of the baseline level and
 the efficiency increased by up to  3  percentage points.
                                10

-------
                COMBUSTION MODIFICATION METHOD
               A Flue Ga s Re c i rc      VAtomization Method
               ^ Air Register Adj     /S Reduced Excess Air
               ^ Oil Viscosity        Q Overfire Air
               O Burner Tuneup        Q Reduced Air Preheat
                  Atomization Pressure O Burner-Out-Of-Service
                                         ;: '.;:•;•;.•;:•:':'••.';. .Best Quadrant.
                             CHANGE IN EFFICIENCY, %
Figure 1-3.
Effect of combustion modification  methods r
oxides emissions and boiler  efficiency.
:otal  nitrc^e
                                                                6001-43
                                11

-------
Figure 1-4.
t


c*°
w
w
Q
H
X
o

2
w


§
H
H
£

J
<
CH

2
H

w
o
             u
                   •COMBUSTION MODIFICATION METHOD


                   ^Air Temp. Reduction  O Staged Air

                   |]Reduced Firing Rate  O Burner Tuneup

                          Gas Recirc .     O Burner-Out-Of-Service


                             Excess Air
                                O
                                  D   -?

                jBest Quadrant ^x'x^XxXx^x"^
                                                 Worst Quadrant
                                          + 40
                                          +30
                             +20
                                                  +100
                                          -10
                                         A   O
                                                  °
                                         O
                                          -30
                               O
                            CHANGE  IN PARTICULATES,  %
Effect of combustion modification methods on total

nitrogen oxides and solid particulate emissions.
                                                            6001-43
                                12

-------
        The effect on the solid particulate emissions was to reduce
them by up to about 15% with coal fuel and up to about 30% with No. 6
oil fuel.  In no case did the reduction of excess air cause less
complete combustion and an accompanying increase in particulate
emissions.  The criterion for minimum excess air was when the carbon
monoxide emissions exceeded 100 ppm.  Carbon monoxide usually appeared
in the flue gas before smoke did.
       Staged Air:  The second most effective combustion modification
was a form of staged combustion where the combustion air was added near
the end of the flame.  The nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced by
up to 47% with this technique.  Diverting some of the combustion air
from the initial combustion zone at the burner and injecting it into
the combustion zone further downflame caused the combustion to be more
fuel-rich.  This slowed the combustion process and the products of
combustion then cooled below the nitrogen oxides formation temperature
of about 2000 K  (3300°F) more quickly, thus inhibiting the formation
of nitrogen oxides.
        In most cases, however, the boiler efficiency decreased by up
to one percentage point, with some  instances of decreases of up to
three percentage points.  The efficiency dropped because more air
was required overall through the combination of the burner and the
overfire ports than was required through the burner alone.  This
resulted  in more hot air being exhausted up the chimney, and a
corresponding decrease  in the ASME  heat loss efficiency.
        Three of the  staged  air tests were made with No. 6 oil fuel
and in all cases the particulates increased, by 12 to 68%  (see
Fig. 1-4).  Apparently, delaying complete combustion increased the
amount of unburned carbon in the flue gas.
                                 13

-------
         Burner Out Of Service:   The form of staged combustion
 that reduced the total nitrogen oxides  emissions  the  most  was operation
 with one of the burners out of  service.   In this  mode the  fuel,  but
 not the  air,  to one of the  burners  was  turned off.  The  total amount of
 fuel being burned was held  constant by  increasing the fuel,  but  again
 not the  air,  to the other burners.   The  result was  that  the  other
 burners  were  operating fuel-rich and complete combustion was delayed by
 the surplus of fuel and the paucity of  air.
         With a burner out of service the total nitrogen  oxides emissions
 were reduced from 9 to 54%  (see Fig,  1-3).   An advantage of  this  type of
 combustion modification was that the boiler efficiency was relatively
 unaffected and varied by only +^0.5 percentage points over nine  runs.
 A disadvantage was  that the combustion process was  disturbed such that
 the particulate emissions always increased.   In one case the increase
 was about 54% and in the second case  the increase was about  95%  for  a
 comparable drop in  nitrogen oxides  concentration.
         Register  Adjustment:  Readjusting the  burner air registers
 succeeded in  reducing the nitrogen  oxides by  3 to 21%.   The  efficiency  varied
 from unchanged  to 1%  lower,   and  the particulate emissions were unchanged.
         Combustion Air  Temperature  Reduction:  Reducing  the  preheating
 of  the combustion air  reduced the total  nitrogen oxides  by up to  32%.
 The effect on boiler efficiency was to decrease it by 1% in  one case
 and to increase it by  3% in  another case.  In  three other instances
 the efficiency did not change.
        In one test, No. 130-1,  the combustion air temperature was
 increased above the nominal, and the particulates decreased  by 64%.
Probably the increased combustion air resulted in a better-mixed  and
hotter flame and in increased burnout of the carbon in the fly ash.
No particulate emission measurements were made at low combustion  air
 temperatures.
                                14

-------
        Flue Gas Recirculation:  Flue gas recirculation was successful
in reducing the total nitrogen oxides concentration in the flue gases
by 10 to 40%, with one outstanding instance in natural gas fuel of a
reduction of 73%.  The efficiency was unaffected if the work required
to operate the recirculation pump was neglected.  There was an increase
in the solid particulate concentration of about 5%, due probably to
a slight increase in the unburned carbon in the less stable flame that
resulted when flue gas was recirculated.
        Firing Rate Reduction:  When the combustion was modified by
lowering the firing rate or steam output of a boiler the total nitrogen
oxides emissions decreased in 20 instances and increased in 16 instances
by up to about +_ 25%.  The reason for the increase was that the
operational procedure in almost all boiler houses was to increase the
amount of excess air being fired at the lower firing rates, and an
increase in excess air often caused an increase in the total nitrogen
oxides emissions.
        Watertube gas-fired boilers were relatively insensitive to
firing rate changes unless they had air preheaters.  Then, reductions
in total nitrogen oxides of about 20% were realized as the firing
rate was dropped from 100% of name plate capacity to 50% of capacity.
Generally, coal fired watertube boilers showed an increase in nitrogen
oxides emissions when operating below 60% capacity.  This increase
usually coincided with an increase in the excess air level.  However,
the particulate emissions from the spreader stoker of Test No. 139
decreased by 44% below the baseline firing rate level.  Watertube
oil-fired boilers showed little or no relationship between nitrogen
oxides emissions and firing rate.
        Fuel Oil Viscosity:  Tests were conducted with No. 6 oil over
an oil  temperature range of 240 K to 400 K  (158°F  to  248°F).  No
consistent  relationship was observed, although  in  all  cases the  change
                                 15

-------
 in the total nitrogen oxides emissions ranged between a reduction of
 16% and an increase of 31% of the  unmodified baseline emission level.
 The boiler efficiency was  increased from one to three percentage
 points.
         Burner Tuneup:   At Locations 1 and  27 the  field maintenance
 technician of the  burner manufacturer tuned the burner after  the
 baseline  emissions measurements had been made.   Tuneup consisted  of
 adjusting the excess  air to  the proper level for each load, adjusting
 the burner registers  to  give  a hard,  bright flame  and replacing worn
 parts  in  the  oil gun  tips.
        In all  cases  there was a slight  increase of up  to one  percent
 in  the boiler ASME heat  loss  efficiency.  In one instance, Test No.  112,
 the particulate emissions were unchanged, in another  instance, Test
 No.  108,  they increased  by 140%.  This latter increase  probably was
 due to flame  quenching caused by an  increase  in the impingement of
 the flame  on  the water walls of the  furnace.  The oil spray angle of
 the burner  used with this boiler was  unusually  large.

        Atomization Method:  The total nitrogen oxides  emissions were
 found to be relatively independent of the fuel oil atomization method,
 i.e., steam,  air, pressure or rotary  cup, and dependent upon the
 characteristics of  the individual burner.  For a given  oil burner the
 oil  atomization method that produced  the lowest nitrogen oxides emissions,
 also usually produced the highest particulate emissions of the test
 series.  The boiler efficiency was unaffected to any significant
 degree by the type of atomization employed.    In general the test
 results were that a well-maintained oil  burner  operating near  its
 design point will produce about the same level of nitrogen oxides and
particulate emissions regardless of the atomization method used.
                                16

-------
        Atomization Pressure:   When the atomization pressure was
increased and the boiler was at 80% of capacity,  the nitrogen oxides
emissions decreased by about 10% and the efficiency was unchanged.
The series of tests done by another KVB field crew on a twin boiler
in the same boiler house achieved a reduction of about 50% in solid
particulates by increasing the oil pressure from 580 to 722 kPa (70
to 90 psig).  The decrease was deemed to be due to the smaller oil
droplets that were formed when the atomization pressure was increased.

                            Conclusions
        On the basis of the results of the field measurements it appears
to be possible and practicable to reduce the total nitrogen oxides
emissions by up to 47% by six of the eleven combustion modification
methods.  However, with only three of the methods is the boiler
efficiency unimpared:  excess air reduction, staged combustion with a
burner-out-of-service, and flue gas recirculation.  Of these three,
excess air reduction is the most attractive method because, while the
nitrogen oxides reduction is only about 35%, the particulate emissions
do not increase, as they do with most of the other reduction methods,
and the boiler efficiency is maintained or improved.  Flue gas
recirculation is promising, since the increase in particulate was
only 5%.   Staged air addition, as with burners-out-of-service also is
somewhat promising, but considerable work will be required in
distributing the air so the particulates do not increase.
                                  17

-------
                            SECTION 2.0
                       TEST BOILER SELECTION

        The findings of Phase I on the amount and potential reduction
of pollutant emissions from industrial boilers were used in the
selection of boilers for Phase II.  Eighteen boilers that had the
capability of one or more combustion modification categories,
either as they stood or with structural modifications, were chosen
for testing during Phase II.
        KVB, Inc. and others have established during testing of
utility boilers that certain modifications of the air-fuel mixture
ratio, flame enthalpy and/or firing inputs reduced the emissions
of the total nitrogen oxides significantly.  During Phase I of
this program several industrial-sized boilers were tested that had
certain of these combustion modifications built in.  Measurements
were made of the emissions from these boilers and were compared to
the emissions from similar boilers that did not have the combustion
modification.  Examples are boilers with and without combustion air
preheaters and with single and dual air registers.
        It was found that boilers with preheated combustion air, as
a group, had higher nitrogen oxides emissions than did those without
preheated air.  It also was found that taking a burner out of service
on a multiple burner boiler reduced the nitrogen oxides emissions.
These findings were consistent with the findings for utility boilers.
        It was not the purpose of the Phase I field measurements to
make an extensive evaluation of the promising combustion modifications,
This was, however, the purpose of Phase II.  For Phase II, eleven
combustion modification methods were selected for investigation and
eighteen individual boilers were selected that were amenable to
combustion modification.
                                18

-------
        The  combustion modification methods that were investigated
 during both  Phases  I and  II are  listed  in Table 5-1.  The Phase  II
 boilers are  described in  Table 7-1 of this report and the Phase  I
 boilers are  described in  Reference 1.

        One  combustion modification technique for which no existing
boiler could be found was flue gas recirculation.  In this instance
a boiler at  Location 19 was modified by adding flue gas
recirculation  (see Subsection 5.2.2).  Also, no existing boilers
could be found where the location of the  staged  air injection
ports could  be changed.   Two boilers, the one at Location 19 and one
at Location  38, were modified for this purpose  (see Subsection 5.1.2).
        Four of the boilers tested during Phase I qualified for
testing in Phase II.  The other fifteen were recommended by members
of the boiler and burner manufacturing industry as a result of a
program review meeting that was held in June 1974.  At that time,
representatives of the major boiler and burner manufacturers were
told of the  objectives of the combustion modifications project and
were asked to recommend candidate boilers for Phase II.
        A total of nineteen different boilers at seventeen locations
were tested.  Some were suitable for more than one combustion
modification method or fuel.  For example, at Location No. 38 both
staged   air and combustion air temperature with gas and oil fuels
were investigated using the same boiler.  In all, forty-one
combinations of combustion modification methods and fuels were tested
on the nineteen boilers.   In Phase I a total of seventy-five sets
of test data on different boiler/burner/fuel combinations were
obtained,  for a total for the two phases of sixty-five boilers and
one hundred  sixteen combinations.
                                19

-------
        In Phase 1     boilers were selected to reflect the
geographical distribution of boilers     fuels throughout
continental United States.  The preponderance of test boiler sites
was east of the Mississippi River,  This criterion          in
II also, although not as rigorously, since certain specific types
of boilers were sought.  This is illustrated in Figure 2-1 which
shows all of the sites for Phases I rind II.  Locations 1
through 26 were visited during Phase 1 and Nos, 27 through 39 during
Phase II.  Location Nos. 1, 13, 19     20 were visited during both
phases.
Figure 2-1.  Field test site locations,
6001-43
                                 20

-------
                                    3.0


        The emission                        with instrumentation con-
       In the 2.5 by 9        (8 by 27 ft) laboratory trailer of which
exterior and Interior views are shown in Figure 3-1.  The gaseous
emission             »        sulfur oxides, were      with analyzers
located in                 console in the trailer.  The particulate
concentration, particulate size, and sulfur oxides concentration
                       with instrumentation          in the wet
chemistry      of     laboratory     taken to            port.  The
weighing      titration           In or          laboratory.
        The  emission                                       the
             that shown in  the      below.  The operation  of
instrumentation is  discussed  in detail  In Section 3.0 of           1.

               3-1.
hrni s.sion
Nitric oxide
Oxides of  nitrogen


Oxygen
Hydrocarbons
Sulfur

Total particuiate
   matter
Particulate

Opacity
  x
NO
NO
CO
CO,
°2*
HC
SO ,
K
          Measurement Method
Chenti luminescent
Chemiluminescent
Spectrometer
Spectrometer
Polarographic
      ionization
Absorption/
  titration

    Std,        5
        itnpactor
Reflection
1PA             9
Thermo Electron
Thermo Electron
Beckman
Becknan
"Feledyne
Beckman

MOT Equipment Co.

Joy Mfg. Co.
Monsanto-Brink
         Appliance Co,
                                                      6001-43
                                  21

-------
          Gas Emission
          Measurement
          Console
Sulfur and Particulat.fi
Measurement Area  -
Wet Chemistry
                                      Mobile Laboratory
                                      Truck and Trailer
Figure 3-1.   Interior  and  exterior views of mobile laboratory.

                                                       6001-43
                            22

-------
3.1
        The measurement of particulate size was added to the measure-
ments to be      during Phase II.  A Brink Model "B" Cascade Impactor
was selected, because the grain loading of the coal-fueled boilers
was expected to be high.  The nominal sample flow rate of 2.8 1/min
(liters per minute) was low enough that the impactor did not readily
overload.  One stage of the cascade irnpactor is shown in Figure 3-2.
        A Cahn Model G-2 Electro-balance     used to weigh  the
collected sample.  To improve the accuracy of the weighing, an
aluminum  substrate was placed in each steel collection cup.  The
particles were collected and weighed on       lightweight discs,
and the origiaal steel collection      were      only as a backing
for these  substrates,
        A common problem with impactotrs is that the particles do not
adhere to the stage surface, but strike it, rebound, and are reentrained
in the flow to the next stage.     Reentrairanent has not proved to be a
problem with the cascade impactor measurements KVB has made, however.
The flue gas flow rate     reduced from the nominal 2.8 1/min to 2.0
1/min or less, and visual examination of the collection stages by hand
lens found no evidence of scouring or reentrainment.  One     of stages
was further examined under an electron microscope and there     no sign
of a significant number of particulates that were larger than the
aerodynamic diameter cut point of the preceding stage.  There was,
however, a considerable amount of sponge-like material that appeared
to be an agglomeration of small particles.
        Back-up filters were      as the final       of the itapactor
to collect the material that        the last irapaction stage.
Binderless, glass-fiber filter material, such as high-purity
Geiman Type A glass fiber filter     employed for this purpose.
The 25 mm diameter circular filters were placed under the spring
in the last stage of the impactcr.
                                 23

-------
                                                                  2.695
  .350-
                       #4-40 Tap
                        Oour Places
                        n 1-1/4 Circle
                                          Assembled
                                           Cyclone
          #7 Drill
          .201 Tangent
          To Bore
           *
                          PRECUTTER CYCLONE
                                                        3 Slots
                     ^-Complete
                        Stage
                                            Single
                                        Collection.
                                               Cup
                               STAGE
Figure 3-2.
Detail of one stage and of precutter cyclone for
cascade  impactor.
                                                             6001-43
                                 24

-------
        The filter was protected from being cut by the spring by a
Teflon O-ring and a second filter disc and a wire mesh were placed
beneath the filter to act as a support.
        For accurate weighing of collected material, a Cahn G-2
Electro-balance with a sensitivity of 0.05 micrograms was used.
This sensitivity was needed for the lower stage of the impactor
where the collected weight occasionally was less than 0.1 mg.
        The flow rate and nozzle size were closely coupled, and
requirements for isokinetic or near-isokinetic nozzle flow sometimes
forced a compromise on nozzle selection.  The general order of
priorities used by KVB to determine nozzle size in the field was
 (1) nozzle diameter  (minimum only),  (2) last stage jet velocity,
 (3) isokinetic flow rate required, and  (4) nozzle diameter if
greater than 2.0 mm.  The impactor nozzle diameter was selected
to provide as close to isokinetic collection as was practicable.
Very small bore nozzles were avoided to forestall nozzle plugging
by fly ash.
        The impactor was placed  inside the chimney and was heated
to flue gas temperature by  the flue gas itself before the sample
collection was begun.  The  inlet nozzle was pointed downstream of
the flow  field during  this  heating phase  to prevent the premature
accumulation of particulates in  the  impactor.
        The flow through the impactor was measured before each use
to determine the actual cut points of  the individual  stages.   This
 level  then was maintained by monitoring the  flow through the
 impactor  assembly with the  pressure  gauges on  the EPA Method  5
 control box.   The pump on the  control  box was  used  to maintain
 the  flow.  Attempts to modulate  flow to compensate  for  changes
 in the duct  flow  rate and to maintain  isokinetic sampling  exactly
 would have destroyed the utility of  the  data by changing the  cut
 points of the  individual  stages.  During  data  analysis  the true
                                 25

-------
 cut points were calculated for the actual gas flow rate through
 the impactar.
         Measurements were made at a sufficient number of points
 across the flue or smoke stack, as specified by EPA Method 5,  to
 make certain that a representative sample of particulates was
 obtained.
         When coal fuel  was fired and sampling was done upstream of
 the dust collector,  the percentage (by weight)  of material with
 sizes larger than ten micrometers was appreciable.   In such cases
 the precutter cyclone shown in Figure 3-2 was used to prevent
 overloading of the upper impactor stages.
         In those instances where a precollector cyclone was used,
 all material from the nozzle to the outlet of the cyclone was
 included with the cyclone catch.   All material  between the cyclone
 outlet and the second stage nozzle was included with material
 collected  on the first  collection substrate.   All adjacent walls
 were brushed off,  as well as around the  underside of the nozzle.
 All material between the second stage nozzle  and third stage
 nozzle was included  with that on the  second collection substrate.
 This process was continued down to the last collection substrate.

 3.2      SMOKE  SPOT
         During Phase  II  the  Bacharach smoke spot numbers  were
measured according to ASTM Designation D  2156-65.   Smoke  spot
measurements were  obtained by pulling a fixed volume  of  flue gas
through  a  standard filter  paper.   The  color (or  shade) of the
spots  that were  produced were matched visually with a standard
smoke  spot scale.  The  result was  a  (Bacharach)  "Smoke Number"
which was used to  characterize  the density  of smoke  in the  flue gas.
                                26

-------
        The sampling device is a hand pump similar to the one shown
in Figure 3-3.  It is a commercially available item that can pass
36,900 + 1650 cubic centimeters of gas at 16°C and 1 atmosphere
pressure through an enclosed filter paper for each 6.5 square
centimeters effective surface area of the filter paper.
                              Sampling Tube
                                                               n
  Filter Paper
                 Plunger
Figure 3-3.  Field Service Type Smoke Tester
                                                         Handle
                                                      6001-43
        The standard smoke scale consists of a series of ten spots
numbered consecutively from 0 to 9, and ranging in equal photometric
steps from white through neutral shades of gray to black.  The
standard spots are imprinted on white paper having an absolute
surface reflectance of between 82.5 and 87.5%, determined
photometrically.  The smoke scale spot number is defined as the
reduction  (due to smoke) in the amount of light reflected by a
spot divided by 10.
        The smoke density is reported as the Smoke Spot Number of
the spot on the standard smoke scale that most closely corresponds
to the color of the soiled spot on the sample filter paper.
Differences between two standard Smoke Spot Numbers are interpolated
to the nearest half number.
                                27

-------
3.3     PLUME OPACITY
        Smoke plume opacity readings were taken by a field crew member
who was a certificated graduate of a U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
approved "Smoke School."  Observations were made at the same time
that particulate measurements are made and as often in addition as
deemed necessary to gather the maximum amount of information.  The
procedures set forth in EPA Method 9, "Visual Determinations of the
Opacity of Emissions for Stationary Sources" were followed, except
that the duration of the observation period was only six minutes.
Opacity measurements were made and recorded every fifteen seconds
during an observation period.  At least one six-minute opacity
observation was made every thirty minutes.
                                28

-------
                            SECTION 4.0
                       BASELINE TEST RESULTS

        The emissions and efficiency of 47 boilers during Phase I and
19 boilers during Phase II were measured over a two year period.  The
Phase I data were analyzed and discussed in detail in the Phase I Final
Report No. EPA-650/2-74-078-a (Ref. 1), and Phase II data and analysis
are presented in this report.  This section contains graphs and tables
that summarize all of the data taken both at baseline and at low
nitrogen oxides emission settings of the boilers.  The results of the
analysis of the baseline data are discussed in this section and the
results of the analysis of the low nitrogen oxides data are discussed
in the following section.
        The total nitrogen oxides and solid  (or filterable) particulate
emissions at baseline settings of the boilers are shown in Figures 4-1
and 4-2.  Baseline is defined as the normal boiler settings for a load
of eighty percent of the nameplate capacity.
        The primary categorization of boilers when the boilers were
originally selected was by capacity or size, because it was expected
that the  larger boilers would have the larger emissions.  However, the
total nitrogen oxides emissions were found  to be only slightly
dependent upon boiler size as is indicated  by Figure 4-1.  The nitrogen
oxides emissions, however, were very dependent upon the fuel being
fired.  This dependence is illustrated in the table of the range and
average concentration of nitrogen oxides that is in Subsection  1.2.
Coal fueled boilers were the greater emitters of total nitrogen oxides.
        The particulate emissions were not  at all dependent upon the
boiler size, but are strongly dependent upon the fuel type.  Figure
4-2 shows this relationship.  The particulate emissions from coal
fuel were ten times greater  than from oil and one hundred times  greater
                                29

-------
U)
o
600 .
550 .
500 -
450 .
S « 400 •
Q o
H
O £ 350 .
gjf
O •
0.
900
800
700

• o
4?
>, 50°
- c
•0
' a
_ a 400
300
_ 200
5



©

*ef
e£ #

I^^^B K^
^^^S^&-
tjjjji*1^^
1K>*^
^31



^»f ^f>

^ A
@
%)^





A78



—
Numerals Inside S\
Numbers.




\



3-140
mbols Are Test
Q Oil Fxiel
D Natural Gas
Fuel
Zj Coal Fuel


^
•
^156
$
	 149

0 10° 200 300 400 SOt
10 lb/hr of steam
i 	 J i ...



0 100 200 300 400 400
                                                         GJ/hr of equivalent saturated steam

                                                         TEST LOAD
       Figure 4-1.  Total oxides of nitrogen concentration at baseload.
                                                                                              6001-43

-------
Test No.

17
:a
19
JO
jf>
r>
26
31
3?
42
A3
73
131
131
150
165
H.9


3
7
3
9
10
21
22
29
33
34
35
44
45
46
52
54
59
63
65
66
70
102
107
111
126
160
170
176
186
195
200


4
12
14
15
24
25
JO
37
38
58
67
75
7V
80




... . , - . - . - . . . 1 . COAL

-" 	 ' ' 	 	 - •" J FUEL
|
1
1
^ 	 	 •" 	 I

J


~™1
i
	 ,.:..-....!
•• . ..••••••(
1
..': .•""'---; _ 	 :-• 	 - - ... ••.-_ .; . .......;..:.. . . - , . -.-.. -.:.-. ;;.U


- , 1 OIL

,.,,,,, ^- i fUJiL
. • . . . - - 1
1

J
, •;•;•• 	 ' 	 	 ... """ 	 t 	 •;•••__;•;:!

• " ' ". 	 .. ..3
j
I
j
"" 	 1
""• .:::.:r:.:- 	 i

"-""" 	 	 ' i
1
1 i
	 j 	

i

•^""L 	 " "J~" 	 : "" 	 .':::.'i
	 	 	 	 -,;i
	 	 ' ....^ 	 .
	 i
tll 	 	 . - 	 ' .. ....I
, i
	 • • . 	 	 ' u ,
•. 	 ;"V"; , 	 - '


	 l_ NATURAL GAS

' 	 ;, J PHEL
I
" ,",, -, ., 	 J
J 	

" " 	 ,. 1 	 -,,r^
:: :-,:. ,;i
, - -J - ,
J
1
	 ^ •.-;-•- -i

i i i i 1 - 1 	 i 	
I •! i i • '
        .0905  .001
                         .005  .01
                 .05
             lb/106 Btu
                                               O.I
                                                          0.5   1.0
                                                                           5.0   10.0
                    t
4-
f
                                    10
                                                     1 QfJ   200
                                                                500   1000   2000
                                                                                5000
                              Solid  Particulate Concentration,  ng/J
Figure 4-2.   Solid particulate  emissions at baseload.
                                                                   6001-43
                                    31

-------
than from natural gas fuel.  The solid particulate concentration
includes only the solid particulate that was caught by a filter and
not the gaseous that was condensed and scrubbed out by the water-filled
bubblers.  The total particulate emissions, including both filterable
and condensable, are listed in Table 4-1.
        Table 4-1 lists the Phase II emissions measurements made both
with the baseline boiler settings and with the combustion process
modified to achieve low nitrogen oxides emissions.  A similar table
of Phase I measurements is contained in Section 2 of Reference 1.

        The data in Table  4-1 are tabulated in order of Test Run
Numbers.  The Test Run Number consists of two parts:  the basic
test number designation which corresponds to a particular combina-
tion of boiler, fuel, and  combustion modification to the left of
the dash and the run number within the given test to the right of
the dash.  A typical test  may have consisted of up to ten individual
measurement runs made with different settings of the boiler controls.
Some tests with the staged combustion modification were comprised
of as  many as 50 individual runs.
        The Location Number in the second column positions the test
site geographically on Figure 2-1.  Locations distributed through-
out the continental United States were chosen to insure that a
variety of fuels would be  tested.
        The columns from Furnace Type through Test Load indicate
where  the particular test  falls among the principal test variables
developed during the initial test planning of Phase I.  The columns
to the right of the one labeled Test Load are data taken during
the corresponding Test Run.
                                32

-------
        For all boilers, two basic types of measurements were
made:
        1.  Baseline:  approximately eighty percent of rated capacity
            and normal control settings.
        2.  Low Air:  Minimum excess air level at baseline load at
            which the boiler could be operated without smoke, excessive
            carbon monoxide, or hydrocarbon emissions.
Test types which are the various combustion modification methods tested
are listed in the sixth column.  The column titled Test Fuel indicates
the fuel being fired at the time of the test run.  A brief explanation
of the abbreviations and symbols used follows the table, and a complete
glossary of terms used throughout the report is in Section 10.  A list
of conversion factors for English and Systeme International d'Unites
 (designated SI units in all languages)  is contained in Section 11.
        In the balance of this section, the baseline gaseous and
particulate emission measurements for coal, oil, natural gas,
refinery  gas and mixed  fuels are discussed in detail.
                                 33

-------
Table 4-1.  BOILER EMISSION MEASUREMENTS.

Test
Run
NO.
iji-:

102-G
103-1

1O4-1

1C5-1



lO~-2
10i-3

IC^-l

110-1


112-6
113-2

114-4

115-1

116-1

117-2

116-1

il^-1
119-4

119-6
120-3

1:1-1

122-1


Loca
tion
1

1
1

1

1



1
1

27

2?


27
29

2?

29

29

29

29

29
29


29

29

28


Burner
Type
F.in^)

Steaa
Steam

Rin^

Ring

Ring

Steam
Stearo

Rinq

Ring


Stean
Rinq

Ring

Ring

Steam

Stean

Steam

Stean
Stean

Stean
Stean

Sto.im

Rinq


Test
Fuel
:IG

#2
#2

SG

NG



*2
#2

NG

NG


PS 300
NG

NG

NG

46

*6

*6

*6
*6

»6
16

•G

NG


Test
Type
8i.sc

Base
LowAir
•
Base

HiAir



Base
BrTune

Base

BrTune


BrTur.e
Base

LowAir

VPH

Base

LowAir

VPH

LowLoad
BOOS

BOOS
Visc-
osity
TP

Base


Capacity
GJ/hr
UO3 lb/hr)
31
(29)
18
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
106
(10O)
106
(100)
106
(100)
106
(100)
158
(15U)
158
(150)
158
(ISO)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
158
(150)
74
(TO)

Test Load
GJ/hr
U03 lb/hr)
18
(17)
18
(17)
20
(19)
25
(24)
25
(?4)

(24)
26
(25)
25
(24)
79
(75)
82
(78)
90
(85)
74
(70)
127
(120)
126
(119)
126
tllO)
126
(110)
129
(122)
127
(120)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
76
(72)
31
(29)

Excess
2.2

5.3
4.7

0.9

1.8



2.7
3.8

6.6

2.4

9. 3
6.5
5.3

3.2

5.2

5.0

3.1

4.8

5.5
6.0

5.4
5.2

5.4

5.7


HO
ng/3
(ppa)
39.6
(77.7)
50.7
90.3)
47.1
84)
38. 0
74.5)
40.7
79.8)
41.8
81.9)
47,7
85)
48.3
86.1)
56.6
111)
77.5
152)
257
458)
277
494)
7S.5
154)
81.6
160)
81.1
159)
165
294)
138
246)
158
282)
139
248)
99.3
177)
104
18C)
138
246)
142
254)
108
2)1)

NO
ng/J
(ppm)
37.7
(74)
48.2
(86)
44.9
(80)
36.2
(71)
38,8
(76)
39.8
(78)
45.4
(11)
46
(82)
55.6
(10»)
75.0
(147)
243
(442)
269
(473)
73.4
(144)
78.0
(153)
78.5
(154)
158
(282)
135
(240)
155
(276)
134
(239)
94.8
(169)
102
(1B2)
136
(242)
140
(250)
97.4
(191)

dry
10.8

11.6
11.7

11.2

10,9

10.4

13.2
12,5

7,9

9,3

sTa"
10,0
8.0

8.8

7,8

11,8

13.4

11,8

11,2
9,8

11.8
12,0

11.4

7.6


CO
ng/J
(ppm)
21
(67)
31
(90)
51
(150)
152
(483)
0
(0)
0
(0)
139
(407)
38
(110)
0
(O)
0
(0)
40
(116)
0
(0)
O
(0)
3.4
(11)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
3.4
(10)
6.8
(20)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

HC
ng/J
(ppm)
.
_
_
-
_
„
^
_


_
.
-
.
_
_
2.5
(14)
-
-
22
(125)
12
(70)
12
(65)
6.8
(35)
4.9
(25)
4.9
(25)

2.9
(15)
6.8
(35)
.
3.9
(20)
0
(0)

SO
ng/5
(ppm)
.
_
188
(241)
_
_
_
_



300
(384)
.
_
_
_

488
(626)
-
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
_
.
_
_
-

1018
130:;)
_
_
,.
_
-

S02
(ppm)
fc

176
(226)
_
_
fc
_



2.39
(371)
_
^
^
^

483
(619)
-
—
^
_
_
_

_
_
_
_
w
_
-

1005
(1289)
_
_
_
,
~

To»>.al
Partic.
Ub/MB)


12 "
(0.023)

_

I

_

7.7
(O.O18)
19.4
(0.045)
_

_

3O.<)
(0.072)
32.7
(0.076)
_
^

_
_

—
_
_
_
_
24.5
(0.057)

70.5
(0.164)
_
_
_
_
-
Solid
Partic
UiJ/.v.3>


7.3
(0.017)


"


_

4.7
(0.011)
:2.o
(0.328)


_

— iTTTi —
(0.061)
28.4
(0.066)
__
_

_


_
_
_
_
_
16.9
(0.044)

67.1
(0.156)
_
_
_
_
-

Boiler
Effi-
ciency
It,

80
81

81

81

80

S3
83

ft2

33

	 ill
82
82

83

84

S7

83

88

88
87

83
88

88

83


^:











.






_







— : 	



_

„





_

0

                                               6001-43

-------
                                                 Table 4-1.  Continued
en

T»«t
Run
Vo.
123-2

124-1

124-5

125-3

126-2

127-3

128-1

128-5

129-1

130-1

131-4

132-1

133-1

133-2

13J-2

135-2

136-3

137-1

13C-2

139-4

139-3

139-7

139-10



Loca-
tion
28

26

2S

28

28

28

28

28

28

28

31

31

31

31

3Q

30

30

3C

30

30

3C

30

30



Burner
Type
Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Steam

Steam

Steam

Stean

Steam

Steam

Pulv.

Pulv,

Pulv.

Pulv.

SpStk

SpStJc

SpStk

SpStk

SpStfc

SpStk

SpStX

SpStk

SpStk



Test
Fuel
NO

MG

NG

MG

»6

#6

16

»6

*6

»6

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coa]

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

coal

Coal



Test
Type
LovAir

BOOS

BOOS

VPH

Base

LowAir

BOOS

BOOS

Viscosity

VPH

Base

LowAir

LowLoad

BOOS

Base

LowAir

SCA

TP

VPH

LowLoad

LowAir
Low Load
OFA
Low Load
OFA
Low Load

Capacity
CJ/hr
Ui>3 Ib/hr)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
74
(70)
274
(260)
274
(260)
274
(260)
274
(260)
132
(125)
132
(125)
13?
(125)
132
(125)
132
(125)
132
(125)
132
(US)
132

132
(125)

Test Load
GJ/hr
UC3 lh/hr
31
(29)
31
(29)
32
(30)
31
(29)
31
(29)
30
(28)
31
(29)
32
(30)
31
(29)
32
(30)
137
(130)
139
(132)
70
(66)
66
(63)
87
(82)
87
(82)
87
(82)

Excess
0,
%2
3.7

.4

5.3

5.6

5.3

4.9

5.9

4.8

5.2

5.2

7.4

6.6

7.2

7.5

6.2

4.7

6.1


NO
ng?J
(ppm)
85
(1C6)
62
(122)
«9.0
(96)
99.5
(195)
115
(205)
101
(180)
125
(223)
105
(lUci)
1S1
(269)
US
(246)
b63
(922)
529
(866)
618
1011)
37ft
(618)
196
(320)
142
(233)
145
(237)

HO
ng/J
tppo)
82
(160)
61
(119)
4G.4
(91)
98.9
(194)
112
(200)
97.6
(174)
121
(215)
103
(1B3)
14B
(263)
135
(241)
559
(915'
519
(850)
615
(1006)
361
(591)
192
(314)
: js
(221)
140
(229)

C02
dry
%
9.1

7.8

7.9

7.6

11.6

11.6

11.2

11.6

11.9

:o.o

11.8

12.5

11.9

11.8

12.8

14.2

12.9


co
ng/J
(ppn)
3.4
(11)
0
(0)
16
(50)
0
(0)
0
(0)
9.5
(28)
33
(9R)
34
(100)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0>
0
(0)
0
<0>
8.2
(22)
18
(49)

IK
ng/J
(ppm)
0
(0!
0
(0)
0
(0)
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

so
rg?J
(ppm)
.
-
_
-
_
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
1037
(1330)
813
(950)
-
-
-
-
-
-
947
(1114)
-
-
-
-

S02
ng/J
(ppm)
_
-
-
-
_
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
-
1022
(1310)
R07
(945)
-
-
-
-
-
-
927
(1091)
-
-
-
-
Total
Partic.
.-.<7/J
(Ib/KB)
_
-
_
-
_
-
.
-
140
(0.325)
-
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
f,4.5
(o.:so)
22do
(5.32)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1320
(3. 07)
847
(1.97)
-
-
Solid
Partic
r-.c/J
Ilb/XB)
_
-
_
-
_
-
_
.
127
(0.2S5
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
40.4
(0.: :s>
2 1' 7*
ti.30)
-
-
-
-
-
-
1312
(3.05)
333 '
(1.95)
-
-
Boiler
E£Ji-
c i«r.cy
%
85

83

81

•J3

86

37

86

8
51
(48)
53
(50)
53
(50)

5.0

10.3

7.4

9.6

7.7


134
(219)
214
(351)
119
1195)
209
(342)
164
(269)

132
(216)
213
(348)
117
(191)
205
(335)
163
(266)

13.8

9.4

11.8

9.8

11.5

3.7
(10)
13
(35)
15
(40)
15
(40)
20
(53)

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
_
757
<1.75)
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
_
740
(1.72)

-
-
-
-
-

64

85

tiH

85

86


7.3

6.0

4.0

-

-

                                                                                  6001-43

-------
                                                  Table 4-1.   Continued
Tes
So.
'..N-2

141-1
141-5

141-E-

142-i



14-1-2

1-45-3

146- 1
1-J7-1



14 '.- 1

148-4

14S-6

l-t?-i



150-2

151-1

151-4

151-5



152-2

152-4

152-5

Loca
tion
32

32
32

32

32



32

32

32
32



32

32

32

33



33

33

33

33



33

33

33

Burner
Type
Ring

Ring
Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Sing

Ring

Ring
Rir.g

King

Ring

Ring

Ring

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Test
Fuel
NG

KG
NC

NG

NG



NG

NG

NG
NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

Rtf
Gas

Gas
Ref
Gas
Set
Gas
Ret
Gas
Rcf
Gas

Gas
Ref
Gas
Ref
C-as
Rcf
Cas
Test
Type
Base

AirReg
LowAir
AirHeg
WH
. AirReg
Vlll
VTH

Base

VPK

LowAir

Low Load
BOOS

BOOS

BOOS

AirReg

AirReg
LowAir
Base
Cc-bCyc
KiLoad
CoBbCyc
Hi Load
CoirtjCyc
Base
SnglCyc
BOOS
SnglCyc
BOOS
SnglCyc

Conbcyc
BOOS
CoaibCj-c
BOOS
CombCyc
SCOS
ConbCyc
Capacity
CJ/hr
(10 3 Ib/hr)
137
(130)
137
(1 30)
137
(130)
137
(130)
137
(130)
127
(120)
127
(120)
127
(120)
127
(120)
127
(120)

(120)
127
(120)
127
(120)
127
(120)
;.8o
(350)
580
(550)
580
(550)
580
(550)
580
<550)
560
(550)
*j&O
(550)
5t»0
(550)
580
(»50)
580
(iSO)
Test load
GJ/hr
flO* Uj/hr)
81
(77)
81
(77)
85
(81)
84
(BO)
81
(77)
SB
(83)
87
(82)
88
(83)
64
(61)
66
(63)
65
(62)
65
(62)
87
(82)
88
(83)
506
(480)
544
(516)
528
(500)
481
(4S6)
450
(427)
433
(410)
506
(480)
506
(480)
468
(444)
468
(444)
Excess
7.1

6.1
6."

6.7

7.1

4.4

4.4

2.2

4.0
4.0

4.0

4.4

4.7

2,5

5.1

3.8

10.3

5.S

6.4

7.3

575

4.8

6.0

5.5

(PP-)
81.6
(160)
100
(197)
100
(196)
119
(234)
83.1
(163)
117
(230)
116
(228)
111
(218)
106
(207)
105
(206)
107
(209)
74.5
(146)
111
(218)
100
(197)
73.4
(146)
69.4
(138)
65.4
(130)
74.9
(149)
61.9
(123)
45.3
(90)
S.3.8
(107)
61.9
(123)
67.4
(134)
70.4
(149)
NO
ng/J
78.5
(154)
97.9
(192)
98.9
(194)
113
(232)
31.6
(160)
116
(228)
115
(226)
1)0
(216)
105
(205)
105
(2P5)
106
(207)
72.4
(142)
110
(216)
100
(196)
69.4
(133)
65.9
(131)
62.4
(124)
71.4
(142)
58.9
(117)
42.8
(85)
T~3~
(102)
5B.9
(117)
63.9
1127)
67.4
(134)
C02
dry
8.0

8.0
7.8

e.i

8.0

9.4

8.6

9.6

9.6
9.6

a. 7

9.0

9.4

10.0

8.4

10.0

6.2

9.2

8.6

7.8

9.4

9.0

8.2

8.4

CO
ng/J
62
(2CO)
32
(103)
0
(0)
18

70
(227)
0
(0)
15
(48)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
13
(43)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
4.9
(16)
0
(0)
8.9
(29)
8.9
(29)
121
(394)
80.2
(262)
16.8
(55)
14.7
(48)
14.4
(47)
HC
ng/J
(ppn)
.
_
_
~
—
_
_
.


_
_
„
_
_
»
*

_ ~"
_
.
_
_
„
_
_
_

I
,,
_
_
—
_
_
_
.


_
_
^
_
_
_
-
S0x
(PP»)
.
_
_
-
_
—
-
„


_
_
_
„
_
_
-

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
—
_


_
_
_
_
—
.
^
_


_
^
_
_
_
^
-
S02
ng/J


_
-

_

_


_
_
—
_
_
_
-


_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_


^
_
_
^
^
__
__
—


„_
^
_
^
„
_
-
Total
Partic.
ng/J
(ib/MS)


I
-



-

	 	
_
_
_
_
^
_
-


_
—

_
_
_
_
-


_
_
_
_
^
_

_


_
_
_
_
_
_
-
solid
Partic
(Ib/.XB)



-



~_

— _ 	

_
_

_
_
-

— ~ 	
_
—

_
_
_
_
_


_
_
_

_
_

_



_
_
_
^
_
-
Boiler
Effi-
ciency
82

82
82

83

83

8 i

B2

83

83
83

	 (J3 " "

33

83

83

_

rtcii
S.-tt Sc.




















_

_





— _

—



_

_





_

_


_







~~T 	







Ul
                                                                                6001-43

-------
Table 4-1.  Continued

Test
Run
No.
UO-6

153-1

15»-1

154-6

154-10

ir4-ii

155-2

155-3

156-2

157-1

i t> /- 3

1:8-4

159-1

159-3

159-6

160- 1

161-3

161-4

161-7

161-8

lt>2-3

162-5

ic-;- 11

1C 3-1



Loca-
tion
33

34

34

34

34

34

34

34

13

13

13

13

13

13

13

36

36

36

36

36

JC

36

36

36



Burner
Type
SpuJ

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

j.Fud

Spud

Spud

Fulv.

Pulv.

Pulv.

Pulv.

Pulv.
Steam
Fulv.
Steam
Pulv.
Stcoa
Steam

Stean

Steam

Stcan

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Stean



Test
Fuel
Kof
Gas
NG

NG

NG

NG

N.1

NG

NG

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal
soil
coal
soil
Coal
noil
t2

(?2

#2

42

»2

t2

12

C2

*2



Tost
Type
BOOS
CorhCyc
Base

LowLoad
MrmlAir
Air Reg

AirReg

AirReg

VPM

VPH

Sase

LovLoad

HiLoad

Low 02

BOOS

BOOS

30CS

Base

SCA

SCA

SCA

SCA

Damper

Damper

Damper
Low 02
A-.om
Press

Capacity
GJ/hr
(1C3 lb/hr)
530
(550)
2,4.
(250)
204
(250)
264
(250)
264
!23O)
J(>'1
1250)
264
(250)
264
(250)
528
(500)
528
(5)0)
528
(5 JO)
528
(500)
?28
(500)
528
(TOO)
528
C'CO)
111
(200)
211
(200)
211
COO)
211
UOO)
211
(200)
211
(•'-00')
211
(200)
.:il
(200)
211
l-'OO)

Test Load
CJ/hr
(1C3 Ib/hr)
464
(440)
206
(195)
53
(50)
161
(153)
158
(150)
160
(152)
211
(200)
211
(200)
422
(400)
338
(320)
485
(460)
411
(390)
433
(410)
443
(420)
422
(400)
72
(68)
63
160)
62
• (59)
80
(76)
82
(78)
95
(90)
93
188)
63
(60)
58
(55)

Excess
O
%
5.9

2.6

10.8

4.4

4.6

4.3

2.6

2.5

8.6

9.6

8.6

8.1

9.2

7.2

8.9

4.4

5.4

5.5

2.5

2.3

4.4

3.8

6.3

5.9


N°*
ng/J
(ppm)
54.8
(109)
96.4
(189)
70.9
(139)
108
(211)
75.0
(147)
79.1
(155)
70.9
(1395
94.9
(186)
216
(353)
197
(322)
23.)
(381)
212
(347)
219
(357)
166
(283)
177
(302)
57.8
(103)
55.0
(98)
57.8
(103)
54.4
(97)
61.1
(109)
69.6
(124)
45.4
(81)
39.3
(70)
53.3
(95)

NO
ng/J
(ppm)
52.3
(104)
92.8
(182)
69.9
(137)
106
(207)
75.0
(147)
76.0
(149)
68.9
(135)
93.3
(183)
206
(337)
'87
(3f)G)
,.•22
(364)
202
(330)
199
(340)
158
(270)
163
(287)
57.2
. (102)
54.4
197)
57.2
(102)
53.9
(96)
60.6
(108)
68.4
(122)
44.3
(79)
38.1
(68)
52.7
(94)

C02
dry
%
8.2

11.4

6.2

10.4

9.0

9.0

11.4

11.4

8.6

9.C

9.0

10.0

8.2

10.0

9.4

11.2

10.6

10.6

13.4

13.4

11.8

12.0

10.4

11.1


CO
ng/J
(ppra)
14.7
(48)
100
(322)
7.1
(23)
24
(76)
9.0
(29)
19
(61)
112
(362)
99
(320)
0
(0)
41
(111)
19
(51)
47
(126)
0
(0)
21
(76)
5.3
(15)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
6.5
(19)
4.8
(14)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
6.5
(19)

HC
ng/J
(ppm)
_
-
6.9
(39)
133
(752)
-
-
-
-
0
(0)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
1.0
(5)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

so
ny?J
(PI'in)
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

S02
ng/J
(pp=v>
_
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
_
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total
Partic.
ng/J

_
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
_
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
1140
(2.65)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
11.6
(0.027)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
12.9
(0.030!
-
-
Solid
Parric
ng/J
UV."B>
_
-
-
-
,
_
-
_
_
_
-
_
_
-
-
-
1122
(2.61)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
a.tjB
('j.r>i.f.)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
Boiler
Effi-
ciency
%
_

-
-
_
-
-
_
.

-

„

-

76

77

76

79

76

79

79

B5

85

34

8ft

66

Bacha-
rach
Sroke
:;,ot No.
_

-

_

-

„

.

.

-

s.o

s».o

•J-0

-

8-5

8.0

-

C. 0

-

-

4.0

4.0

85 < 3.0

85

-

85


3.0

3.0

0.0

                               6001-43

-------
                                                 Table 4-1.  Continued
00

Test
Run
No.
163-2

164-1

165-1

ltu-1

156-4

lt)7-i

167-4

16S- 3

169- 1

no-3

171-1

171-6

172-2

173-4

174-1

174-3

175-5

176-2

177-3

177-5

178-1

178-2

17»-3

179-4



Loca-
tion
35

36

35

35

35

35

35

35

31

20

20

20

2C

20

20

20

20

37

37

37

37

37

37

37



Burner
Type
Steam

Steam

ChGrt

ChGrt

ChGrt

ChOrt

ChGrt

ChGrt

Pulv.

Steam

Stean

Steam

Stean

Stean

Steam

Steam

steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam



Test
Fuel
*2

#2

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal

»6

#6

*6

*6

#6

*6

W6

#6

te

*6

*6

16

16

•6

t6



Test
Type
Atom
Press
Steam
Injec
Base

Low O

LowAir

liLoad

LowLoad

SCA

Base

Base

LowLoad

LowLoad

LowAir

Vis-
cosity
AirReg

AirReg

AirReg
LowAir
Base

VPH

VPH

Vis-
cosity
vis-
cosity
HiAir

LowAir


« . .
GJ/hr
(10- Ib/hr)
:n
(200)
211
(200)
227
(215)
227
(215)
227
(215)
227
(215)
227
(215)
227
(215)
274
(260)
84
(80)
84
(805
84
(80)
84
(80)
84
(80)
84
(80)
84
(80)
84
(80)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)

Test Load
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr)
55
(52)
63
(60)
110
(104)
108
(102)
111
(105)
127
(120)
59
(56)
108
(102)
148
(140)
65
(62)
34
(32)
53
(50)
67
(64)
65
(62)
66
(63)
66
(63)
67
(64)
34
(32)
33
(31)
33
(31)
34
(32)
35
(33)
34
(32)
34
(32)

—
o
%2
5.8

5.1

9.5

9.0

8.7

8.3

12.5

9.0

7.0 ,

3.3

5.5

4.5

2.7

3.3

3.:,

3.4

2.7

. 4.3

4.5

4.25

4.6

4.5

5.65

4.0


NO
X
nq/J
(ppmj
49.9
(89)
46.6
(83)
100
(164)
74.5
(122)
77.0
(126)
94.7
(155)
146
(239)
101
(166)
561
(918)
148
(264)
148
(264)
147
(262)
143
(255)
156
(278)
132
(236)
164
(292)
132
(236)
109
(195)
104
(186)
106
(189)
107
(191)
109
(194)
113
(201)
97.6
(174)

NO
ng/J
(ppm)
48.2
(86)
45.4
(81)
99.6
(163)
73.9
(121)
75.8
(124)
92. a
(152)
144
(23C)
99.6
(163)
534
(874)
146
(261)
146
(261)
145
(259)
142
(253)
155
(277)
132
(236)
164
(292)
131
(234)
108
(193)
104
(185)
105
(188)
106
(189)
108
(192)
112
(199)
97.1
(173)

f»Q_
<-u2
dry
%
10.6

12.0

9.2

9.6

10.3

10.0

7.0

9.0

-

13.5

11.8

12.4

13.7

13.4

13.2

13.2

13.1

12.6

12.0

12.2

11-5

11.8

11.6

12.1


CO
ng/J
(ppa)
0
(0)
7.8
(23)
9.3
(25)
22
(60)
20
(55)
23
(75)
13
(35)
5.6
(15)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
10
(30)
70
(205)
0
(0)
29
(85)
12
(35)
10
(30)
0
(0)
12
(35)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
8.5
(25)

HC
ng/J
(ppm)
0
(0)
0
(0)
5.3
(25)
11
(53)
3.8
(18)
3.4
(16)
11
(50)
7.5
(35)
-
-
1.6
(8)
0
(0)
1.6
(8)
1.6
(8)
2.3
(12)
1.6
(8)
0
(0)
2.5
(13)
2.9
(15)
2.5
(13)
0
(0)
4.9
(25)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

so
ng?J
(ppra)
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
815
(1045)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"

SOl
***f £
ng/J
(ppm)
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
780
(1000)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
803
(1029)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"
Total
Partic.
ng/J
(Ib/HB)
_
-
-
-
176
(0.41)
161
(0.375)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
30.1
(0.070)
61.9
(0.144)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
41.3
(0.096)
Solid
Pa"*lc .
ng/J
(IV-'-S)
,
-
-
-
133
(0.31)
156
(0.3C3)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3014
(7.01)
31.8
(0.074)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
24.1
(0.056)
50.7
(0.118)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
34.8
(O.C31)
Boiler
Effi-
ciency
%
?5

85

76

76

78

77

74

76

36

82

63

81

83

82

81

81

81

85

83

83

87

84

84

85

Sacha-
racij
E.-icke
Spot No.
0.0

1.0

7.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

9.0

9.0

-

3.0

2.0

-

5.0

3.0

-

-

5.0

5.0

6.0

-

7.0

-

5.5

7.0

                                                                                 6001-43

-------
                                                   Table 4-1.  Continued
U>
ID

Test
Run
No.
160-2

161-2

181-4

1S2-4

182-13

1S3-44

183-47

184-1

134- 5

185-3

185-5

186-1

IS 7-1

187-5

186-1

188-21

189-5

189-6

	

Loci-
tior.
33

38

38

33

38

38

38

38

38

38

"51"

38

38

38

38

~~38

38

38



Burner
Type
Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Stean



Test
Fuel
NG

NG

tK

NG

HG

NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

*6

*6

#6

te

*6

»6

16



Test
Type
Base

KiAir

Low Air

VPH

VPH

SCA

SCA

HiLoad

HiLoad
SCA
LowLoad

LowLoad
SCA
Base

HiAir

LowAir

SCA

SCA

VPH

VPH


Capacity
GJ/hr
<103 Ib/hr)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(15)
47
(45)
47
(45)
47
(45)

Test Load
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr)
43
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
42
(40)
40
(38)
42
(40)
41
(39)
46
(44)
45
(43)
34
(32)
33
(31)
38
(36)
38
(36)
39
(37)
38
(36)
38
(36)
35
(33)
33
(31)

Excess
0
%2
1.9

3.15

1.35

1.75

1.6

3.4

2.9

1.75

2.1

4.1

2.6

3.0

6.2

1.6

2.9

3.5

2.7

2.8


NO
ng/5
(ppm)
112
(220)
119
(233)
92.8
(182)
120
(236)
63.2
(124)
82.1
(161)
52.0
(102)
120
(235)
56.1
(110)
108
(211)
59.7
(117)
183
(326)
215
(384)
136
(243)
97.1
(173)
90.3
(161)
159
(283)
153
(272)

NO
ng/J
(ppm)
110
(216)
115
(226)
91.8
(180)
118
(232)
60.7
(119)
80.1
(157)
51.5
(101)
117
(230)
55.1
(108)
106
(208)
59.2
(116)
183
(326)
214
(382)
134
(239)
95.9
(171)
83.6
(158)
157
(280)
150
(268)

C02
dry
%
9.4

9.8

9.4

9.2

9.2

8.6

8.4

9.0

8.6

7.8

8.4

11.0

9.2

11.4

11.8

11. «

11.3

11.0


CO
ng/J
(ppm)
0
(0)
0
(0)
279
(900)
9.3
(30)
9.3
(30)
6.2
(20)
11
(35)
6.2
(20)
16
(50)
0
(0)
23
(75)
0
(0)
0
(0)
40.9
(120)
18.8
(55)
30.7
(90)
0
CO)
0
(0)

HC
ng/J
(ppn)
1.8
(10)
3.5
(20)
0
(0)
1.8
(10)
0
(0)

-
-
.
-
.
_
_
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
4.9
(25)
3.9
(20)
0
(0)
0
(0)
1.0
(5)

SO
ng?J
(pr'Hi)
.
-
_
-
-
-
_
_
_
_
.
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
-
738
(946)

-
_
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
—

S02
ng/J
!>:•!)
.
_
_
-
-
_
_
_
.
-
_
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
-
736
(943)

-
_
-
_
-
-
-
.
-
_
••
Total
Partic.
ng/J
Clb/KB)

_
.
-
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
.
_
_
_
.
„
_
.
-
_
-
45.6
(0.106)
_
.
.
-
58.5
(0.136)
-
-
.
-
_
•
Solid
Partic
ng/J
Ub/KH)

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
.
_
-
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
-
_
_
38.7
(0.090)
_
_
_
-
55.0
(0.128)
-
-
_
_
_
-
Boiler
Effi-
ciency
%
82

81

83

81

79

eo

79

80

30

81

E2

87

85

87

87

66

85

84

Bacha-
rach
S.-ioke
Spot .'.'^.


_

_

_

_

_

_

.

_

_

_

_

_

_

8.0

_

_

4.0

                                                                                   6001-43

-------
Table 4-1.  Continued

Test
Run
MO.
190-3

191-3

1?2-1

192-7

193-8

193-9

194-1

194-5

195-1

196-2

197-4

197-S

197-6

198-2

198-8

198-1;

199-4

199-5

200-3

201-1


loca-
tion
19

19

19

19

13

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19


Burner
Type
Ring

Kin?

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Steam

Stean

Steam

Steam

Air

Air


Test
Fuel
NG

HG

NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

*6

*6

46

*6

16

««

te

»6

16

16

16

*6


Test
Type
Base

Low
Air
FGR

FGR

SCA

SCA

FGR +
SCA
FGR +
SCA
Base

Low Air

FGR

FGR

FGR

SCA

SCA

SCA

FGR +
SCA
FGR +
SCA
Base

Low Air


Capacity
GJ/hr
'103 lb/hr)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
IS. 5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
16.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)

Test Load
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr)
14.8
(14)
14.8
(14.0)
15.0
(14.2)
14.3
(13.6)
15.2
(14.4)
14.6
(13.8)
14.8
(14.0)
14.9
(14.1)
15
(14)
15.0
(14.2)
14.8
(14.0)
14.6
(13.8)
15.2
(14.4)
14.8
(14.0)
14.2
(13.5)
15.1
(14.3)
14.8
(14.0)
14.8 '
(14.0)
14.8
(14.0)
14.8
(14.0)

Excess
%°>
3.2

2.0

2.9

2.75

2.8

2.4

3.1

3.15

3.1

0.9

2.1

2.9

3.0

2.4

3.25

3.1

1.6

2.5

2.9

2.25


NO
ng?J
(ppm)
30
59)
28.5
55)
19
(37)
8.2
(16)
39
(77)
27 .
(53)
16
(32)
11
(22)
95
(169)
70
(124)
74
(132)
81
(145)
83
(148)
61
(108)
102
(182)
75
(133)
67
(119)
79
(140)
91
(162)
77
(138)

NO
ng/J
(ppn)
30
(59)
28.5
(55)
19
(37)
8.2
(16)
39
(77)
27
(53)
16
(31)
11
(22)
95
(169)
70
(124)
74
(132)
81
(145)
82
(146)
61
(108)
102
(182)
74
(132)
67
(119)
77
(137)
91
(162)
77
(136)

C02
dry
%
10.0

10.2

10.0

10.2

10.0

10.6

10.0

9.8

13.2

14.6

13.6

13.2

12.8

13.6

13.0

12.8

13.6

13.2

13.2

13.4


CO
ng/J
(ppm)
3.1
(10)
25
(6o
0
(0)
37
(120)
0
(0)
3.1
(10)
4.7
(15)
3.1
(10)
0
(0)
34
(100)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
53
(155)
0
(0)
0
(0)
5.1
(15)
0
(0)
0
w
48
(140)

HC
nq/J
(ppm)
1.0
5
-
-
0
(0)
13
(75)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
_
-
-
-
2.0
(10)
0
(0)
0
(0)
1
(5)
0
(0)
3
(15)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

S0x
n<3?J
(ppm)
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
_
-
.
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
146
(187)
-
-

S02
nq/J
(fpra)
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
144
(184)
-
-
Total
PartiT.
n«
£t^- NO.
.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1.5

8.0

4.0

2.5

-

8.0

3.0

4.0

7.0

6.0

1.0

9.0

                                 6001-43

-------
Table 4-1.  Continued

Te*
Run
Ho.
23:-

201-

203-

203-

204-

2C5-

206-

206-7

207-1

205-1

2ce-3

208-5

2D9-1

2C9-4

210-1

211-1

211-2

212-4

212-1!


loca
tion
19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

39

39

39

39

3?

39

39

39

39

39

9


Burner
Tyr«
Air

Air

Air

Air

Ring*
Air
Ring*
Air
Ring.
Air
Ring,
Air
Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

Spud

fpud

Spud

Spud


Test
Fuel
«C-

»6

16

16

NG +
»6
KG +
#C
NG +
1C
NG +
#6
SG +
RG
NG +
RG
NG +
KG
KG +
SG
KG +
RG
NG +
R3
NG +
RG
NG +
KG
N3 +
RG
NG +
RG
NG +
RG

Test
Typ«
FGR

FOR

SCA

SCA

Base

Low Air

FGR

FGR

Base

Low Air

Lew Air

Hi Air

SCA

SCA

Load

Low Air

Lov Air

SCA

SCA


Capacity
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr
IB. 5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200)
211
(200?

Test Load
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr
14. e
(13.8)
14.8
(14.0)
15.0
(14.2)
14.8
(14.0)
15.7
(14.9)
15.6
(14.8)
14.8
(14.0)
14.8
(14.0)
169
(IbO)
172
(163)
169
(160)
16?
(160)
172
(163)
169
(160)
100
(95)
98
(93)
100
(95)
100
(95)
100
(95)

Exces
i°»
2.7

2.3

3.0

2.9

3.3

2.4

2.8

3.2

3.7

3.05

1.3

5.?

3.6

6.4

8.9

6.8

3.4

6.6

3.9


N0x
ng/5
(ppra)
"-,
(141)
65
(116)
84
(149)
73
(131)
59
(111)
56
(104)
49
(92)
55
(102)
97
(1CJ2)
111
(220)
97
(1911
83
(164)
58
(114)
74
(147)
44
(86)
61
(120)
81
(160)
67
(132)
56
111)

NO
ng/J
(pun]
79
(141
65
(116
84
(149
73
(131
59
(111
55
(103
49
(92)
55
(102)
97
(132)
110
(218)
95
(186)
81
(161)
57
(113)
73
(144)
44
(86)
61
(120)
81
(160)
67
(132)
55
(109)

C02
dry
%
13.2

13.8

12.6

12.8

11.2

11.8

11.8

11.4

8.8

CO
ng/J
(I'pm)
fi.B
'20)
fi.8
(20)
27
(80)
10
(30)
3.2
(10)
4.9
(151
0
(0)
0
(0)
7.7
(25)
9.4

10.0

8.2

9.2

7.4

6.2

7.4

9.0

7.4

9.0

2C
(65)
102
(330)
4.G
(15)
616
(20CO)
48
(155)
0
(0>
0
(0)
28
(90)
62
(200)
616
(2COO)

HC
ng/J
(H>m)
0
(0)
0
(0)
13
(65)
0
(0)
4.6
(25)
1.9
U'J)
4.6
(25)
1
(5)
O
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
5.3
(30)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
1.8
(10)
0
(0)

S°y
iiS?J
(H-")

-
.
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
.
-
_
-
.
-
_

_
-
_
-

-
_
_
_
-
_

_
-
_
-
_
-
_
-

S°2
ng/J
(f'P»)

-

-
.
.
_
-
_

_
-

-

-

-
_
_
_
_

-
_
_
1
-
_

_
-
_
-
_
-
_
-
Total
Partic.
ng/J
Ub/XB)

_

.

.
20.2
(0.047)
_


_

.

-

-

_

_

_

_
.
-
_

.
-
.
-
.
_

-
Solid
Partic
r.y/J
(]b/:

_

_

_
18.1
(0.042)



_

_

_

Bailer
Effi-
ciency
%
83

63

83

S3

01

82

81

61

K?
!

-
£4

94


_

_
.
-



-

_

_

-

63

El

82

61

83

84

83

84

Etcr.a-
zt-'*
Sr z'f.u
£;---,! No.
3.5

3 . 5

9.0

£.0

4 . 0

6 . "

2.0

3 . C



_

_





_





.

.

_

                                      6001-43

-------
              GLOSSARY OF SYMBOLS USED IN TABLES 1-1 AND 4-1
Burner Type
   Air
   ChGrt
   Pulv.
   Ring
   SpStk
   Spud
   Steam
Test Fuel
   Coal
   NG
   Ref.Gas
   NG/#6
   #2
   #5
   #6
   PS300
Test Typg^
   AirReg
   Atom Press
   BOOS
   Base
   BrTune
   CombCyc
   Damper
   HiAir
   HiLoad
   LowAir
   LowLoad
   NrmlAir
   SCA
 Air Atomizer
 Chain  Grate
 Pulverizer
 Natural  Gas Ring
 Spreader Stoker
 Natural  Gas Gun
 Steam  Atomizer

 Coal
 Natural  Gas
 Refinery Gas
 Mixture,  Natural Gas and  #6 oil
 No.  2  Grade Fuel Oil
 No.  5  Grade Fuel Oil
 No.  6  Grade Fuel Oil
 Pacific  Standard Fuel Oil No.  300

 Air  Register Adjustment
 Burner Atomizing Pressure Adjustment
 Burners  Out of Service
 Baseline
 Boiler Tune-up
 Combined  Cycle
 Air  Damper Adjustment
 High Excess Air
 High Load
 Low  Excess Air
 Low  Load
 Normal Excess Air
Staged Combustion Air
Test Type - Continued
   SnglCyc      Single Cycle
   Steam Injec  Steam Injection
   VPH          Variable Combustion
                Air Temperature
   Viscosity    Fuel Oil Viscosity
                                  42

-------
4.1     NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS
4.1.1   Goal Fuel
        The analyses of the coals tested during Phase II are contained
in Section 6.0.  The moisture content of the coals tested in Phases I
and II varied substantially, from less than 2% to greater than 10%.  The
higher heating values varied significantly also, from 0.0254 GJ/kg to
0.0326 GJ/kg (10,950 Btu/lb to 14,000 Btu/lb).  The average of the fuel
nitrogen of the coals burned was 1.4%.  However two boilers were tested
with western coals which had nitrogen contents of 0.83% and 0.94%.  The
baseline nitrogen oxide emissions for the coal tests are presented in
Figure 4-3 as a function of boiler test load.  Although the data, as
shown, indicate that the baseline nitrogen oxides emissions increased
with increasing boiler size, other parameters besides test load were
contributing to this increase.
        The lowest baseline nitrogen oxides emissions were measured on
a boiler equipped with a traveling chain grate burner.  The baseline
nitrogen oxides was 100 ng/J  (164 ppm) with an excess O  of 9.5%.  One
of the contributing factors to the low nitrogen oxides emissions was
believed to be poor combustion equipment conditions.  Visual examination
of the furnace during the tests revealed low intensity combustion
flames of a very lazy and random nature.  The excess air was extremely
high and the heat release rate per unit furnace volume was comparatively
low, 0.496  GJ-hr   -m     (0.013x10  Btu-hr   -ft   ), considering the
rated capacity.
        Boilers equipped with underfed stoker coal burning equipment
produced nitrogen oxides emissions ranging from 134 to 208 ng/J  (220
to 340 ppm).  These boiler  designs were of a small capacity,  less  than
63 GJ/hr  (50,000 Ib/hr steam  flow) and had a low  hear release per  unit
                            — ]  — 3          6       —1—3
furnace volume, 0.443 GJ-hr  -m    (0.012x10  Btu'hr   -m   ).
                                43

-------
              600-r-     1000
              500..
              400--
         w
         8
         O   CN3004-
            o
         u
         S
              200
              100-.
                oJL
          CN
         O

         dP



         (0



         TJ




         &
UWVJ
900
800
700
600
500
400
i
300
t
200
100

0





*%&

g"2S
fA"



^
S.
^•s-^
134
ss
t
^^iflfcfci 1
AUFS
<



f
ACH
-^165







3-
^
*

The r

/\


^

>
£
lumbers v






)f
n
/ithin
the symbols are
test numbers
1 1
Symbol Burner Type
C Cyclone
CH Chain Grate
P Pulverizer
S3 Spreader Stoker
UFS Underfed Stoker
                                  100
                              200
500
Figure 4-3.
                    TEST LOAD, 10  Ib/hr of Steam
               |	,	,	1	1	1	
               0     100    200    300   400     500

               TEST LOAD GJ/hr of Equivalent Saturated  Steam

Total nitrogen oxides emissions at baseload for coal-fired
boilers.
                                                 6001-43
                                 44

-------
        Spreader stoker fired boilers produced NOx emissions of 196
to 336 ng/J (320 to 550 ppm).   The spreader stoker equipped boilers
were middle sized and all had higher heat release per unit volume
and higher NOx emissions.
        The largest capacity boilers tested were equipped with
pulverized or cyclone burners and produced the highest level of
nitrogen oxides emissions.  Emissions ranged from 214 to 563 ng/J
{350 to 922 ppm) on the pulverized units.  The highest emitter was
a four-burner, face-fired unit burning pulverized Wyoming coal
(Tests 131 and 169).  Nitrogen oxides emissions at 50% of rated
capacity were 563 ng/J  (922 ppm).  The nitrogen content of the
Wyoming coal fuel was 0.83% which is the lowest of any coal tested
during the entire program.  Thus, the uniquely high emissions were
not due to a high fuel nitrogen content.  However, the coal oxygen
content was the highest at 12.5%.
        Another pulverized unit  (Test 156) with approximately the
same size burners fired a coal with only half the nitrogen content,
i.e., 1.5%,and 8.1% oxygen content and emissions were only 214  ng/J
(350 ppm).  It is theorized that emissions were high with the Wyoming
coal because the high amount of fuel oxygen in  intimate contact  with
the fuel nitrogen enhanced the  low temperature  conversion of  fuel
nitrogen to nitrogen oxides.

        A  spreader stoker equipped boiler fired a similar Wyoming
coal with  0.94% nitrogen and 11% oxygen  (Test 134).  In this case,
nitrogen oxides were 196 ng/J   (320 ppm) which was the lowest
level measured on a spreader stoker.  The large differences in
emissions  between this and the pulverizer burning Wyoming coal
may be related to the differences in combustion intensity of  the
two.  The  pulverizer had efficiently mixed fuel and air along with
                                45

-------
 530 K (500°F)  combustion air  temperature  which  resulted  in  a
 high intensity flame.   The  stoker,  on  the other hand,  used  93°C
 (200°F)  combustion  air and  the burning process  was much  slower
 to  accomodate  the larger fuel particles.   The flame  zone gases were
 cooler  and less NOx was produced.
         The other large coal  fired  boiler used  cyclone type coal
 combustors which have  a reputation  for being large NO  producers.
                                                     ji
 The  unit had a large heat release rate and a very small  heat
 absorption volume and  emitted 489 ng/J  (800 ppm) of  nitrogen oxides.
 Here  the furnace absorption volume  was defined  as the volume of the
 cyclone  combustor   alone,  since the combustion reactions were
 mostly completed before the hot gases  left the combustor and
 entered  the boiler  for  steam  generation.

 4.1.2   Oil Fuel
         The oil  fuels  tested  during Phase I and Phase II included
 Nos.  2,  5,  and 6 type  oils, the properties of which  are  summarized
 in Section  6.0 for  Phase  II.  The nitrogen content of the oils
 varied from essentially zero  to greater than 0.5%.   Other properties,
 such  as API gravity, viscosity, heating value,  and Conradson
 carbon also varied  over the normal  ranges  for oil fuels.  The
 burners tested in Phase  I included  steam,  air,  rotary cup and
pressure atomization.    All Phase II testing was done on  steam or air
atomized burners.
                               46

-------
        The baseline nitrogen oxides emissions from oil fuel are
plotted in Figure 4-4 as a function of boiler test load.  The fire-
tube boiler data, from Phase I,  shown as a cross-hatched area due
to large number  (14) of data points, were insensitive to boiler load,
combustion air temperature and excess oxygen level and were between
56 and 168 ng/J  (100 and 300 ppm).  The watertube boiler nitrogen
oxides emission data shown in Figure 4-4 did not vary significantly
with test load, but were dependent upon fuel nitrogen content, burner
size and excess oxygen level, as is discussed later in this report.
         Nitrogen oxides  emissions  from No.  2 oil fueled watertube
 boilers  were  typically about 56 ng/J (100 ppm).   In  two cases
 emissions approached 112 ng/J (200 ppm) on  a No. 2 oil fired
 boiler.   Emissions were  found to be insensitive  to excess  oxygen
 for both preheated and ambient-temperature  combustion air.
         Burner heat release rate and fuel nitrogen content were
 found to influence NO emissions for No. 5  and 6 oil fueled boilers.
                      x                           ,-
 The larger burners, 85 to 130 GJ/hr (80 to  123 10 Btu/hr), had
 nitrogen oxides emissions from 140 ng/J (250 ppm)  to over 336 ng/J
 (600 ppm).  The smaller  burners, 10 to 50 GJ/hr (9.5 to 47 10
 Btu/hr), produced from 85 to 170 ng/J  (150 to 300 ppm) of NOX.
 Nitrogen oxides emissions from No. 5 and 6 oils were generally
 affected by the excess 05 level as discussed in Section 5.1.1.

 4.1.3   Natural Gas Fuel
         The analyses of the natural gas fuels tested in Phase II
 are contained in Section 6.0.  The properties of all the natural
 gases tested were similar.  The methane contents varied from
 88 to 97% and ethane proportions were between 1.8 and 5.8%.  The
 fuel heating values ranged from 0.0364 to  0.0391  GJ/m3  (976  to
 1050 Btu/ft3).
                               47

-------
CD
            400 r-
       W
       H


       S
            300
         03  200
         
tilers'1
a)

(5)

U






D
3 ^

^




)
© i






D ^


Number v
I refers 1

O
PS30C

p
(2



(j



/ithin
:o oil


\)



symbo!
grade



ifi.


L



)
C


D

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
                                                      _L
                                     TEST LOAD,  10  lbs/hr of steam

                                                 I		1	
                                         25
                                  50            75            lOQ
                                    GJ/hr  of  Equivalent Saturated  Steam
                                                                                                125
               Figure 4-4.   Baseline total nitrogen oxide emissions for oil fired boilers.
                                                                                            6001-43

-------
        The natural gas fired boilers tested in the program were
nearly all equipped with ring type burners.  The only exceptions
were the two corner-fired boilers used for Tests 75 and 77, that
had natural gas nozzles which could be tilted for steam
temperature control and the boiler used for Tests 153-155 that
utilized a single burner comprised of three multi-orifice gas
nozzles.  The natural gas ring burners operated at various
pressure levels, depending upon gas pressure available at the site
and burner design.
        The NOjj emissions for natural gas-fired boilers were
found to be dependent in varying degrees upon furnace type,
excess oxygen level, combustion air preheat temperature, burner
size and firing rate.  The baseline NO  emissions for large and
                                      Jv
small size boilers are presented in Figure 4-5.  A large number
of small firetube boilers, 7.4 to 21 GJ/hr  (7 to 20 103 Ibs/hr
steam flow), were tested in Phase I and each individual test point
could not be-shown on Figure 4-5, since many boilers had
practically the same concentration.  These 10 tests are represented
by the cross-hatched area.  No firetube boilers were tested during
Phase II.
        The natural gas fired firetube boilers all had baseline
NO., emissions between 25 and 50 ng/J  (50 and 100 ppm) and showed
  X,
little dependence of nitrogen oxides on excess oxygen level  (see
Section 5.1).  The natural gas fired watertube boilers without
combustion air preheaters  (indicated by simple squares) showed only
a slight dependence of nitrogen oxides on excess oxygen; while for
boilers with preheated air  (shown by crossed squares) the influence
of excess O_ on NO  was significant.  Natural gas fired watertube
           £,      X
boilers with ambient temperature combustion air had baseline
nitrogen oxides emissions of 36 to 57 ng/J  (70 to 111 ppm) .
These boilers were generally small, less than 95 GJ/hr capacity
 (90,000 Ib/hr steam flow).  NO  emissions  from natural gas
                                49

-------
             200
                     400
             150
            CM
           i
           w
           (8
             100
              50.
         w
         a
         H
               OL
                                           Combustion Air Prehea


                                            |  1  No Preheat


                                            |  |  Preheated


                                               1          i
         EH

         H
§
8
  100        200        300

 TEST LOAD,  103 Ibs/hr of steam

_J	|	|	|

  100       200       300       400

 GJ/hr of Equivalent  Saturated  Steam
                                                                 400
             300
                     300
            100
          §

          S3

     5C -

                                TEST LOAD, 10

                                    '
                                       Ibs/hr of  steam
Figure 4-5.
               0          25           50           75

                      GJ/hr of Equivalent Saturated Steam

     Baseline total nitrogen oxides emissions for natural gas  fired

     boilers.
                                                     6001-43

                        50

-------
 fired boilers equipped with  air preheaters were between 46 and 191
 ng/J (90  and  375 ppm).   Figure 4-5  indicates  that nitrogen oxides
 emissions increased with test load  for  the watertube boilers.

 4.1.4   Mixed Fuels
        An additional objective of  the  Phase  I and  Phase  II  field
 measurements  was  to  collect  data  on the level of  nitrogen oxides
 emitted when  a mixture of fuels was burned.   The  properties  of the
 secondary fuel  may materially affect NO  emissions, especially since
 waste  material  fuels  sometimes are  high in organic  nitrogen  content.
 Six sets  of measurements were made  where a secondary fuel was burned
 and the results are  listed in Table 4-2.
          In Test No.  23, the fuel was a mixture of No.  5 oil and a
 small amount of refinery gas.   The  refinery gas contained about 25%
 hydrogen and 30% methane.   In Test  No.  74 the proportion of refinery
 gas was  increased to 50%, and the nitrogen oxides emissions increased
 by  26%,  even though  the excess oxygen was lower.  This might have
 been due to  the refinery gas having a  high nitrogen content that
 varied with  time, but unfortunately, it was  impractical  to  obtain
 for analysis a sample of  the refinery  gas.
          When a quantity of  wet tree bark, about  18 metric tons (20
 English  tons)  per hour, was fired with  No. 6 oil in Test No. 29-1,
 the nitrogen oxides  concentration increased by 6%, even  though the
 excess oxygen  level  had decreased.
          In Test No.  32 burning pure coal produced nitrogen oxides
  levels  of about 485 ng/J  (800 ppm).  When a 70-30 combination of
^ coal and No. 6 oil  was burned nitrogen oxides became  very sensitive to
  the excess oxygen level and varied between  423 and 513 ng/J (710 and
                                  51

-------
Table 4-2.   NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS FROM MIXED FUELS
Test
No.
23-1
74-1
29-5
29-1
32-4
32-2
72-3
72-4
71-1
156-2
159-6
190-3
200-3
204-1
207-1
Test
Load,
GJ/hr
93
93
422
422
338
424
431
338
422
422
443
14
15
16
169
Mixed Fuel Type
92% #5 Oil & 8% Refinery
Gas
50% #5 Oil & 50% Refinery
Gas
#6 Oil
#6 Oil & Wet Bark
Coal
Coal
70% Coal & 30% #6 Oil
70% Coal & 30% #6 Oil
50% Coal & 50% #6 Oil
Coal
50% Coal & 50% #6 Oil
Natural Gas
#6 Oil
50% #6 Oil & 50%
Natural Gas
Natural Gas & Refinery
Gas
Burner Type
Steam/Ring
Steam/Ring
Steam
Steam
Cyclone
Cyclone
Cyclone/
Steam
Cyclone/
Steam
Cyclone/
Steam
Pr1-
Pulv. /Steam
Ring
Air
Air/Ring
Spud
Excess
°2' %
8.0
6.5
9.5
9.0
3.4
3.2
3.6
3.4
3.7
8.6
8.9
3.2
2.9
3.3
3.7
NOx
ng/J
96
116
224
238
489
483
513
423
468
216
177
29
91
59
97
ppm
172
217
400
425
800
790
860
710
797
353
302
56
162
111
192
                                                 6001-43
                        52

-------
860 ppm).   A 50-50 mixture of coal and No. 6 oil resulted in a
slight reduction of 3.5% in nitrogen oxides emissions below those
from pure coal, however, there was insufficient testing time
remaining to investigate how sensitive this particular fuel mixture
was to the excess oxygen level.
        A 50-50 mixture of coal and No. 6 oil in Test No. 159
resulted in 14% lower nitrogen oxides emissions than with coal
alone as in Test No. 156.  This reduction was probably due to
the lower overall nitrogen content of the fuel mixture.  The coal
was analyzed to be 1.5% nitrogen and the oil was found to contain
0.33% nitrogen.
        Tests  190, 200, and 204 were conducted on natural gas.
No. 6 oil, and a 50-50 mixture of the two.  Natural gas firing
resulted in 30 ng/J  (59 ppm) of nitrogen oxides.  Oil firing
gave 91 ng/J  (162 ppm).  Emissions from the fuel mixture were an
average of the two levels at 59 ng/J  (111 ppm).
        For Test No. 207 the fuel was a mixture of natural and
refinery gases.  The fuel composition averaged 48% methane, 36%
hydrogen, and  11% ethane.  Baseline NOx emissions were 97 ng/J
 (192 ppm).  Unfortunately, this was the only fuel burned in the
boiler  so no comparisons can be made.
        The limited amount of mixed fuels testing does not allow a
firm conclusion to be drawn.  However, it does appear that nitrogen
oxides  emissions may decrease when the total amount of nitrogen
contained in the composite fuel is reduced by mixing fuels
having  a high  and a low nitrogen content.
                                 53

-------
 4.2     PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
         The baseline solid (filterable)  particulate  emissions  from the
 oil- and coal-fired boilers  that  were  tested during  Phases  I and II are
 discussed in the  following sections.   The solid particulate emissions  and
 the total particulate emissions  (including both the  solid particulates
 and the  condensed vapors)  from coal  and  oil fuels  tested in Phase II are
 listed in Table 4-1.

 4.2.1   Coal Fuel
         For  many of the  coal  burning boilers particulate measure-
 ments  were  made  downstream of  a dust collector, because upstream
 sampling  was  not possible due  to the absence of satisfactory
 sampling  stations.   Test  numbers 32, 131, 134, and 169
 were conducted upstream of dust collectors  and are  indicated  as
 such in Figure 4-6  by the shaded  data  points.  When comparing
 particulate emissions from coal fuel, one should  be  aware of
 whether the measurements  were  made downstream or  upstream of  a
 dust collector.
        Figure 4-6 illustrates solid particulate  emissions  as a
 function of boiler load for coal fuel.   As the data  indicate, the
particulate emissions are not dependent significantly upon boiler load.
The highest particulate emissions  were measured during Test 31, 4300 ng/J
 (10 Ib/lo  Btu).  The boiler  can burn tree bark as a supplement fuel to
pulverized coal.   The high particulate  level was measured during Phase I
 immediately following a period of  bark  burning.   Emissions  were
 high due  to either residual bark particles  in the flue gas  or to
 the extremely high ash content of  the coal  fuel.  An ultimate
analysis of the  coal  revealed  it was over 17% ash and had a low
heating value.   The  same  boiler was tested during Phase II
 (Test  156), this  time with a coal of approximately 15% ash  but
with a higher heat content.  Particulate emissions were significantly
                                54

-------
5000
SOLID PARTICULATES
ng/J M M
\-> NJ Ul O O
(ji O O O O O
o o o o o o
1 1 1 1 1 1 — 1
10.0 -. «/"



5.0
•»
2.0
3 1.0
V
m
(£
o
H
3 0.5
•
•
0.2
0.1






	 j^lc
AI7.U

A 19 i$


A42.U
,••» M
^o,u


O2U


^t ton o
t_iloStr
Al3|.p

4.8
AI8.S
A?7«
A*?






. A 28,
\lfi5 Q

,8








A78.F







I56.PZ
j A 32.C
Numbers Outside Symbols
Are Test Numbers.
Letters Beside Test
Numbers Indicate Burner
Type As Given Below:
C Cyclone
5 Q Chain Grate
p Pulverizer
S Spreader Stoker
U Underfed Stoker
Shaded Points Indicate
Testing Upstream Of
Dust Collector
^
^
!) 100 200 400
103 Ib/hr
Jl I 1
100 200 300 400
GJ/hr
                             TEST LOAD
  Figure 4-6.  Baseline solid particulate emissions, coal fuel.
                                                  6001-43
                        55

-------
 lower at 1120 ng/J  (2.6 lb/10  Btu).  The boiler had not been  fired
 with any appreciable  amount of tree bark prior  to  this  second  set
 of measurements,  and  the  particulates could have been  lower because
 of the  absence of residual bark  fly ash,  as well as from firing a  lower
 ash  content  coal.
        Particulate levels for other pulverized coal fired  boilers
 ranged  between 430 and  3000 ng/J  (i.o and 7.0 lb/106 Btu).
        Spreader  stoker fired boilers had a large  range of
 particulate  emissions levels.  Test 20 had  the  lowest emissions
 of the  group of 82  ng/J (0.19 lb/106 Btu),  and  Test 18  had  the
 highest emissions of  1250 ng/J  (2.9 lb/106  Btu).   Test  134  on  a
 spreader stoker had even  higher particulates, but  these data were
 taken upstream of the dust collector.
        The  boiler equipped with the chain  grate burner, Test  165,
 had  relatively low particulates of  133 ng/J (0.31  lb/10  Btu).   This
 boiler  was operating  with a very high excess O  .
        Test No.  32 was on a cyclone-fired  unit for which the
 particulates were measured before the dust  collectors, rather
 than after.  The level of 516 ng/J  (1.2 lbs/10 Btu) was no
 higher  than  that of the other units  that were measured after
 a dust  collector.
        Generally, baseline particulate emission levels from coal
 fired boilers were found  to be independent  of  the boiler  size
and  dependent upon the fuel ash content.  To a  lesser extent,
particulates were also dependent upon burner design.  The correlation
between particulates and fuel ash content is further discussed in
Section 6.0.
                               56

-------
4.2.2   Oil Fuel
        Figure 4-7 presents solid particulate emissions plotted
versus boiler load.  The particulates generally increased in going
from light to heavy oils, but were independent of boiler size and
burner type.  Particulates from No. 2 oil-fired boilers were between
4.3 and 14.6  ng/J  (0.01 and 0.034 lb/10  Btu) .  The levels from
No. 5 oils were 10.3 and 36.6 ng/J  (0.024 to 0.085 lb/10  Btu).
No. 6 fuel oil fired boilers produced the highest particulate
emissions; 16.8 to 155  ng/J  (0.039 to 0.36 lb/106 Btu).
        The  total  particulate loading was found to be highly
dependent  upon the fuel ash  content.  This correlation  is
discussed  in Section 6.0.

4.2.3   Gaseous
         Gas fired boilers very  seldom operate with luminous  flames
 where the  combustion of elemental  carbon is occurring and soot
 or coke particles are formed by incomplete combustion.   The
 particulate emissions data taken during Phase I for natural  gas
 fired boilers and shown on Figure  4-8 were low, typically between
 1.7 and 3.0 ng/J (0.004 and 0.007  lbs/10  Btu) as would be expected
 from non- luminous gas flames.  No particulate testing was conducted
 on gas fired boilers during Phase  II.
                                  57

-------
   4004-
   200,
   100--
    50._
to
    20
    10
     5--
Q
H
J
O
Ul
     2 ._
     1 --
   0.5
           3
           4J
           m
           •^
i.a
0.1
46,5
0.01
.001






— O'26»6 —
^N_ . ~
^34,6" '
176,6
3,5^ J0,6
Lli&fep19'6
O4.5£BJ6(g)i
X)44,5
— — ^_}oo,5—
066,2
VjcQ O
^^*jyt c.
0 107.2




















PS 300
A

k O22'6

7,2
2

X )K5,2




























	 — f\f\ c *~H
cy,b r











Symbol Burner Type
O Steam Atomized
f\ Air Atomized
^ Mechanical Atomi
^} Rotary Cup Atomi
Numbers Outside Symbols
Refer to: Test Number,
Oil Grade
>
sed
ted
                           100
                       200


                  103 Ib/hr
                                    400
0
_l	1_

 100         200
       GJ/hr
     TEST LOAD
                                                  300
400
Figure  4-7.   Baseline  solid particulate emissions.  Oil Fuel.

                                                       6001-43
                                58

-------
    404.
    20. .
    10. .
3
D
U ^
Pi ?
gj
Q
0.5
W
   0.2._
   0.1- -
  0.05._








.01






>
>
4
•s
.001








.0001








D 38





De
Q37
D [914
«Sft IS
QI2








Numbers














o a?




n 25






beside symb(








D77





'5

D30









sis are test


























numbers.
                             100
                                       200
                                  103 Ib/hr
  300
   400
                  0
                         H-
                          100
300
400
                                     200
                                  GJ/hr
                              TEST LOAD
Figure 4-8.   Baseline solid particulate emissions.  Natural gas fuel,

                                                         6001-43
                                    59

-------
 4.3     PARTICULATE SIZE
         The particulate sizing portion of the field test included
 thirty runs on ten different boilers with and without combustion
 modification.   Sixteen of the runs also involved the measurement of
 the toxic element content of the flue gas and fly ash.   Sixteen of the
 measurements were with oil fuel and fourteen with coal  fuel.   The
 particulate sizing was done on the basis of aerodynamic diameter, as
 is  explained in Subsection 3.2.  (In Phase I the sizing was  done on
 the basis of optical size using an electron microscope.  The Phase I
 results are discussed in Subsection 4.7 of Reference 1.)
         A low  speed flow type of cascade impactor that  is described in
 Subsection 3.5 was used to measure particulate aerodynamic diameters.
 It  consisted of five stages having nominal cut points at  diameters of
 2.5,  1.5,  1.0, 0.5,  and 0.25 ym,  and a final filter to  catch particulates
 that passed through the stages.   The aerodynamic diameter discussed
 here is the diameter of a spherical particle of unit density that is
 collected with 50% efficiency by  the impactor stage.  The symbol used
 for this diameter is D  .   A cyclone was added upstream of the  first
 stage  of the impactor to collect  particulate larger than  2.5  ym when
 coal was the test fuel.
         In order to forestall particulate rebound and reentrainment,
 the  flue gas flow speed through  the impactor was reduced  to  about
 two-thirds nominal,  and this  reduced flow increased the aerodynamic
 diameters  of the  stages.      The  points  plotted on the  graphs in this
 section  are the  aerodynamic  diameter cut points of the  stages that
 actually existed  during  the  test.
         The proportion of particulates in  three  size  categories  for
 the toxic  tests with oil and  coal  fuels  are  listed in Table 4-3.   The
 size category  of  five-tenths  of a micrometer or less was  selected
because  of what is shown about particle  size  on  Figure  4-9.  Particles
 that are less  than 0.5 ym in  size  tend to be  inahled and  then exhaled,
                                60

-------
Table 4-3.  DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICUIATE SIZE WITH BASELINE CONDITIONS
                                 OIL FUEL




Test


No.
Ill
121-9

121-10

121-11

130
162-36
171-6A
171-6B
171-8
170-5
176-5


Location
27
29





28
36
20



37
Load
GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
90 (85)
76 (72)

76 (72)

76 (72)

32 (30)
65 (62)
53 (50)
53 (50)
54 (51)
68 (64)
34 (32)
Burner
or Oil
Typo
PS300
No. 6

No. 6

No. 6

NO. 6
No. 2
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
Proportion of Tot.il W.'iqht of r.it.:li

Particles
Inhaled
Then
Exhaled
<0.5 lira
%
60
10

15

3

7
1
40
37
35
32
32
t'artiv les
In The
"Fine"
Particulate
Size Range
<3 Urn
%
81
68

70

30

49
26
73
67
65
62
58
\ir tides
\educing
Visibility
jy Mie
Scattering
0.4-0.7 urn
%
10
8

19

3

6
1
2
2
2
3
1





Soot
Included
No
Yes

Yes

Yes

NO
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No







Test Conditions
Baseline
Baseline with
light soot
Baseline with
light soot
Baseline with
heavy soot
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Higher Load
Baseline
                                 COAL FUEL
139-5

156-2

166-3
166-5
166-6
166-7
166-9
166-10
169-1


169-2


169-3


169-4


169-6


30

13

35




31














87 (82)

422 (100)

116 (110)
111 (105)
111 U05)
110 (116)
106 (100)
116 (110)
148 (140)


148 (140)


148 (140)


148 (140)


148 (140)


SpStk

Pulv,

ChGrt




Pulv.














0.7

2

11
46
25
6
5
5
3


1


1


1


<1


B

30

24
65
33
30
22
25
30


30


11


31


17


<1

3

6
13
3
2
2
4
1


<1


3


2


<1


No

No

NO
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes


Yes


Yes


Yes


Yes


Baseline, Upstrean
of Cyclone
Baseline, Down-
stream of Cyclone
Baseline, Down-
stream of Dust
Collector



Baseline, Up-
stream of Dust
Collector
Baseline, Down-
stream of Dust
Collector
Baseline, Up-
stream of Dust
Collector
Baseline, Down-
stream of Dust
Collector
Baseline, Down-
streaiu of Dust
Collector
                                   61
6001-43

-------
                      INORGANIC PARTICULATES

                              IN AIR
0.1
          INHALED
           in
       FILTERED OUT
        IN AIRWAYS
            100   50
            i
                                                Diameter
            r   it
DEPOSITED
IN ALVEOLI

RETAINED

^
SWALLOW]

EXPELLED
1
*-j IMBEDDED IN SEPr

SDJ EXPECTORATED



'IZED
t *
PHAGOCYTE
DIES

PHAGOCYTE
SURVIVES
                         RETAINED IN LUNG
Source:  "The Pneumoconioses — Diagnosis,  Evaluation and Management."
         Committee  on the Pneumoconioses,  Council on Occupational
         Health,  American Medical Association,  Chicago, 1963.
Figure 4-9.
Schematic  presentation of the biological  fate and effects
of inhaled inorganic particulates .
                                                           6001-43

-------
rather than deposited in the alveoli.   They do not build up readily
in the airways and possibly are not a serious health hazard.  Figure
4-9 also shows that particulates between 0.5 ym and 50 ym in diameter
are inhaled and either filtered out in the airways, deposited in the
alveoli or exhaled in various amounts.  In this size range particles
                                    (7 8)
3 ym or less are the most hazardous.  '
        When analyzing the impactor data it is assumed that all of
the mass caught upon an impaction stage consists of material having
aerodynamic diameters equal to or greater than the D   for that stage,
and less than the D   for the next higher stage.  For the first stage,
or the precutter cyclone when one is employed, it is assumed that all
of the captured particulate have aerodynamic diameters greater than,
or equal to the D    for that stage or cyclone, but less than an
arbitrarily large diameter of 50 ym for oil  fuel and 100 ym  for coal
fuel.
        The combustion of oil fuel produced  a  larger proportion of
particulates having  an aerodynamic diameter  less than  3 ym  than did
coal  fuel.  Thus, more of the particulate emissions  from oil is
inhaled and then  exhaled  (24%),  retained in  the  respiratory passages
 (67%), and involved  in reduced  visibility  (7%)  than  from  coal.  Coal
fly ash generally was  larger in size  than was  oil  fly  ash.
        The chain grate type of coal  burner  at Location No.  35 produced
more  fine particulate  (about 36%),  than  did  the  pulverizer  at Location
No.  31  (about  24%).   The  greater proportion  of fine  particulate being
from the  chain grate,  rather than  the pulverizer was unexpected.   The
difference  in  particulate size  between  the  chain grate and pulverizer
is not explained easily by the  difference in the size  of  the coal
fired.  One would expect  that  the  larger size crushed coal that was
 fired on  the  chain  grate  would yield the larger particulate, but this
was  not  so.
                                 63

-------
         At 10 ym diameter and less the order was reversed.   The
 pulverizer produced a greater amount of particulate having a diameter
 less than 10 \im (50%)  than did the chain grate (35%).   These data are
 similar to those reported in  Reference 9  where  30% of the  particulate
 from a pulverizer was  under 10 Mm while only 10% from  a spreader stoker
 was under 10 ym in diameter.   At  10 pm the pulverized  coal  produced
 a greater proportion of smaller size particulate than  did the crushed
 coal.
         There was little difference in the proximate analyses of the
 two coals burned at Location  31,  Test 169  and Location 35,  Test 166.
 The averages of the three proximate analyses of  the coals was as
 follows:


Location No.
Test No.
Inerts, %
Volatile Matter, %
Fixed Carbon, %
Heat of Combustion,



J/g
Coal
35
166
13
38
44
26,835
31
169
11
39
44
25,576
Bottom Ash
35
166
49
4
45
—
31
169
95
5
<1
—
        However, the proximate analyses of the two ashes were far
different.  The inerts content of the bottom ash from Test 169 was
much higher than that from Test 166, while the carbon content was
practically zero.  The pulverizer burner completely burned out the
carbon leaving both a bottom ash and fly ash that was almost entirely
uncombustible mineral.  This type of ash remained or agglomerated
into larger size particulates than did the ash from the chain grate
that was 45% carbon.
        The smallest proportion of fine particulate was 8% from a
spreader stoker tested as part of the combustion modification task.
There was no ash analysis nor was the soot blown during this test,
so there can be no direct comparison, as in Tests 166 and 169 above.
                                64

-------
It was not surprising,  however,  that a spreader stoker that burned
crushed coal partly in suspension, as did the pulverizer, and partly
on a grate, as did the chain grate, would produce relatively few fine
particulates and many large particulates.
        When the test was run to measure the toxic elements content
of the flue gas, e.g., trace metals and polyorganic material, the soot
was collected.  Just prior to the start of this latter type of test
the soot blowers were operated to clean the boiler.  Then, just before
the end of the particulate collection the soot blowers were operated
again to dislodge the soot that had been deposited during the test.
The results of the toxic element testing are discussed in Reference 5.
        Test No. 121 at Location 29 illustrate a size effect of
soot blowing during a test.  For test runs 121-9 and 121-10 the
soot blowing was timed so only the soot deposited during the run
was caught by the impactor.  For run 121-11, an operational problem
caused about 18 hours of soot accumulation to be caught, rather
than the 4 hour accumulation of runs 121-9 and 121-10.  The result
was that the submicron particulates constituted only 3% of the total
catch, and a great many more large-size particulates were caught.
Apparently there was a significant growth in the size of soot
particles by agglomeration over a period of time.
        The cascade  impactor data  are listed in Table  4-4.   The  data
points and the  distribution of aerodynamic diameter  for  the  baseline
type  tests are  discussed in this  subsection and the  data from the
combustion modification  tests are  discussed in Subsection  5.4.2.
When  reducing the particulate size  data  the convention was employed
that  assumes  that the  largest particulate present  in the flue gas from
oil fuel was  50 ym  and from coal  fuel was  100  urn.      Thus,  a cumulative
proportion of 100%  was deemed to  occur  at  an  aerodynamic diameter (DCQ)
of 50 or  100  um.
                                 65

-------
Table 4-4.  CASCADE IMPACTOR DATA SUMMARY

Tast
ill
i:i-3
i:i-l.
13J-5
luc-3
UC-:
* -u-c
lcC-7
luS-3
lei- 9
iss-i;
:e:- 11
16:- 36
169-2
159-3 .
U9-4
16?-6
171-6S
171-3
17CV-5A
175-53
179-4

Loc.
No.
rv
:s
:s
°9
2y
30
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
Jt.
36
36
31
31
31
31
20
20
20
20
37

Fuel
Typo
PS3SO
'5 "00
No . 6
Xo . 6
No. C
No. 6
Coal
CCjl
Coal
Coal
Coal
Ccal
Coal
Coal
Coal
NO. 2
"0. 2
Ko. 2
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal
No. 6
No. 6
Mo. 6
No. 6
No. 6

Burner
Type
Stea».
Stcaa*
StO ••!>
S-.eiT.
Stcani
S-t'ar
icroad
Pulv.
Grate
Grate
Grit-
Grata
(.-rate
Grato
Grate
Stean
Stean
Stean
?ulv.
Pulv.
Pulv.
Pulv.
Fulv,
Steam
Stean
Stean
Stean
Steam
Stean

Test
Load
GJ-hr'1
90
90
31
76
74
126
53
420
116
111
111
116
103
106
116
58
65
65
US
148
148
148
14S
53
53
54
68
£7
34
34

Impact.
Flow
cn3.s-l
35.4
37.7
11.3
17.6
20.0
17.9
46.5
51.5
24.6
22.2
25.5
23.6
23.6
24.1
24.1
28.3
28.3
23.3
23.7
25.7
25.7
26.4
23.7
26.1
27.6
26.1
29.3
34. S
22.6
22.7
Actual Csn of Staae No.
1
va
2.9
2.8
5.0
4.1
3.85
4.1
2.5
2.5
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.S
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.53
3.39
3.39
3.35
3.53
3.36
3.27
3.36
3.18
2.93
3.62
3.61
2
ym
1.7
1. 7
3.0
2.4
2.31
2.4
1.5
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.0
2.1
*' 1
2.1
2.1
1.9
1.9
1.9
2.12
2.03
2.03
2.0)
2.12
2.02
1.96
2.02
1.91
1.76
2.17
2.17
3
UK
1.2
1.1
2.0
1.6
1.54
1.6
1.0
0.96
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.41
1.36
1.36
1.34
1.41
1.31
1.35
1.27
1.17
1.45
1.44
4
yn
0.58
0.56
1. 0
0.81
0.77
0.81
0.5
0.43
0.70
0.73
0.68
0.71
0.71
0.70
0.70
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.71
0.673
0.678
0.669
0.71
0.67
0.66
0.67
0.64
0.59
0.72
0.72
5
MZI
0.29
0.28
0.41
0.33
0.41
0.25
0.24
0.35
0.36
0.34
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.32
0.32
0.32
0.35
0.339
0.339
0.335
0.35
0.34
0.33
0.34
0.32
0.29
0.36
0.36
DSO
Cycl.
ura
—
10.9
10.4
15.6
15. B
14.7
15.3
15.3
15.2
15.2
~
15.3
15.4
14.7
14.5
15.3
—
~

Cyclone
rcg
None
None
None
None
None
75.1
52.6
10.32
32.3
30.01
13.06
10.82
19.99
34.15
None
None
289.2
64.49
67.83
72.39
'71.89
None
None
None
None
None
Ncne
Cyclone, Stag* and Filter Catch
1
ng
0.368
0.038
1.00
1.82
11.7
8.33
57.7
1.056
6.54
6.18
3.22
0.200
3.30
0.7b8
96.9
5.60
48.02
32.55
5.49
35.20
40.63
0.588
1.052
1.060
1.792
3.824
2.812
3.112
rag
0.148
0.246
1.152
1.08
2.20
2.62
5.49
34.2
0.780
2.75
2.32
4.60
0.276
4.01
3.42
7.55
0.148
92.46
26.90
2.89
32.00
20.96
0.616
O.480
0.501
0.852
1.660
1.616
1.372

3
mg
C.240
0.444
0.896
1-21
0.616
1.84
0.488
8.82
0.660
1.176
1.01
1.38
0.472
0.936
2.58
0.408
0.064
55.95
19.60
2.05
19.42
8.11
0.332
0.256
0.256
0.512
0.924
0.668
0.596

4
ng
0.272
0.296
C.880
0.9<32
1.06
1.64
0. 306
6.69
0.340
0.714
1.33
1.21 '
2.10
0.692
1.20
0.756
1.032
33.24
4.82
2.74
6.73
1.36
0.172
0.172
0.168
0.164
0.372
0.45G
0.332

5
ng
0.216
0.30"
0.734
0.438
2.37
0.343
0. S2S
3.04
0.600
32.20
0.916
0.772
3.26
1.304
4.88
0.008
0.024
6.48
2.15
1.58
3.04
1.02
0.140
0.068
0.108
0.256
0.312
0.312
0.196


Filter
ma
Total
Catch
m"
1
0.864| 2.11
M 1.33
3. 32.';
0.40',
0. 360
0.34?
0. 1?'1
0.23C
0.572
33.91
13.74
1.22
1.29
1.24
1.55
0.3C8
0.192
11.91
0.600
0.336
0.208
0.156
1.160
1.172
1.120
0.283
3.158
2.700
2.344

j 	 >=..10
5.37
8.C2
18.99
9") S
163
14.60
109.3
55.51
25.46
18.42
31.48
48.53
105.6
70.6
lj-%42
537.27
151.112
82.92
163.99
!44.) 3
3. COS
3.200
3.213
3.864
10.250
8.564.
7. 952

Coir.->onts
Baseline
Filter dostroyea
bv'r»'_ lin«
I-i?ht soct
Light soot
Hiavy soot
EuseJiisfl
Baseline no soot
Toxic with soot
Toxic with soot
Toxic vith scot
Lev t;0x, no soot
Toxic with soot
Toxic vith soot
Lover Load
Isiv NOx
&::.'>) irr-
Toxic, Upstream dust coi:«.--rir
Toxic, Downstream dust collector
Toxic, Upstrean dust collector
Toxic, Oovmstrcam dust collector
Baseline, Tcxic
Baseline, Toxic
Baseline, Toxic
Baseline
8a«eline
Low NOx

                                         6001-43

-------
        The size distribution from all of the baseline oil fuel tests
are shown in Figure 4-10.  Test No. 121 is not included, because it
was primarily a toxic element test and soot was blown on all three
runs.  In general the heavy oils, No. 6 and PS 300, had the greatest
proportion of particulates in the fine particulate size range below
3 ym, and the No. 2 fuel the least proportion.  Typically two-thirds
of the particulates from the residual type oils were 3 ym or smaller
in size while only about 30% of the particulates from Test No. 162
with No. 2 oil were below 3 ym.  The light oil also had a lower total
concentration of particulates.  As is shown in Figure 4-7, the concen-
tration of No. 2 oil particulate was about 15 ng/J, while the concen-
tration of No. 6 oil particulates was about 390 ng/J.
        The five individual runs on chain grate-fired coal that were
made on successive days at Location No.  35 are depicted on Figure 4-11.
All of the measurements were made downstream of the dust  collector,
since the dust collector was built into  the back-pass of  the boiler
and the flue gas up stream of the collector was not accessible.
        There were two types of distribution.  One distribution was
convex with the proportion increasing rapidly  up  to 1 or  2 ym  and
then tending to  level out.  The other was an  s-shaped distribution,
where the proportion increased rapidly between 2  and  3  ym and  then
leveled out.
        The baseline data  from Test  No.  169 on a  pulverized  coal-fired
boiler at  Location  31, are entered on Figure  4-12.  The triangles with
the base down  and  connected by the solid curve are data points taken
upstream of  the  cyclone  dust  collector.   The  inverted triangles and
dashed curves  are  data taken  downstream  of  the dust  collector.  The
striking  feature compared  to  Figure  4-11 is  the much  smaller proportion
of fine particulate.
                                 67

-------
         10
                                         Fine Paxticulate
                                                           Fuel
                                                      Q  PS  300 Oil
                                                      O  No.  6  Oil
                                                          No,  2  Oil
                              1.0      3.0        10
                                                  pm
Figure 4-10.  Baseline partlculate size distribution, oil fuel.
                                                             6001-43
                               68

-------
         100
                                            __—,.*__ 'f.o--*~»-*-
                                            ._.™4~ t -f -j—-f
                                     -HHH--+-  1-  r
                                                     titt
                                                •   »  ' I M '
                           AERODYNAMIC DIAMETER,  }jm
Figure 4-11.   Baseline particulate size distribution,  coal fuel.
                             69

-------
           100
a

P «o

o *»
  nt
rt *J
O w

o o>


a
       cn
  z
  o
  H
  O
  ft

  s
  eu
  C 4J

  O 0)


  '•U ««

  K -r^

  O no


  8*
  M

  O.
  a ,
  §

  O
  4)
           10
1.0
          0.1











_Rur

















i Nc
i





3
2
4
f*












^





easts
v
<
w












X

WuJ
zz
Jul

^
/
>











/\

4-
_j Zj
W** t jft
Z* £™

''
rine Farticuiace
jj_____,
. , "—^js


	 y
J
"*"^^S
&/WLZ
''Zjjr/T-
\2-*j-I
'^^2Z
11 sz
/r
j T
""t
p






/
/
/^
V-





est
ulv




^

s/
Or






N
sr



•rf

x
x*






o.
12


7
/

<«"






:e
_4

^u
**


f '






16S
r F
_tjt_
R




:.^ap







>, Local
ired
ij_____i
un No
•2,4--
§ j~
"

_.






tio

IJJ_LLL__ 	 	 	 i_ 	 ."









n J















to















.













;
t














U,
ja
f '

Line Symbol Sampling Location
— —Sy~ — — Downstream of dust
collector
— — ^— — Upstream of dust
collector
i 1
           0,1
                     1.0     3.0       10
                                                          30
100
Figure 4-12.   Baseline particulate  size distribution, pulverized      fuel,
                                                              6001-43
                                 70

-------
        The proportion of fine particulate downstream of the dust
collector, on the average, was larger than the proportion upstream,
being 26% and 21% respectively.  The difference was caused, no doubt,
by the dust collector removing more of the larger particulate than
the smaller.  The amount of particulates in the 0.5 ym diameter or
less was much smaller across the board than the amount from the chain
grate and from oil fuel.  The entire particulate size spectrum
definitely was weighted toward the larger particulate sizes.
        As with Test No. 166 there were two types of distribution:
one convex with a rapid increase in the cumulative proportion up to
about 2 ym and the other s-shaped.  The distribution type was not
unique to whether the sample was collected upstream or downstream;
both locations had both types of distribution.
        The findings of the size measurements for Tests 121 and 170
with No. 6 oil fuel are plotted on Figures 4-13 and 4-14.  It is.
assumed arbitrarily that 100% of the impactor catch was 50 ym or
smaller in diameter; although the largest cut point of the impactor
was about 4 ym.  The significant difference between these oil data
and the coal data shown in the two preceeding figures was that the
proportion of submicron and fine particulate from oil burning was
greater than that from coal by, a factor of about 10.
        Test No. 121 in Figure 4-13 illustrates the size effect of
soot blowing during a test.  For test runs 121-9 and 121-10 the soot
blowing was timed so only the soot deposited during the run was
caught by the impactor.  For run 121-11, an operational problem
caused about 18 hours of soot accumulation to be caught, rather than
the 4 hour accumulation of runs 121-9 and 121-10, and the total catch
shown in Table 4-4 was 18.99 mg.  The result was that the submicron
particulates constituted only 3% of the total catch, and a great many
more large-size particulates were caught.  Apparently there was a
significant growth in the size of soot particles by agglomeration over
a period of time.
                                71

-------
                 10Q
K

H *O
rt! a)
O 4J

rt 4J
O w

U Q>
rtl XI

2    co
H q  to


O 4J

a w x»
O w)
     O  C  n
     0«  0  OJ
     O -H  4J
     (£ 4->  f
     04  ^  6
        0  *
     W  (VH
     >  O  T3
     H  N
     B  Oi
     S  0)
     p  •
     O -H
                  30
                  10
                 3.0
           1.0
           0.3
                0.1
                                                    Run  No.








3Kui






























i


















*
~,t
j*%
s
i
f
u
f
J















/
.L
i
r
l
r


Y
P













f

/ /
^g **, ««



. f
£
i
/













n^>2!
202
\ f~*
i/
f/




^










t Wr
r, .


JT



>










3








*\



V
r










Fi






.!
1

""















13







i
r



1











g^J






l,
I
si,
I














!'•







I
LU —















art let,






,ooa t i'
4 Ft £.' ^ i >I

















lat
























*






i/i

















































29 **


























                  0.1      0.3      1.0      3.0      10       30       100


                                                        ym
                                       Test No.  121,  Location No,  29

                                       No. 6 oil,  steam atomized
Figure 4-13,   Baseline particulate size distribution,  No. 6 oil  fuel.
                                                                6001-43
                                   72

-------
                                                   Run No,
    o

    «C cu
    U +J
       <0

    O (fl
     MCE
       (0
     fa ,c >,
     O -M XI

     7; » *
     O (0
     u cu  ~
     [-« r-t M
     K   4)
     O C
     0« 0
     O "H „
     ffl 4J (0
     0, M -^
       0 13
     H ft
     > O
     M il
     c-« a,
et
CUMULA

i.e.,
               100
0,1
                          0.3
1.0      '.0       !0       30

AERODYNAMIC DIAMETER,  ym
Figure  4-14.  Baseline particulate size  distribution,  No. 6 oil.
                                                                 6001-43
                                    73

-------
         The proportion of  the  submicron size particulate 0.5 Mm or
 less  in  diameter  and of  the  fine particulate 3.0 urn or less were
 about the  same  from the  two  runs with light soot.  At a diameter of
 1.0 urn there was  considerable  difference in the proportion, but this
 difference did  not persist beyond 2.0 pm.
         During  Tests 170 through 175 shown on Figure 4-14, the fine
 particulate proportion ranged  only from 25% to 33%, with the exception
 of Run No. 5A.  At 0.5 ym  diameter there was moderate scatter of the
 data.  The relatively large  proportion of the total mass on the filter
 stage of Run 175-5B that is  shown in Table 4-4 may be due to
particulate rebound and  reentrainment.  The data are typical of what
would happen if some of  the  larger particles that belonged on the
second through the fourth  stages had rebounded and ended up on the
 filter stage at the outlet end of the impactor.  There is no ready
explanation of the relatively  large total catch of Run No. 175-5B
nor of the small filter  catch of Run No. 170-5A.
        Figure 4-15 illustrates the effectiveness of a dust collector
in removing the larger particles from the flue gas.  The two curves are
the size distribution before a mechanical dust collector and the size
distribution after it.   After the dust collector approximately 30% of
the particulates were less than 3.0 microns whereas only 11% were less
than three microns before the dust collector.   Sixty percent of the
catch vas= less than 100 microns after the dust collector compared to
18% before the dust collector.
        The method in which the coal was fed into a furnace was found
to have an effect on the  particulate size.   The size distribution for
a given type of coal feed was similar from furnace to furnace.   This
similarity is illustrated in Figure 4-16.   The upper two solid curves
are for Locations 13 and 31, both of which fired pulverized coal from
different sections of the country but the size distributions were
similar.
                                74

-------
         100
0.1
                    0.1        i,0       2.0        iu



                                                SIZE,  pm
                                                             100
Figure 4-15.  ii*-f, ct of a  dust  collector
                               on  particulate size distribution.
                                                              ')01-43
                                 75

-------
   U
   E~i 13
        O.J
                                                 SIZE,
                             From KVB Field Tests

                             From Re fe re nce 9
Figure 4-16.
Effect of coal size and burner on particulate
distribution.


                                            6001-43
                                 76

-------
         The  lower solid curve  is  from a spreader stoker at  Location 30
 that burned  crushed,  rather than  pulverized,  coal.   The crushed coal
 fly ash had  a much smaller proportion of fine particulate.   For example,
 with the pulverized coal about 30% of the fly ash was  less  than 3 Mm
 in diameter,  while with the crushed coal only about 5% was  less than
 3 ym in diameter.
         This  finding that the  coal feed method had  an  effect on the
 fly ash size  is  consistent with data published in Reference 9.   These
 data are plotted on Figure 4-16 too and are  connected  with  dashed
 lines.   The  absolute level of  the proportions differ in some respects,
 but the spreader stoker data also showed a lesser proportion of small-
 sized particulate than did the data for the  pulverized coal.

 4.4    HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
        Hydrocarbon  (HC)  emissions measured as methane  (CH4) at
baseline conditions with  both  natural gas and oil fuels are  listed
in Table 4-1 and were  generally In the  zero  to  14 ng/J (0 to 75 ppm)
range.  The two highest baseline values  measured were  35.4 and
101.8 ng/J (200 and 575 ppm),  and both of these were natural gas
fueled  firetube boilers.   Ideally, the hydrocarbon emissions should
be near zero, indicating  that  no unburned fuel is being lost up the
smoke stack.
        The single highest baseline hydrocarbons emissions measure-
ment with oil fuel was 14.6 ng/J (75 ppm) from a firetube boiler.
The highest hydrocarbon   emissions from an oil fuel  fired watertube
boiler were 6.8 ng/J  (35 ppm).
        The test data  indicated that natural-gas-fired firetube
boilers tended to emit a greater concentration of hydrocarbon than
did watertube furnace  type boilers burning natural gas, oil, or
coal.  This higher concentration may be caused by the rapid quenching
of the products of combustion by the relatively cool walls of the
furnace tube.

                                77

-------
 4.5     CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
        The carbon monoxide  (CO) emissions for industrial boilers were
 normally near zero although  in a few test cases the emissions reached
 significant levels.  The presence of over 100 ppm carbon monoxide in
 the flue gas indicates either low overall excess oxygen, air/fuel
 maldistribution, or burner problems.
        Oil-fueled boilers typically had no carbon monoxide emissions,
 because oil fuels generally  are fired with higher excess air or
 oxygen to avoid smoke emissions.  One exception was the boiler used
 for Test 107.  Baseline CO emissions were 139 ng/J ( 407 ppm).
 Carbon monoxide emissions were reduced to 38 ng/J (110 ppm)  via
 adjustments made by the boiler manufacturer, but the CO emissions could
 not be eliminated entirely.  The air to fuel ratio was set by adjusting  the
 air bias  control by positioning the clamper on the inlet to the
 forced  draft  fans according to a curve issued by the boiler manufacturer.
 Carbon  monoxide was present at all damper adjustments, even when the
 forced  draft  fan dampers were fully open.  Observation of the oil
 flame during  the tests showed that it was very bright and that it
 impinged  upon the relatively cold water walls of the furnace.  The
 completion of oxidation of carbon monoxide may have been hindered
by the quenching effect of the cold walls or, the impact of the burning
combustion gases with the walls may have prevented thorough fuel and
air mixing.  After the test, the oil burner tip was carefully in-
spected and no sign of wear or orifice restriction was seen.   It was
noted that the brick work between the furnace and backpass had holes
in it.  Possibly the incompletely burned gases escaped through these
holes.
                                78

-------
        Carbon monoxide emissions from coal fired boilers were
generally found to be less than 74 ng/J (200 ppm).  The units
that did produce CO were equipped with spreader stoker, underfed
stoker, and chain grate type coal burners.  Pulverized and cyclone
coal burners produced no CO at baseline conditions.
        Baseline carbon monoxide emissions from natural gas fired
boilers were typically 62 ng/J (200 ppm) or less.  In a few cases,
emissions exceeded this level.  In one instance during Phase I
testing, a firetube boiler emitted greater than 620 ng/J  (2000 ppm)
CO.

4.6    SULFUR OXIDES EMISSIONS
        Total sulfur oxides emissions  for coal-  and oil-fired boilers
ranged  from near zero to as high as 1530  ng/J  (1800 ppm).  The  level
of  sulfur oxides emission was dependent solely upon the  sulfur
content of the fuel.  A sulfur content of 1.0% in  an oil  fuel
resulted in approximately 390 ng/J  (500 ppm) of  sulfur oxides emission.
For coal, 1.0% sulfur in the  fuel gave about 765 ng/J  (900 ppm) of
the pollutant.  The relationship between  fuel  sulfur content  and
sulfur  oxides emissions is  further  discussed in  Section  6.0.
                                 79

-------
 4.7     BOILER EFFICIENCY
         Boiler thermal efficiencies were determined by the ASME Heat
 Loss Method using on-site measurements of the fuel and flue gas
 compositions.      The efficiency of steam generating equipment
 determined within the scope of the ASME Code is the gross efficiency
 and is defined as the ratio  of the heat absorbed by the working fluid
 to the heat input.   This definition disregards the equivalent heat in
 the power required by the auxiliary apparatus external to the envelop.
 The abbreviated efficiency calculation considers only the major heat
 losses and only the chemical heat in the fuel as the input.
         Baseline efficiencies for coal-fired boilers ranged from 72 to
 88% and average 81%.   The oil-fired boilers  exhibited efficiencies
 between 72 and 88%  and average 83%.   Gas fueled boilers had efficiencies
 from 70 to 85% with an average of 81%.   One  of the major factors
 affecting the efficiency of individual  boilers was the excess oxygen
 level.   A reduction of one percentage point  in excess 0  (about a 5%
 reduction in  excess air)  generally improved  efficiency by about one-
 half a  percentage point.
         Baseline efficiencies were also dependent  upon the type
 of boiler  equipment.  Older boilers were generally in poorer
physical  condition  and lacked efficiency-enhancing design features,
 such as economizers and air preheaters.  Hence, the older boilers
exhibited  lower efficiency levels.  The larger capacity boilers
were more efficient than smaller units probably due to design
factors.  The type of burner had an influence on efficiency, especially
in the case of coal-fired units.  Cyclone and pulverizer units had
much higher efficiency levels than the chain grate and underfed
stokers.
                                80

-------
        The effect on boiler efficiency of combustion modifications
is shown in Figure 1-3 and it was determined primarily by the level
of excess air required.  If the amount of combustion air could be
lowered along with changing burner registers or taking burners out
of service, the efficiency was improved.  If an operational change
resulted in a higher excess air requirement, efficiency was degraded.
In either case, the magnitude of the change was typically in the 1
to 3% range.  The effects of combustion modifications on efficiency
are discussed further in Section 5.5.

4.8     PLUME OPACITY
        In addition to measuring the concentration of solid and
condensible particulates in the flue gas, the opacity of the smoke
plume was observed.  The opacity measurement was made using the EPA
Method 9.
        The data taken during three of the  observations are tabulated
in Tables 4-4 through 4-6.  Starting at Location No.  37 the observations
were made at fifteen second intervals for a six minute long portion
of the baseline total particulate measurement period.  The data in
Tables 4-4 and 4-6 were taken at fifteen second intervals.  Prior
to Location 37 the observation was made at  five minute intervals over
a two or three hour period of emission  testing.  Table 4-7 is a
sample of the data from this prior type of  observation.
        An attempt was made to correlate  the opacity  measurements
with the concurrent particulate  concentration  measurements.  This
correlation was unsuccessful,  and a  reason  is  that  the  fifteen-
second observation interval was  started too late in the program to
get sufficient data  to make a meaningful  correlation.
                                 81

-------
            Table 4-5.  PLUME OPACITY OBSERVATIONS
Test No.
188-1
Location No.
                                       38
Fuel Type No. 6 Oil
Test Load   38   GJ/hr,   36
                      10  Ib/hr  Sun Position  Southeast
Solid Particulate Concentration
                         55.0
Total Particulate Concentration
                                     58.5
                        _ng/J,
                        ng/J,
    0.128    lb/10  Btu
                                          0.136
            lb/10  Btu
Obs
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Time
11:21:00
11:21:15
11:21:3C
11:21:45
11:22:OC
11:22:15
11:22: 3C
11:22:45
•11:23:OC
11:23:15
11:23:3C
11:23:45
11:24:OC
11:24:15
11:24:3C
11:24:45
11:25:OC
11:25:15
11:25:3C
11:25:45
11:26:OC
11:26:15
11:26: 3C
11:26:45
Opac-
ity
%
10
10
10
5
10
20
10
10
15
15
5
10
10
10
5
5
15
20
20
10
15
20
10
5
Wind
Speed
m/s
2-3
2-3
1-2
2-3
2-3
1-2
1-2
1-2
2-3
2-3
2-3
2-3
4-5
2-3
2-3
2-3
1-2
3-5
3-5
3-5
3-5
2-3
2-3
5-6
Direc-
tion
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
Sky
Con.
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
PCldi
Obs
No.
25
26
27
28
29


















Time
11:27:00
11:27:15
11:27:30
11:27:45
11:28:00
Ave

















Opac-
ity
%
5
10
10
5
5
rage

















Wind
Speed
m/s
2-3
3-5
2-3
3-5
2-3
Opacit

















Direc-
tion
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
/ = m

















Sky
Con.
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy









•








             PCldy = Partly Cloudy
                               82
                                                      6001-43

-------
            Table 4-6.  PLUME OPACITY OBSERVATIONS
Test No.   203-7
19
Test Load   15
Solid Particulate Concentration_
Total Particulate Concentration
_ Location No.
GJ/hr,    14 _ 10   Ib/hr  Sun Position Southwest
                              ng/J,
18.1
           Fuel Type  No.  6 Oil

                             
-------
            Table 4-7.  PLUME OPACITY OBSERVATIONS
Test No.  179-4
     Location No.
Test Load  34
GJ/hr,
32
	37	Fuel Type No. 6 Oil
103 Ib/hr  Sun Position  Southwest
Solid Particulate Concentration
                    34.8
Total Particulate Concentration
                    41.3
                  _ng/J,
                   ng/J,
                    0.081   lb/10  Btu
                    0.096   lb/10  Btu
Obs
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Time
1500
1505
1510
1515
1520
1525
1530
1535
1540
1545
1550
1555
1600
1605
1610
1615
1620
1625
1630
1650
1655
1700
1705
1710
1715
1720
Opac
ity
%
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
5
5
5
5
Wind
Speed
m/s
2-3
2-3
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
5-6
4-5
5-6
5-6
5-6
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
2-3
1-2
Direc-
tion
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
SE
W
W
W
W
W
W
NW
W
W
W
Sky
Con.
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
Clear
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
PCldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Obs
No.
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

















Time
1725
1730
1735
1740
1745
1750
1755
1800
Avei
















Opac-
ity
%
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
rage (
















Wind
Speed
m/s
1-2
1-2
1-2
1-2
0-1
0-1
2-3
1-2
Dpacity
















Direc-
tion
NW
W
W
W
W
W
SW
SW
= 5%
















Sky
Con.
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
Cldy
PCldy
PCldy

















   Cldy = Cloudy
        PCldy = Partly Cloudy
               84
                                 6001-43

-------
4.9     NITROGEN DIOXIDE EMISSIONS
        About one hundred measurements of the ratio of nitrogen
dioxide (NO») to total nitrogen oxides (NO )  at base load were made
           2                              x
and many of them are plotted in Figure 4-17.   Nitrogen dioxide
percentages for oil fuel were typically about 1% to 5% of the total
nitrogen oxides with an average percentage of about 2%.  Typical
nitrogen dioxide percentages for coal were about 1% to 6% with an
average value of 2.8%.  For gas fuel the typical percentages were 3%
to 13%, and the average of 4.5% was the highest of the three fuels.
A commonly accepted ratio heretofore has been 5%, but this value
would appear to be too high for coal and oil fuels.
        The amount of nitrogen dioxide was determined by taking  the
difference between a measurement of the total nitrogen oxides and
the nitric oxide concentrations.  In several instances the measured
percentages of nitric oxide were zero, e.g. Tests  27 and 190, or
abnormally high, e.g., Tests  38 and 122.  There  is  no  rationalization
based  on  the mechanism of nitrogen oxides formation  to explain  these
extreme values.
        The  cause  could  have  been differing  operating  conditions.
A  likely  cause was a  combination  of instrumentation error  and readout
error.  The  uniformity  of the temperature of the heated  sample  line, the
stability of the nitrogen oxides analyzer and the objectivity of
the crewman  in estimating a representative value  from a constantly-
changing  trace on  a pen  recorder tape  all affect  the magnitude of
the small difference between  the nitric oxide and total nitrogen
oxides measurements.  For gas testing  where  the  total  nitrogen
oxides concentrations frequently are  less than  30 ng/J  (100  ppm),
there  is  a  very  small absolute difference.
                                85

-------
In
O

a

a
u
a;
                           300   400   500    600   700    800   900


                                 ppm, dry @ 3% 0
                                  4-
                  •f
                    4-
                     100
    200
      300
         400
                                 ng/J , as NO  for Gas
                                                                       500
                   100
                  100
                              200
             300
              400
                                 ng/J , as NO  for Oil
200
300
400
                                 ng/J , as NO  for Coal
                500
                                                            500
                       TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES CONCENTRATION
Figure  4-17.  Percent of nitrogen dioxide in total nitrogen oxides

              concentration .
                                                           6001-43
600
                                86

-------
                            SECTION 5.0
               COMBUSTION MODIFICATION TEST RESULTS

        The overall objective of the program was to determine the
effectiveness of known combustion modification methods in reducing
the nitrogen oxides emissions from industrial boilers.  Phase I of
the program primarily concerned the emissions of boilers operating
normally; although some testing of simple combustion modifications
was done.  The findings of Phase I were analyzed and the results
used a guide in selecting the types of combustion modification to
be used in Phase II.
         During Phase II three major categories of combustion
 modification were  investigated.  These categories were the
 following and the  methods of combustion modification that were
 used in each category are listed in Table 5-1.
         1.  Mixture Ratio Variation;  (1) Vary the overall fuel/
             air mixture ratio  (e.g., reduce average excess air
             level);  (2) vary the local fuel/air mixture ratio in
             the furnace.
         2.  Enthalpy Variation:  Reduce the level and/or  duration
             of the peak gas  temperatures in order to reduce the
             pollutant  formation rates.
          3.  Input Variation;   Limit  the  input of  the chemical
             source  from which  the  pollutant  is derived  in the
             boiler.
The postulated effect of the combustion modification technique  that
causes  the lower nitrogen  oxides emissions  is  tabulated  in the  right-
hand  column of the  table.
                                  87

-------
      Table 5-1.  COMBUSTION MODIFICATION METHODS AND EFFECTS
     CATEGORY AND METHOD
                                                   EFFECT
1.  Mixture Ratio Variation
    o  Excess air level
    o  staged combustion air
    o  Burners-out-of-service
    o  Burner register adjustment
Varies  the overall  fuel/air
mixture ratio
Creates local fuel/air ratio
stratification by bypassing air
and delays complete combustion
Creates local fuel/air ratio
stratification by bypassing air
and delays complete combustion
Controls swirl level and the
local rate of fuel/air mixing
2.  Enthalpy Variation

    o  Combustion air temperature
    o  Flue gas recirculation
    o  Firing rate
Influences peak gas temperature
level and duration
Reduces peak gas temperature
level and duration

Affects fuel heat release rate
per unit volume, and gas heat
loss rate
3.   Input Variation

    o  Fuel oil temperature/
       viscosity


    o  Fuel type switching


    o  Burner tune-up


    o  Fuel oil atomization
       method and pressure
Controls atomization character-
istics, e.g., drop size and
vaporization rate
Reduces sulfur and/or nitrogen
oxides emissions from the fuel
Assures performance according
to design specifications

Control local fuel/air mixing
rates by varying drop size
distribution and overall fuel
spray shape
                                                          6001-43
                                88

-------
        During Phase I and II fifty-four individual tests were run
on the effectiveness of combustion modification.  The tests are
listed in Table 5-2.  As the table indicates, tests were run using
coal, oil, natural gas and mixed fuels.
        In order to find the combustion modification capabilities
that were needed it was necessary to include boilers located at
widely separated sites within the continental United States, as is
shown in Figure 2-1.  This dispersal of test boilers had the added
advantage that the effect of the geographical variation in fuel
properties could be included in the testing.  The boiler capacities
ran from a minimum of 18 GJ/hr (17x10  Ib/hr) of equivalent
saturated steam to a maximum of 580 GJ/hr (550x10  Ib/hr).
        The measurements that were made are listed by test number
in Tables 1-1 and 4-1. In the balance of this section the results
of the analysis of the measurements are discussed.  Not every
combustion modification test listed on Tables 1-1, 4-1, and 5-2
is discussed individually in this section.   Those where the test
results  followed the general trend usually  are  not discussed
specifically.  The practice is to select one or two  tests  that illustrated
the  trend, or deviated  from the trend, and  discuss these.
                                 89

-------
Table 5-2.  COMBUSTION MODIFICATION TEST SUMMARY,



           PHASE I AND PHASE II TESTS
Combust ion
Modification
Staged Air






Burners Out
Of Service














Burner
Register
Readjustment








Variable
Combustion
Air
Temperature






Flue Gas
Recireulation
Fuel Oil
Viscosity


Burner
Tune- up


Fuel
Atomization


Tost

136
161
168
1B3
188
193
108,203
6
9
15
21
22
30
63
68
119
124
128
133
147
151
159

7
10
26
30
70
77
78
141
148
154
174
115
118
125
130
142
144
155
177
182
189
192
197,202
120
129
173
178
106
108
110
1)2
2
44
'j2
163
Test
LoL-at ion
30
36
35
38
38
19
19
7
18
9
18
18
9
2
2
29
28
28
31
32
33
13

17
16
12
9
2
12
12
32
32
34
20
29
29
28
28
32
32
34
37
38
38
19
19
29
28
20
37
1
1
27
27
)'J
19
19
30
Ttst

Coal
No. 2 Oil
Coal
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. G Oil
No. 5 Oil
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
PS 300 Oil
PS 300 Oil
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gao
No. 6 Oil
Coal
Natural Gas
Refinery Gas
Coal & No. 6
Oil
No. 2 Oil
No. 6 Oil
Coal
Natural Gas
PS 300 Oil
Natural Gas
Coal
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
Natural Gas
No. 6 Oil
No. 6 Oil
No. 6 Oil
No. 6 Oil
No. 6 Oil
Natural Cias
No. 2 Oil
Natural Gas
PS 300 Oil
No . Coil
No. 6 Oil
Mo . 2 Oil
No . 2 Oil
Boiler
GJ/hr
132
211
227
47
47
18
18
90
95
63
110
169
316
62
69
158
74
74
274
127
580
528

116
69
237
317
132
338
338
137
i33
264
84
158
158
74
74
137
127
264
42
47
47
18
18
153
74
84
42
31
31
106
106
HI
18
18
211
Capacity
(103lb/hr)
U2D!
(200)
(215)
(45)
(45)
(17)
(17)
(85)
(90)
(60)
(105)
(160)
(3001
(59)
(65)
(150)
(70)
(70)
(260)
(120)
(550)
(500)

(110)
(65)
(225)
(300)
(125)
(320)
(320)
(130)
(120)
(250)
(80)
(150)
(150)
(70)
(70)
(130)
(120)
(250)
(40)
(4S)
(45)
(17)
(17)
(150)
(70)
(80)
(40)
(29)
(29)
(100)
(100)
(17)
(17)
(17)
(200)
                                                 6001-43
                       90

-------
5.1     MIXTURE RATIO MODIFICATION
5.1.1   Excess Oxygen or Air
        One form of combustion modification that was applied to almost
all boilers measured in both Phases I and II was the reduction of the
amount of excess air or oxygen that was being fired.  It was found
that, in general, industrial boilers were being fired with more than
adequate excess air in order to assure complete combustion and pro-
vide a margin of safety to the operator.  Utility boilers, on the
other hand, typically are fired with a smaller margin of excess air,
but they are more closely monitored by the operating personnel and
do not suffer the wide variations in demand that industrial boilers
do.
        This form of combustion modification was found to be most
effective for coal-fueled boilers and slightly less effective for oil
and natural gas-fueled boilers.  This is illustrated in Figure 5-1
which shows the  reduction in the nitrogen oxides emissions that were
obtained during  several of the tests by reducing the amount of excess
oxygen being fired.  As the amount of excess oxygen was lowered, the
nitrogen oxides  level fell most steeply and consistently when the
fuel was coal.   The amount of excess oxygen fired on the average also
is indicated on  the figure for each of  the three fuels, and the
average for coal of 8.7% is a good deal higher than for oil or
natural gas.

5.1.1.1 Coal Fuel -
        The effects of the level of excess oxygen on the total
nitrogen oxides  emissions for coal fuel are depicted in Figures 5-1
and  5-2.  Figure 5-1 illustrates the absolute nitrogen oxides
levels as  a function of excess oxygen,  while Figure 5-2 shows the
nitrogen oxides  reduction factor plotted versus  the reduction in
excess oxygen from the highest oxygen  level at which NO  was measured.
                                                       X
                                91

-------
to
0™ 20Q
Of
f)
£ & 10Q
O T3
i— i
03
CO *-3
M *X
S cn
we a
w
Q
M
X
O
2
W
O
§ 300:
E-t CM -
M O
" <*>
tJ n
EH 0 200
8 &
T>
^ 10°.
Cn
c
0_
i o™ 40Q
of
ro
fr 200
a
c
0
600
(M
O
* 400
®>
. 200
E
a
0



f
T^—
-->
^-
S
V

^
¥

s
s
^
gr>j


^
K
G
-'


as



6 8 10 12 1
Avg.
FLUE GAS EXCESS OXYGEN, %, DR



•

tf
f ^
^

S
^
ss
i^_««.
^^^•^B


/
/
SB
^M



<»


C





i





DUU.
CM
O
OP 400-
ro
M 300.
^
4 (TV
Y
100 J




CN
O
no 600
S-l
13
^ 400
a
• cu
200






''









''S
— —

.
/
*s
/
^^*-


.
*^'
J
'+
Cc

//
/


al
/





0 2 4 6 8 1 10 12 14
1 Avg.
FLUE GAS EXCESS OXYGEN, %, DRY
COMBUSTION AIR TEMPERATURE:
____ Ambient
____ Preheated
The crosshatched areas on the
oil. and natural gas graphs are
for firetube boilers.
                             0   2    46   8   10  12   14
                                         I Avg.
                              FLUE  GAS EXCESS OXYGEN, %,  DRY
          Figure  5-1.   Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to a decrease in excess oxygen.
                                                                                          6001-43

-------
           1.0
               Number beside curves
               denote test numbers.
               Ambient Combustion Air
               Preheated Combustion Air
                                  2345
                           REDUCTION FROM HIGHEST LEVEL, PERCENTAGE POINTS
Figure 5-2.
Reduction in  total nitrogen  oxide emissions  due to  a
reduction in  excess  oxygen,  coal fuel.

                                                  6001-43
                                      93

-------
        Figure 5-1 shows that the effect of reducing the excess oxygen
was relatively large, running approximately at 31 ng/J  (60 ppm) change
in nitrogen oxides emissions for each one percent change in excess oxygen.
The normalized curves of Figure 5-2 summarizes the reductions in emissions
brought about by reducing excess oxygen.  The effect was similar whether
or not the combustion air was preheated.  A decrease in excess oxygen/air
always resulted in a steady decrease in nitrogen oxides emissions.
        The highest level of excess oxygen that is referred to in
the abscissa title is the level to which the excess was raised at
the start of the test.  For example the small graph labeled "coal"
in Figure 5-1 indicates that in one test the excess oxygen was raised
to almost 13% and then reduced to about 9%.
        This consistent decrease in the nitrogen oxides emissions
during all tests was unique to coal, since the nitrogen oxides
emissions occasionally increased with a decrease in excess oxygen
with oil and gas fuels.  A very effective form of combustion modifi-
cation would be to fire coal-fueled boilers with less excess air.

 5.1.1.2 Oil  Fuel -
        Figures  5-1 and  5-3 illustrate  the  effect of changes  in  the
 level  of  excess air,  expressed  as  excess  oxygen, on the total  nitrogen
oxides emissions from oil  fuel  firing.  The data for both heated
combustion air and  ambient  temperature  combustion air  indicated  that
the total nitrogen  oxides  emissions for No.  2 oil were less affected by
excess oxygen level  and averaged about  6  ng/J (10 ppm)  change  for
each one percent change of  excess  oxygen.   The  type of oil burned  is
listed in Table 4-1  and in  Table 7-1.   The  data for  the Nos.  5 and 6
fuel oils with both preheated and  ambient air showed a greater
influence of excess  oxygen  on nitrogen  oxides emissions than  did the
data for No. 2 oil.
                                94

-------
      Q
      W
           1.2
           '1.1
           1.0
           0.9
       O
       B
           0.7
           0.6
               Numbers beside curves
               denote test numbers
               Ambient Combustion Air
               Preheated Combustion Air
                      0  REDUCTION FROM HIGHEST LEVEL, PERCENTAGE POINTS
Figure 5-3.
Reduction  in total  nitrogen oxide  emissions due  to a
reduction  in excess oxygen, oil  fuel.
                                                     6001-43
                                      95

-------
        An average change in nitrogen oxides emissions of about
11 ng/J  (20 ppm) for each one percent change of excess oxygen level
was observed for watertube boilers during both Phase I and Phase II.
The change for firetube boilers measured in Phase I and shown on the
figure as a shaded area averaged about 3 ng/J  (6 ppm) for each one
                                (4)
percent change of excess oxygen.     Generally, when the absolute
level of the total nitrogen oxides was less than 100 ng/J (200 ppm),
the sensitivity of the nitrogen oxides to excess oxygen change was
very small.
        In most instances the nitrogen oxides decreased steadily as
the excess oxygen was reduced.  However, in two cases in Phase I and
two more in Phase II, nitrogen oxide emissions first increased,  then
peaked and finally decreased as the excess oxygen was lowered.
Examples of this behavior shown in Figure 5-3 are Test No. 1  (with
No. 6 oil), Test No. Ill (with PS 300 oil) and Test No.  65 (with No.
2 oil).
        This behavior is typical of a burner where the fuel  and air
are well mixed prior to ignition.   The nitrogen oxides emissions
from a "pre-mixed" burner first increase then decrease when  the level
of excess air or oxygen is reduced.

5.1.1.3 Natural Gas Fuel -
        The influence of the excess air/oxygen level on natural gas-
fueled boilers is illustrated in Figure Nos. 5-1 and 5-4.  Both the
Phase I and Phase II measurements with ambient temperature combustion
air showed that the effect of excess oxygen changes on nitrogen
oxides was varied.    However, the preheated combustion air data
evidenced a stronger effect of excess oxygen level on nitrogen
oxides emissions than did the data for the unheated combustion air.
The change in nitrogen oxides concentration with excess oxygen varied
from about 3 to 20 ng/J (5 to 70 ppm) change for each one percent
                               96

-------
                     Number beside curves     \
                     denote test numbers.       \
                    Ambient Combustion Air
                    Preheated Combustion Air
                    O REDUCTION FROM HIGHEST LEVEL, PERCENTAGE POINTS
Figure 5-4.
Reduction in  total nitrogen oxide emissions due to a
reduction in  excess oxygen, natural gas  fuel.

                                                   6001-43
                                    97

-------
 change  in excess  oxygen  level.   The  variations  in  dependency were
 brought about by  physical  differences between boilers.   The heat
 absorbing characteristics  of  the furnace,  slight differences in
 burner  design,  and  burner  air register position could have all
 combined to produce the  inconsistent excess  air effect.
         As with oil fuel,  in  most  instances  the nitrogen oxides
 emissions decreased steadily  as  the  excess oxygen  level was decreased.
 In  four instances,  Tests 14 and  109  with ambient temperature
 combustion air  and  Tests 24 and  114  with heated combustion air,
 however,  the  nitrogen oxides  emission levels increased as the
 excess  oxygen was decreased.
 5.1.1.4  Firetube  Boilers -
         The test  results showed  that the nitrogen oxides emissions
 from firetube boilers was  less sensitive to the excess oxygen level
 than it  was from watertube boilers.  Figure 5-5 presents the firetube
 boiler data that were taken during Phase I (no  firetube boilers were
 measured during Phase II).  The  change in emissions for firetube
 boilers  averaged about 3 ng/J (6 ppm) for each one percent change
                  (4)
 of excess oxygen.     Generally, when the absolute level of the total
 nitrogen oxides was  less than 110 ng/J (200 ppm),  the nitrogen oxides
 emissions were insensitive to a change in excess oxygen.  Test No.
 34 conducted with No. 6 oil fuel did show some dependency of nitrogen
 oxides emissions on excess oxygen.   However,  the test results may
 not be typical, because the No.  6 oil was run as a special test fuel
 for this program using a boiler and atomizer that actually were
designed for a lighter oil.
                               98

-------
      200..
    O 150 I
   H
   M M
   S « 100.
    IS
     c
       50..
            200..
           1*
           3150.
100- .
             50--
        0-L    oJL
                    400
        300
                  O

                  dp
                  •a

                    100
                     I     I      I     I     I     I     I     I
                  The Numerals at the End of Curves are Test Numbers
                       0   1.0   2.0   3.0  4.0   5.0   6.0   7.0   8.0   9.0

                                    FLUE GAS EXCESS OXYGEN, %, DRY
Figure 5-5.
   Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due  to a

   reduction in excess oxygen.  Firetube boilers.

                                                       6001-43
                                    99

-------
 5.1.2    Staged  Combustion
         Three different methods of staging the combustion air were
 investigated during the program.  The term "staged combustion" denotes
 a method of modifying the combustion whereby the air is injected into
 the  combustion  zone in stages, rather than all of it entering with the
 fuel through the burner.  When a portion of the air is injected through
 ports  located above the burners, it commonly is called "overfire air."
 When the  fuel to one of the burners is turned off and only air is
 injected through the burner, it is called "burners-out-of-service."
 When the  air is staged through ports located in the furnace walls
 downstream of the burner, it will be called "sidefire air."  Front
 or side-mounted ports often are called "NO  Ports."
                ^                         x
         In addition to limiting the formation of thermally generated
 nitrogen  oxides, staged combustion also limits the conversion of fuel-
 bound nitrogen to nitrogen oxides.  The mechanism for the fuel-bound
 nitrogen  conversion is not highly temperature sensitive, so a
 combustion modification which reduces only the bulk gas temperature
will not  greatly limit the conversion.  Staged firing, however, also
 reduces the available oxygen in the combustion zone near the burner,
and  thus  it is effective in limiting the conversion of fuel-bound
nitrogen.  This effect is illustrated by Figure 5-6 from the work
of Turner, et al.     showing the theoretical nitric oxide emissions
as a function of the percentage of stoichiometric air at the burner
throat.  The parameter that is used in discussions of staged combustion
is the "theoretical air at the burner" defined in percent of the
stoichiometric ratio of fuel to air as follows:

       Theoretical Air     (Fuel/Air)  .  .  , .
        _ _       „            __•	stoichiometric     . nn
       at Burner,  %     =  ——   —• 	x  100
       of Stoichiometric   (/   'actual
                           (Air/Fuel)   ^   .
                                    actual
                                       	 x   100
                        =  (Air/Fuel)  ^  .  , .
                                     stoichiometric
                              100

-------
I
                                      I     I

                                    Air  Rich
                                    	>•
                                     Combustion
                                      I
I
I
I
I
I
                 70   80   90   100  110  120  130  140  150  160

                 THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % of stoichiometric



                 Fuel-bound nitrogen content = 0.35%
Figure 5-6.  Reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions due to reduction
             of combustion air at the burner. (ID
                                                          6001-43
                                101

-------
        The data in Figure 5-6 indicate a sharp decrease in nitrogen
oxides emissions for fuel-rich combustion, and this reduction has
been achieved with industrial boilers during the current series of
tests.  The objective of the staged combustion air tests was to operate
the burner in a fuel-rich, rather than an air-rich mode, i.e., the
left side of the 100% theoretical air point.  However attaining fuel-
rich operation in actual practice sometimes was difficult,  because
if the  combustion became too fuel-rich, the carbon monoxide and/or
smoke emissions increased.
5.1.2.1 Sidefire Air -
        During Phase II two boilers were modified to allow the addition
of air in stages downstream of the burner and two units were tested
which had been manufactured with sidefire air capability.  The first
unit to be modified was a 47 GJ/hr  (45,000  Ib/hr of saturated steam
flow) vertical type watertube boiler at Location 38 for Tests 183 and
188.  It had a single Peabody brand oil and gas burner that fired
either natural gas or No. 6 oil.  In addition the unit was equipped
with an air preheater which preheated the combustion air to a
temperature of 450 K (350°F).
        The sidefire installation is pictured in Figure 5-7.  A 36
centimeter diameter manifold pipe was run along each side of the
boiler and was connected to a fan mounted on the floor at the left
rear of the boiler.  The manifold is pointed out in the picture in
the center photograph of Figure 5-7 and a schematic diagram is shown
in Figure 5-8.  Four flexible fabric pipes were connected to each
manifold and these could be connected to the five overfire air ports
that had been cut into the furnace side walls on each side.  Two of
these downcomers also are shown attached to the manifold and to the
ports in the center photograph.
                               102

-------
                    Manifold
                   Down coiner
       TWO
Downcomer      Port Nozzle
                                               INSTALLATIONS
                                       Port With Plug
                                          Installed
                                          DOWNCOMERS TO PORT NOZZLE
      5-7,          air installation at Location No.  38.
                                                       6001-43
                           102A

-------
   T
 183 cm
   I
 Windbox
                 Port
                 Nos.
        7   ESI9
                       13,15
 Furnace
                          n
        310 cm
                        .249 cm
                     166 cm..
86
cm
H
                              ll
               36 cm dia.
               Manifold
                            (a) TOP VIEW       Sidefire Air Fan
   Windbox
                  86 cm  . 80 cm
                    —e— -0--G— e
I                   Port 6,7      8,9    10,11  12,13
                   Nos.
                                        366 cm
                             (b)  SIDE VIEW
                                                   Dividing Wall
Figure 5-8.   Schematic diagram of staged air system installed at
            Location No. 38.
                            103
                                      6001-43

-------
        Two of the ten ports cut into the boiler wall are seen in
the photograph in the upper left of Figure 5-7.  The first one has
the sidefire air nozzle installed.  The second port has a plug inserted
to close it off while it is not being used.  The third and fourth ports
have downcomers attached.  The details of the attachment of the down-
comers to the sidefire air nozzles is depicted in the lower photograph.
        The amount of sidefire air going to each downcomer was
controlled by butterfly valves installed in each of the two legs of
the manifold and in the upper section of each downcomer.
        Staged combustion air tests were conducted on this unit with
both natural gas and No. 6 oil firing.
        At the baseline load setting of 42.7 GJ/hr (40,500 Ibs/hr
steam flow) while firing natural gas the unit operated with 1.9%
excess oxygen and emitted 112 ng/J (220 ppm, dry § 3% 0 ) of nitrogen
oxides.  The carbon monoxide emission levels were zero.  During the
staged air tests the amount and location of the injection of the
sidefire air addition was systematically varied while the total amount
of combustion air was held constant.   Due to process demands it was
not possible to hold the load constant and it varied as follows:
Tests 180 and 183, 88% of capacity; Test No. 184, 96%,  and Test No.
185,  71%.   The test results are presented in Figures 5-9, 5-10, and
5-11.
        For comparison, the effect of burner stoichiometry on nitrogen
oxides emissions with no staged air also is plotted with dotted circle
symbols in Figure 5-9 for a load of 88% of capacity.   The staged air
port numbers and locations are shown  in Figure  5-8.   The data in
Figure 5-9 indicate the following:
        (1)  except for the ports located above the burner axis
             (ports 14 and 15) the nitrogen oxides emissions
             exhibited little sensitivity to the location of the
             sidefire air addition,
                               104

-------
    120. .
    110- •
    100 •
CO
w
Q
M
X
S3 O
W 2

O W
PS fl3
  cr
  C
EH
8
80- •






70





60j_





50


 0*
                                Tests  180  and 183

                                Test Load:   42 GJ/hr (40x10  Ib/hr)

                                Fuel:  Natural Gas
220
200
o, 180
O
f!
b 16°
a
a 140

120
100
*










\- ^
i'uei Rich
Comb\

(
A

'


/
v

as t ion

1^ //
&
^
D /
^7/V
/

V


Air Rich
Combust

A
V
/v
^





ion
W
s

Symbol _
/
O


Port Ope




n
O None
^ 6 & 7
O 8 & 9
D 10 & 11
£ 12 & 13
^ 14 & 15
£ 15 only
B 14 only
1 1






3^ 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
                      THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % OF STOICHIOMETRIC
Figure 5-9.
         Reduction  In  Total  Nitrogen Oxides At Constant Total Excess

         Air Due  To Staged Combustion Air,  Natural Gas Fuel.


                                                       6001-43
                                 105

-------
         (2)  the  sidefire air ports  14 and  15  located above the
             burner  axis were the most effective in reducing
             nitrogen oxides,
         (3)  the  nitrogen oxides reduction  with sidefire air
             addition was a strong function of the theoretical
             air  at  the burner, i.e., the percentage of the
             required stoichiometric air.
 The nitrogen oxides emissions were  reduced on the average of 32%
 when  sufficient  air was staged to create a theoretical air ratio of
 98% at the burner  (an increase in the burner  equivalence ratio 98%
 to 108%).  The carbon monoxide emissions were generally under 30
 ng/J  (100 ppm) except when ports 14 and 15 were used.  In this case
 carbon monoxide  levels were frequently in  the range of 80-300 ng/J
 (250-950 ppm) when the burner air ratio was less than unity.
        Similar  results were obtained at a lower load setting of
 71% of capacity  or 34 GJ/hr  (32,000 Ib/hr  steam flow), and they are
 plotted in Figure 5-10.  The nitrogen oxides  reduction achieved
 was somewhat less, being 43% for a  load of 71% of capacity
 compared to  a reduction of 54% for the baseline load of 88% of
 capacity.
        The  relative insensitivity of the  nitrogen oxides emissions
 from natural gas to the location of the staged air addition except
 for the extreme  upper rear was somewhat surprising.  It was suspected
 that there was insufficient momentum in the sidefire air jet to
 cause complete mixing of the staged air with  the primary combustion
products.  To further investigate this, all of the staged air was
added through only one port rather than two opposed ports, in order
 to increase  the  sidefire air penetration.  As the solid symbols
in Figure 5-9 show, when port 14 or 15 alone was used no discernible
differences  in nitrogen oxides emissions were observed.
                                106

-------
      110.
       100.
 w
 Q
 H
 X
 O

 a
 w
en
(0



I
c
        90-
        70. .
        60
    50



     0
                 220
                 200
                 180
               CM
o

of
00

&
            160
                 140
                 120
                 100



                   0
                           Test  185

                           Test  Load:   34 GJ/hr (32x10'

                           Fuel:   Natural Gas
                                                   Ib/hr)
                                     Rich
                                Combustion
                                           C
                               o
                                         Air Rich
                                        Combustion



                                         Symbol Port Open


                                          E3    None


                                                6 & 7


                                                8 S 9


                                                10 & 11


                                                12 6 13


                                                14 S 15
                                                 I
o
D
A
V
                        80        90        100       110        120      130


                       THEORETICAL  AIR AT  BURNER,  %  OF STOICHIOMETRIC
Figure 5-10.
          Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due  to  staged

          combustion air, natural gas fuel.



                                                  6001-43
                                 107

-------
         Further tests were conducted at a high load of 96%  of capacity
 where the staged air was added through four side  ports in order to
 increase the total amount of staged air,  thus  operating with a lower
 level of theoretical air at the burner.
         The results of the test series are summarized  below:

Test
No.
180, 183
185
184

Fig.
No. %
5-9
5-10
5-11

Test Load
of Capacity
88
71
96

Number of
Ports Open
2
2
4
Lowest
Theoretical
Air at Burner
93
98
90
Reduction
in NOX Below
Baseline Level
54
43
49
         In  Test No. 184 with  four ports open it was possible to reduce
 the  theoretical air at the burner to 90%, i.e., to 90% of the stoichio-
 metric amount, and to achieve a nitrogen oxides reduction of 49%.  The
 fact that the greatest nitrogen oxides reduction were achieved at the
 lowest levels of theoretical  air was deemed to support the conclusion
 that, with  natural gas firing in this unit, the nitrogen oxides reduc-
 tions were  determined primarily by the burner equivalence ratio rather
 than by  the location at which the staged air was added.
         The results of the  staged   air tests with oil firing at
 Location 38 are shown in Figure 5-12.  While firing No. 6 oil, the
baseline emissions from the boiler at Location 38 were 183 ng/J (326 ppm)
of nitrogen oxides and zero carbon monoxide at an excess oxygen level
of 3%.  The total particulate emissions were 45.6 ng/J (0.106 lb/10
Btu)  at this baseline condition.  As had been  found with gas  firing,
the theoretical air at the burner was an important factor in
correlating the nitrogen oxides emission.   Nitrogen oxides reduc-
tions on the order of 50% of the baseline  level were achieved
when the theoretical air at the burner was reduced to 100%.
                                108

-------
   120
    110.
    100
x

°0°
IZ 55
w
O W
O nS

EH O
M \
13 ^
     90
     80
     70- •
     60- •
     50,
            <#>
            n
            ©
             &
             O.
                240
                220
                              Test  184

                              Test  Load:   46 GJ/hr (44x10  lb/hr)

                              Fuel:   Natural Gas
                200
                180
                160
                140
                120
                100
                          Initial  NO   level
                                                      Port Open

                                                       None

                                                       10,11,12  &  13


                                                       10,11,14  &  15

                                                       8,9,10  &  11

                                                     I          I
                   0 *  80       90       100       110        120


                     THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER,  %  OF  STOICHIOMETRIC
                                                                       130
Figure 5-11.
              Reduction in total nitrogen oxides  emissions due to

              staged combustion air, natural  gas  fuel.
                                                       6001-43
                                 109

-------
                                 Tests 187 and 188

                                 Test Load:  38 GJ/hr  (36x10"
                                                Ib/hr)
     225
     200
     175. .
     150
CO

§
H

O  CN 125
  O
z z
W
O w
O it)
rt
     100
      75-
      50.
      25

ro
               g

               &-
               O,
400
350
300
250
200
150
SO
fl!
x uc j. ; HU. u uj-o.

XI—
M 	





V-
	 Fuel Rich
Coi
Baselim

0
/



nbustion
; NO
X
I
/,
-£j
O fi

r


Air Ri
Comb us
d
<£/
' P
/



ch
:ion


>
0





^^^.'3




Symbol Port Open
O None
O 6,7
O 8 & 9
^ 10 & 11
O 12 & 13
0 14 & 15
Q 10,11,14 & 15
O 8,9,10 & 11
O 6,7,8 & 9
1 1

                      THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER,  % OF STOICHIOMETRIC
 Figure 5-12.
 Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions due to

 staged combustion air, No. 6 oil  fuel.


                                              6001-43
                                 110

-------
As with natural gas, the curve of nitrogen oxides emissions with
staged air that is shown in Figure 5-12 was essentially an extension
of that obtained merely by reducing the overall excess air with no
staged air ports open.  The main effect of the staged air appeared
to be the suppression of the carbon monoxide and smoke while allowing
operation of the burner in a fuel-rich mode.
        Although the proportion of the stoichiometric air that was
injected through the burner was a major parameter, there was a definite
effect of the location of the sidefire air addition on the nitrogen
oxides emissions with oil firing.  The testing showed that the nitrogen
oxides reductions increased as the point of staged air addition was
moved  farther away  from the burner.  This can be explained in that
moving the injection point away from the burner provided  a more
gradual heat release and a longer residence time of the products of
combustion in a fuel-rich region.  The delayed heat release  rate
resulted in overall lower temperature  levels  and a reduction in the
production of thermal nitrogen oxides.  The longer residence time
under  fuel-rich conditions allowed a greater  fraction of  the fuel
nitrogen compounds  to be  reduced to molecular nitrogen rather than
oxidized to nitrogen  oxides  and,  thus,  reduced  the  conversion of
 fuel-bound nitrogen to  nitrogen  oxides.   In fact,  the insensitivity
of the nitrogen oxides  reductions to the  location of the staged air
 addition with  natural gas firing,  suggests that the  major effect  of
 staged firing with  oil in this  unit was to suppress  the conversion
 of fuel bound  nitrogen,  rather  than to suppress the  formation of
 thermal nitrogen oxides.
         During all the sidefire air tests with No. 6 oil firing,
 the carbon monoxide emissions were less than 7 ng/J  (20 ppm) , with
 the exception  of one test run No. 188-10 where the carbon monoxide
 emissions reached a level of 7^ ng/J  (218 ppm) .
                                 Ill

-------
        The effect of sidefire air on particulate emissions was also
investigated.  A relatively large decrease in nitrogen oxides was
achieved with only a moderate increase in participates.  The baseline
Test 186-1  (no sidefire air) had total particulate emissions of
45.6 ng/J  (0.106 lb/10  Btu).  With sidefire air addition through
ports 14 and 15, such that the theoretical air at the burner was
99%  (overall excess oxygen level held constant at about 3%), the
total particulate emissions increased by 28% to 58.5 ng/J  (0.136
lb/10  Btu).  The nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced by 50% from
the baseline value of 183 ng/J (326 ppm).
        The second boiler modified for sidefire air was a D-type
watertube unit rated at 18.5 GJ/hr (17,500 Ib/hr steam flow) at
Location 19.  Tests were conducted with both natural gas and No. 6
oil firing during Tests 193, 198, and 203.
        The furnace walls were of tangent-tube construction so it
was not practicable to install sidefire ports in the wall of the
furnace.  The staged air was introduced into the furnace by four
steel tubes that were pushed through holes cut into each of the four
corners of the front face of the windbox.  Flexible fabric ducts were
attached to the end of each steel tube to supply air from the staged
air manifold to each tube.  The manifold was attached to an staged
air fan mounted beside the boiler on the floor of the boiler house.
The four tubes are shown in the retracted position in the picture
in the lower left of Figure 5-13.
        The photographs in the upper left and center are side and
front views of the windbox with the tubes fully inserted.  The vertical,
rectangular structure at the right shoulder of the engineer in the
center picture is the flue gas recirculation duct.  With this arrange-
ment the effect of simultaneous staged air and flue gas recirculation
could be determined.
                                112

-------
                                  Side fire Mr
                                  Tube Inserted
                                                 Sidefire Air
                                                 Tubes Inserted
                                  Sidefire
                                  Air Duct
                    Flexible
                    Sidefire
                    Air  Ducts
                                         Sidefi.ro Air
                                         Tubes Retracted
                                         Windbox
                                         Face
Figure 5-13.    Staged air installation at Location No.  19.
                                                       6001-43
                            113

-------
         Each of the  four air sidefire air tubes  could be  inserted
 to a depth of up to  122  cm (4 ft)  into the furnace.   The  ends  of the
 tubes were constructed such  that  the  staged air  was  injected into
 the flame  from the side.   When air was not being blown through a tube
 it was fully retracted to prevent its being melted by the nearby
 flame.  The quantity of  air  being staged  was controlled by a butterfly
 valve in the manifold.
         A  pitot tube was  positioned in the staged air duct to  determine
 the quantity of sidefire  air that was passing though it.   The  load and
 overall excess oxygen level  were  held constant and the amount  and the
 point at which the staged air was  added were varied.   In  addition/ the
 No.  6 oil  tests were conducted with both  steam and air atomization.
         Figure 5-14  illustrates the effect of staged air  in  terms of
 the  theoretical air  at the burner  on  nitrogen oxides emission  levels
 for natural gas fuel at Location  19.   The  shaded data points on  the
 right are  the  tests  with  no  staging of the air.   Without  staged  air
 the  minimum nitrogen oxides  level  was  28 ng/J (54 ppm)  at an theoretical
 air  of 109%.   Adding the  air in stages  allowed the burner  to be
 operated fuel  rich with a theoretical  air  of  between 67%  and 77%.
 With the sidefire air tubes  inserted  30 cm from  the  burner nitrogen
 oxides  emissions were 33  to  39 ng/J (65 to  77 ppm),  which  is a
 significant  increase  above baseline levels.   As  the  sidefire air tubes
were moved further downstream  from  the burner  the nitrogen oxides
emissions decreased.   The reason that nitrogen oxides  emissions  first
increased above the  baseline with  sidefire  air appears  to be that the
sidefire air was introduced  too near the burner and,  thus, the air
was not in fact added in  stages.  The  lowest  level of nitrogen oxides
emissions attained with staged air was achieved with  the tubes 122 cm
into the furnace; the nitrogen oxides was  27 ng/J  (53 ppm).  This was
an insignificant reduction from baseline conditions.  Further reductions
may have been possible if the air could have been introduced further
downstream of the burner.
                                114

-------
                                      191, and  193
    40..
    35..
X O
O 2
W
H
2
    30L .
    25
            Tests 190,
            Test Load:   15  GJ/hr
            Fuel:  Natural  Gas
                                                 (16x10  Ib/hr)
                              Fuel Rich
                                            Combustion
                                           Combustion
                                                      No Sidefire Air
                                                  D  Sidefire Air
                                 Numbers beside symbols are the
                                 distance from burner face at
                                 which sidefire air was injected
                         70         80       90        100        110
                    THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % OF  STOICHIOMETRIC
                                                            120
Figure 5-14.
Reduction  in  total nitrogen oxides emission due  to
staged combustion air, natural  gas fuel.
                                                    6001-43
                                  115

-------
         The  effect  of  sidefire air on nitrogen oxides emissions  for
 No.  6  fuel oil  firing  at Location 19 is presented in Figures 5-15 and
 5-16  for air and steam atomization respectively.  Again the nitrogen
 oxides  data  grouping at the  left is from baseline and excess oxygen
 variations alone.   The lowest nitrogen oxides emission level without
 staged  combustion air was 77.4 and 69.6 ng/J  (138 and 124 ppm) for
 air  and steam atomization at burner air levels of 103% to 110%
 respectively.   With sidefire air the burner was operated with fuel-
 rich burner  air levels between 77% and 86%.  As with gas fuel the
 effect  of the sidefire air was dependent upon the position of the
 tubes within the furnace.  Inserting the tubes 122 cm into the furnace
 resulted in  the lowest nitrogen oxides emissions of 73 and 61 ng/J
 (120 and 108 ppm) for air and steam atomization, respectively.  These
 levels  represent a  reduction of 13% from baseline conditions without
 staged  air for both the air and steam atomizing techniques.  For air
 atomization the effect of the sidefire air tube position on nitrogen
 oxides  emissions was less pronounced than for steam atomization.  With
 air  atomization, emissions varied within a range of about 8 ng/J (15
ppm) as  the tubes were moved from the minimum to the maximum insertion.
 When the fuel was atomized with steam the nitrogen oxides emissions
 changed by about 17 ng/J (30 ppm) as the air insertion point was
 changed.
         Staged  air was more effective with No. 6 oil than natural
gas  (recall that for natural gas the nitrogen oxides emissions were
essentially the same or increased above the baseline values).  This
indicates that:
         (1)  the fuel/air mixing characteristics for this burner may
            by different for natural gas and No.  6 oil with effective
            staging being obtained 122  cm from the burner with oil
            firing or
         (2)  the differences  in fuel/air mixing were such that the
            fuel bound nitrogen conversion to NO  was suppressed with
            little effect on the thermal NO formation.
                                116

-------
                          Tests 195, 196, 198, 200, 201 and 203
                          Test Load:  15 GJ/hr  (14xl03 Ib/hr)
                          Fuel:  No. 6
   110..
   100
O)
W
Q
H
X
O
W
  § 90

  in
  (0
    70
    60,
200
180
O™
* 160
£
i 14°
Q<
120
i




61
91 <

LA^
.ruej.; «*
/Vl22

.el Rich
nbustion

n
cm

cm

Air Ric
Comb us tj




:h
on
00
00
J? ®
tp





^5 No Sidefire Air
O Sidefire Air
Numbers beside symbols are the
distance from burner face at
which sidefire air was injected.
1 1
                 0 * 80        90       100      110       120      130

                  THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % OF STOICHIOMETRIC
 Figure 5-15.
               Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due  to  staged
               combustion air, No. 6 oil fuel.
                                                            6001-43
                                 117

-------
                            Tests 195, 196,  198,  200,  201,  203
                            Test Load:   15 GJ/hr  (14xl03  Ib/hr)
      110.
      10Q.
   w   9C4-
   Q
   H
   X
   O  









Numbers beside symbols are the
distance from burner face at
w]





lich sidefire air was injected.
(!•) No Sidefire Air

Q Sidefire Air


1
                    0 I 70      80      90      100       110      120      130

                       THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % OF  STOICHIOMETRIC
Figure 5-16.
Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged combustion
air, No. 6 oil fuel.

                                               6001-43
                                 118

-------
        Using staged air with steam atomization resulted in lower
total particulate emissions.   The baseline level was 13.3 ng/J
(0.031 Lb/10  Btu) and the particulates with the staged air tubes
122 cm into the furnace were  11.6 ng/J (0.027 lb/106 Btu).  The
reverse occurred with air atomization.  Baseline particulates were
13.3 ng/J  (0.031 lb/10  Btu)  while the concentration with sidefire
air was 20.2 ng/J (0.047 lb/10  Btu).  It is not certain why the
trends were different with steam and air atomization.
        Two boilers at Locations 39 and 36, which were manufactured
with staged air capabilities, also were tested.  The unit at Location
39 was a new watertube boiler rated at 211 GJ/hr (200,000 lb/hr steam
flow).  The boiler utilized a single gas spud burner and was fired
with a mixture of natural gas and refinery gas.  A single forced
draft fan supplied both the burner and the sidefire air duct.  The
staged air was supplied from one side of the furnace through two
ports located approximately one-fourth of the furnace length from
the burner.
        The effect of burner equivalence ratio on nitrogen oxides
emissions at 80% and 48% rated load are presented in Figure 5-17.
As in the previous graphs the shaded symbols are nitrogen oxides
data obtained by varying the excess oxygen level without staging
the combustion air and the open symbols represent staged air tests.
It should be noted that during these  staged  air tests it was not
possible to hold the overall excess air level constant while varying
the burner theoretical air.  At a load of 80% of capacity the nitrogen
oxides emissions were 83 ng/J  (164 ppm) at an air-rich burner air of
128%.  As  the excess oxygen was decreased, nitrogen oxides emissions
increased  and peaked at a burner air  level of about  110%.  Fuel-rich
firing conditions  (burner air levels  less than  100%) were  reached
with staged air and nitrogen oxides emissions reached  the  lowest level
of 58 ng/J  (114 ppm) at an air level  of 82%.   (This  represents  a
reduction  on the order of 40%.)  Carbon monoxide emissions were  high,
between 93 and 620 ng/J  (300 and 2000 ppm) at  low burner  air  levels.
                                119

-------
     125
     100. .
 §
 H  <
 X O
 o z
 2 W
 w m
   CP
   C
      75
      50. .
      25
        <
        «
       0
  250
                   Tests 207 through 212
                   Test Loads:   100 and 169 GJ/hr (95 and 160x10"
                   Fuel:  Mixture of natural and refinery gas
                                                     Ib/hr)
               200
Of
ro
  150
             6
                                                         Load 100 GJ/nr
                                                        No Sidefire Air
                                                        Sidefire Air
                                                    Test Load 169 GJ/hr
                                                        No Sidefire Air
                                                     Q Sidefire Air
  100
                  0*80        100        120       140       160
                     THEORETICAL AIR AT BURNER, % OF STOICHIOMETRIC
                                                         180
Figure 5-17.
 Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to staged
 combustion air, mixture natural and refinery gas.
                                                           6001-43
                               120

-------
        At a test load of 48% of capacity, i.e.,  100 GJ/hr (95,000
Ib/hr steam flow) nitrogen oxides emissions increased as conditions
became less air-rich when the theoretical air at the burner was
lowered from 164%.  Nitrogen oxides emissions were a maximum 85 ng/J
(166 ppm)  at a burner air level of about 118% and then decreased as
the combustion approached fuel-rich conditions.  The nitrogen oxides
emissions with staged air were lowered to 106 ppm at a burner air
level of 86%; however, the carbon monoxide emissions were greater
than 620 ng/J  (2000 ppm) which is unacceptably high.
        The effectiveness of staging the air for reducing nitrogen
oxides was not as great as simply firing air-rich.  The lowest
nitrogen oxides  level of 44 ng/J  (86 ppm) was achieved with zero
staged air and a burner air level of 164%.  Operating with fuel-rich
staged air conditions, however, was better in terms of the boiler
efficiency than with high excess oxygen.  For example, the boiler
efficiency was about 83% when staged air was used to obtain burner
air  levels of  90% and nitrogen oxides  levels in the 56 to 61 ng/J
 (110 to 120 ppm)  range.  On the other  hand, operating with burner
air levels of  164% and a nitrogen oxides emissions of 44 ng/J
 (86 ppm),  resulted in an 81% efficiency.
        The effectiveness of staged air in reducing nitrogen oxides
emissions from this boiler is further  illustrated in Figure 5-18
which shows the reduction of nitrogen oxides that was achieved in
terms of the excess oxygen, rather than theoretical air parameter.
This figure indicates that at overall  excess oxygen levels less
than 5.5%, the staged air addition was effective in reducing the
nitrogen oxides  emissions below  that obtained  without  staged air.
When the overall excess  level  is  below 5.5%, the  burner is  operating
with a theoretical  burner  air  level  greater than  100%,  i.e., fuel
 rich.   When the  overall excess  oxygen  level is greater than 5.5%
 the  use of staged air increases  the  nitrogen oxides emissions.  This
                                 121

-------
                     Test No. 212
                     Test Load:   100 GJ/hr (95x10  Ib/hr)
                     Fuel:  Natural gas and refinery gas mixture
100


C/3
x 80"
o
CJ h3
O \
OH t7>
EH G
d 6°-
§
A f\


F
1 80
CM
O 1 6O
Of
m
140


ft 120
i nn
80
60

uel-ri







^j—
— T_
	 Bast


sh Com!

NO
til




^-c

sline C


Dustion

Stage^





^-^|






3 Air



^^
^s^
D




Air-r



P
x6







ich Cor

D r
r-^T
jjf-L








ibustic

P
-a —









n



r^
D











s.
"a






                                  5678

                                  EXCESS OXYGEN,  %
                                                   10
11
Figure 5-18.
Effect of excess oxygen on total nitrogen oxides emissions
with and without staged air.
                                                              6001-43
                                122

-------
may be caused by increased fuel and air mixing due to the proximity
of the sidefire air port to the burner.
        The 211 GJ/hr (200,000 Ib/hr steam flow)  watertube boiler
at Location 36 also had staged air capabilities.   The unit had a
single steam atomized burner with a 96.5 cm (38 inch) diameter throat
and fired No. 2 fuel oil.  The sidefire air port was located
approximately 3.61 meters  (12 feet) downstream of the burner  [furnace
length was 10.5 meters  (34.5 feet)].
        Staged air tests were conducted at three different loads, 38,
63, and 80 GJ/hr  (36x10  , 60x10  , and 76xl03 Ib/hr steam  flow).  During
each of these test series the overall excess oxygen  level was held
constant and the  amount  of air supplied to the burner varied  by changing
the sidefire air  damper  position.  With the sidefire air  damper open
100%  the nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced  by 10%.
        The effect of the  amount of staged air on nitrogen oxides
is  shown in Figure 5-19  in terms of the degree of being  open  of  the
sidefire air port.   The  data are plotted  as a  function of damper
position as sufficient  instrumentation was not available to determine
the theoretical burner  air level.   However, approximate  calculations
based on the  static  pressure  in  the ducts and  the duct areas  indicate
that  the theoretical air level at  the  burner with the  sidefire  air
damper 100%  open  was on the  order  of 72%.
         The  reason that only a 10% reduction  in  nitrogen oxides
emissions  was realized with  substantial amounts  of  staged air at
 Location 36  probably was that the  test loads  were low.   At the  low-
 load settings the fuel and air mixing is reduced due to the decreased
 pressure drop across the burner.  This reduced mixing has the effect
 of naturally "staging" the combustion.  The effectiveness of staging
 the combustion additionally with sidefire air then would be expected
 to be diminished at low loads.  Additionally, the burner heat release
 rate per unit heat absorption area is reduced at low loads,  and this
 reduction tends  to decrease the flame temperature which  also causes
 lower nitrogen oxides emissions.
                                 123

-------
   60
 (N
o
S5
c 40
CO
H
X
o
h**
8
&
  20 ._
            120.
            100
             80
         *   60
          M
         •O
I  40
            20
                      Test No. 161, Location  36

                      Rated Capacity:  211 GJ/hr

                                       (200xl03 Ib/hr)

                      Fuel:  No. 2 Oil
                                                Load
                                                       Excess
                                     Symbol GJ/hr  (103 Ib/hr)  O , %_
                                                      (76)


                                                      (60)


                                                      (36)
                                                        2.5


                                                        5.5


                                                        9.0
                        20         40        60         80


                             SIDEFIRE AIR PORT, % OF FULLY OPEN
                                                         100
Figure  5-19.   Effect of  staged air  on   total  nitrogen oxides emissions,


                                                              6001-43
                                124

-------
5.1.2.2 Overfire Air -
        On stoker fired coal units,  air ports are conventionally
located over the coal injection ports and inject air into the flame
zone above the grate.  The purpose of this overfire air is to promote
turbulence in the vicinity of the flame zone to assist in obtaining
complete carbon burnout within the furnace.  During the program varying
this overfire air was investigated as a nitrogen oxides control
technique.  In addition, three of the stoker fired units had the
equivalent of overfire air ports in the form of auxiliary oil or gas
burners located above the grate.  The effectiveness of using these
auxiliary burners as overfire air ports was also investigated.
        The boiler at Location 30 was a spreader stoker rated at
132 GJ/hr  (125,000 Ibs/hr steam flow).  Overfire air injection ports
were located at two different heights on the furnace front and back
walls.  The lower air ports were always open and the air flow to the
upper ports could be controlled.  A single natural gas burner was
also located on the right hand side of the furnace and had a separate
windbox with damper controls such that a portion of the coal fuel
combustion air could be diverted to the gas burner port.
        The baseline nitrogen oxides emissions at the normal excess
oxygen level of 6.2% are  196 ng/J  (320 ppm dry corrected to  3% oxygen).
The  overfire air injection ports in combination with the gas burner
port were  used to successfully reduce the baseline nitrogen  oxides
emissions  by 26%.  The  overfire air injection ports alone reduced
the  nitrogen oxides emissions by only 8%.  Either these ports were
located too far  from  the  primary  flame zone or,  they did not have
sufficient air  flow capacity to change the  fuel-air ratio of the
primary flame.
                                125

-------
         The  227  GJ/hr  (215,000 Ib/hr steam  flow) unit at Location  35
was  coal fired with a  traveling chain grate  type stoker with forty-
six  overfire air nozzles mounted above the  chain grate.  Air was
supplied to  these nozzles by a separate  overfire air fan.  Also, four
Peabody  oil  burners were installed in a  single horizontal row on the
boiler front wall.  Primary combustion air was supplied under the
grate and to the oil burner windbox by a forced draft fan.  Increasing
the  overfire air flow  on this unit increased the nitrogen oxides
emissions on the order of 10%.
         However, in comparison to other  coal fired stoker units, the
nitrogen oxides  emissions from this boiler were unusually law with
baseline emissions of  100 ng/J (164 ppm, dry at 3% 0 ) at 60% load
and  an excess oxygen level of 9.5%.  Visual examination of the furnace
during the tests revealed low intensity  combustion flames of a very
lazy and random  nature at these low loads where testing had to be
conducted.   The  combination of the lazy  flames, low load, and a large
furnace  could result in low nitrogen oxides emissions, with an increase
in nitrogen  oxides as  the turbulence and mixing is enhanced with the
addition  of  overfire air.
         During Test No. 28 of Phase I a  spreader stoker coal fired
unit was  tested that had the equivalent of overfire air in the form
of auxiliary oil burner throats.   When these were used as overfire
air ports, nitrogen oxides reduction of 20-25% were obtained with
satisfactory boiler operation (see Ref. 4,  Subsection 4.1.1).
5.1.2.3 jBurners-Qut-Of-Service -
        The third form of staged combustion achieved by adding the
combustion air to the  flame zone  in stages  involved taking one or more
burners out of service.
                                126

-------
        The burner-out-of-service modification on multiple burner
boilers entails terminating the fuel flow,  but not the air flow,  to
one or more of the burners while maintaining the same overall fuel
flow by increasing the fuel flow at the other burners.
        During Phase I, the eight burner-out-of-service tests which
were conducted focused primarily on determining the most effective
burner pattern to be implemented.  These results showed that:
        .  A square burner pattern (rows and columns) is more
           effective than a staggered pattern.  This is probably
           a result of better mixing between burners in the
           regular pattern than in the staggered arrangement.
           This allows in-service burners to be operated more fuel
           rich with subsequent mixing of the remaining combustion
           air from the out-of-service burner.
           Removing a burner in the top row from service is more
           effective than removing a bottom row burner.
           Removing inner rather than outer burners is more
           effective.  Operation at lower excess oxygen levels
           is possible due to better mixing of the air from the
           burner out of service with the combustion products
           from the operating burners.
        Seven additional burner-out-of-service tests were conducted
on six multiple burner boilers during Phase II.  Burner register
changes were investigated to optimize burner-out-of-service perfor-
mance during these tests.  In addition, the effect of burner
equivalence ratio on emissions and performance was investigated.
The results of these tests are summarized in Table 5-3.
        The Phase II burner-out-of-service tests showed that nitrogen
oxides reductions on the order of 25-40% could be attained with gas
or oil fuels, with no change in efficiency and minor increases in
carbon monoxide levels.  However, on the oil fired units where
particulate data were obtained, the particulate emissions increased
substantially  (65-100% on tests during Phase I and 170% for series
119).
                                127

-------
                                              Table 5-3.  BURNERS-OUT-OF-SERVICE  SUMMARY

Test No.
119-1
119-2
119-3
119-4
119-5
119-6
122-1
123-2
124-1
124-3
li4-5
127-2
127-3
128-1
126-4
128-5
128-2
123-6
126-3
145-1
147-1
147-2
147-3
147-4
147-5
147-6
147-7
147-8
101-1
151-2
151-4
151-5
133-1
133-2
156-2

159-1

159-6


Burner Pattern
0 2
0 1

000
123




000
123




0 0
3 4
0 0
1 2


0000
5 6 7 B
0000
1234
03 04
01 02
000
789
000
456
000
123

out-of-
Service Burner
None
None
2
2
2
2
None
None
2
2
2
None
None
2
2
2
2
2
2
None
3
3
3
4
4
4
3,4
3,4
None
None
2
2.4
None
3,4
None

4,5,6*

7,8,9**


GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
158(150)


74 (70)




274(280)






127(120)



580(550)

274(260)
528(500)






Fuel
No. 6
Oil


Nat.
Gas




No. 6
Oil






Nat.
Gas



Ref.
Gas

P.C.
P.C.

P.C.
+
No. 6
Oil

GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
73(69.5}
74(70)
71(67)
74(70)
74(70)
74(70)
31(29)
31(29)
31(29)
30(28)
32(30)
32(30)
30(26)
31(29)
32(30.5)
32(30)
30(28)
31(29)
31(29)
64(61)
66(63)
66(63)
64(61)
65(62)
65(62)
65(62)
65(62)
64(61)
481(456)
506(480)
450(427)
433(410)
70(66)
66(63)
422(400)

433(410)

422(400)


Excess
°2 %
5.5
5.2
6.8
6.0
7.1
5.4
5.7
3.7
5,4
5.5
5.3
6.75
4.9
5.9
5.7
4.8
6.7
6.35
5.9
4.0
4.0
3.2
4.6
4.0
3.2
2.6
4.4
4.4
5.S
4.7
6.4
7.3
7.2
7.5
8.6

9.2

8.9


Burne r
0.75
0.76
1.37
1.45
2.12
1.52
0.74
O.84
0.92
0.91
1.05
0.69
0.78
1.10
1.11
1.16
0.95
1.06
0.91
0.83
O.99
1.03
0.96
0.95
1.00
1.01
1.12
1.12
0.76
0.79
O.82
0.90
0.67
1.30
—

—

—


« 3%02
nq/J(ppm)
139(248)
145(258)
107(191)
99.3(177)
96(171)
104(186)
108(211)
85(166)
62(122)
70(138)
49 (96)
139(248)
101(180)
125(223)
129(230)
105(188)
154(274)
137(244)
167(298)
106(207)
105(206)
97(190)
108(212)
107(209)
101(198)
95(186)
74(146)
80(155)
86.6(149)
84.3 (145)
71.5(123)
52.3 (90)
668(1011)
408(618)
216(353)

209(357)

177(302)


Efficiency
%
87
86
83
85
83
83

87
86
86
	
—

	
	
_,
—
	
	
—
—
—
81
81
	

	

_.


Air Register Positions
	 (% Open) 	
Nonul positions
1: 30/551 open
2: 30/55* open
Burner (2 registers
opened to 100%/95%
100% open
100* open
*2 50% open
*2 50% open
#2 75% open
100% open
100% open
1OO% open
100% open
100% open
100 i open
»2 75% open
12 50% open
Normal: 50% 60%/60% 60%
»3 closed to 30%
»3 closed to 30%
#3 closed to 30%
»4 closed to 20%
»4 closed to 20%
»4 closed to 20%
*3, «4 closed to 20%
*3, «4 closed to 20%
No register changes

No register changes
	

	

_.


% R^Suctic*
23
29
31
25

42
35
55

__
Reductions due
primarily to
excess oxygen
level



0.5
6
(+2.4)
(1-1)
4
10
29
25
17
40
39
	

	

__

to
CD
      •P.C. fired in 7,8,9; Oil fired in 1,2,3
     ••P.C. find in 4,5,6; Oil fired in 1,2,3
                                                                                                                  6001-43

-------
        The results obtained during test series 119 shown in Figure
5-20 are typical of the results obtained during Phase II.  These tests
were conducted on a 158 GJ/hr (150,000 Ib/hr) watertube boiler fired
by No. 6 oil through two burners in a vertical arrangement.  During
these tests the fuel flow to the top burner was terminated and the
theoretical air level of the in-service burner varied by controlling
the total air flow and/or the register setting of the out-of-service
burner.  The maximum load obtainable with the top burner out of service
was 74 GJ/hr  (70,000 Ib/hr steam flow).  These tests resulted in
nitrogen oxides reductions of 29-31% with the top burner out of service.
Adjusting the out-of-service burner register had little effect on the
results.  Opening the top burner register which increased the burner
air level of the in-service burner required  the excess oxygen level
to be raised to 7.1% in order to prevent smoking.  Also, the particulate
emissions were 2.7 times higher with the top burner out of service and
the boiler heat loss efficiency dropped from 87% to 86%.
        A three burner boiler with a horizontal burner pattern was
tested with natural gas during test series 124.  The middle burner
was taken out-of-service and the middle register used along with the
total air flow to control the level of the air at the burner of the
in-service burners, with the overall excess  oxygen held  constant at
5.5%.  The nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced by 55% with this con-
figuration as seen in Figure 5-21.  The efficiency remained at  83%
with burners out of service and the carbon monoxide emissions only
increased to  16 ng/J  (50 ppm) at the maximum nitrogen oxides reduction
condition.
        If the  fuel and air going  through a  burner are well mixed,
one expects the level of the theoretical air at  the operating burners
to be  the controlling parameter for nitrogen oxides  formation.   This
control is apparent for the multi-jet  ring burner  of  test series 124
                                129

-------
                             Tests 119, 127,  and 128
                             Test Load:  See  Table 4-1
                             Fuel:  Coal and  No. 6 oil
200-
W •-!
W (0
8 8 175.
pq
« 0™ 150.
fH 2
M
2 W
It
II 12S
100.
75.
£
20CL
•
175.
rH
'o
£ isa
(N
. O
2
3 125,
• "o^
100.
•
75.
•
50.
• 5

300
CN
O
*>
n 250
©
ft 200
ft
•
150
»
1DO
•
^
r o
r






>
AT-
F
Co



&y
^^j^^\


ael Rich
Tib us t ion

Test 128
9 '
%
X"/
§'"
*


Air Rich
Comb us tic
r
/O
'est H9x
^rf
'

>n


/Test
/


127

No Burners Out of Servic<
^ Coal
O Oil
Burners Out of Service
A Coal
O oil
l I
i V en so ino 120 140 16
                        THEORETICAL AIR AT THE BURNER,  % OF STOICHIOMETRIC
Figure 5-20.
Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to burners out of
service, coal and oil fuels.

                                           6001-43
                               130

-------
       »_.    300
                         Tests 123, 124, 146, 147, and 151

                         Test Load:  See Table 4-1

                         Fuel:  Mixture of Natural and Refinery Gas
w
Q
M
X
o
125.
100.
CN
g
W
«J
. 75.
^
50.
25-
a
250
f Service

) V 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
                  THEORETICAL AIR AT  THE  BURNER,  %  OF  STOICHIOMETRIC
Figure  5-21.
Reduction in total nitrogen oxides due to burners out of

service, mixture natural and refinery gas fuel.
                                                                    6001-43
                                131

-------
 the  results  of  which are plotted on  Figure  5-21.  Figure  5-21 also
 shows  a  good correlation of  the natural  gas nitrogen oxides emissions
 data with  the burner theoretical air level whether the theoretical
 air  level  is obtained by low-excess-air-firing of all the burners or
 by taking  a  burner out-of-service.
         The  same  three burner unit discussed above also was fired with
 No.  6  oil  with  the center burner out of  service during test series
 127.   As is  illustrated in Figure 5-20,  the nitrogen oxides was not
 reduced  during  this test series with oil fuel as it had been with
 natural  gas  fuel.  The nitrogen oxides emissions were not a strong
 function of  the in-service burner theoretical air level but rather
 of the overall excess air in the boiler.  This dependence would occur
 if the fuel  and air mixing did not occur in a short distance from the
 burner, but  actually on a length scale comparable to the burner spacing
 or furnace length.  For this case, removing a burner from service
 would not have grossly altered the fuel and air mixing process in the
 furnace, and  the nitrogen oxides emissions would have been primarily
 dependent on  the overall excess air  level in the boiler  (e.g. the
 burner was naturally staged).
        A four burner boiler with a  square burner pattern, two rows
 and two columns, was tested in series 133 with pulverized coal fuel.
As indicated in   Table 5-3,  a 40%  reduction in nitrogen
oxides emissions from 618 to 378 ng/J (1011 and 618 ppm)  was achieved
by removing the top two coal burners  from service and using the burner
ports for air injection.   The carbon monoxide emissions were zero for
all tests and boiler efficiency did not change from the baseline
condition of 81% when the top burners were taken out of service.
        A smaller unit with a square burner pattern was tested with
natural gas in series 147.   with either one of the top burners out of
service,  nitrogen oxides  emissions were reduced to about 100 ng/J or
at most 10%.   This change appeared to be due to a reduction in overall
                                132

-------
excess air level and not necessarily to a change in the burner
theoretical air level due to removing a burner from service.  When
the top two burners, numbers 3 and 4, were removed from service,  the
reduction in burner theoretical air was a dominant factor and the
nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced to about 75 ng/J or by 25%
with little change in carbon monoxide emissions.
        During test series 151, burners were removed from service
from an eight burner boiler firing refinery gas.  Removing a bottom
center burner  (#2) from service resulted in 17% reductions in nitrogen
oxides emissions with no increase in carbon monoxide levels.  When
an additional bottom burner was removed  (#4), a 40% reduction in
nitrogen oxides was realized; although there was an increase in the
carbon monoxide levels from less than 35 ng/J to 139 ng/J.
        Since modifications to the fuel delivery systems were not
possible,  this  limited the scope of  testing during Phase II  to low
load setting on the units.  Testing  at these low loads  can  limit
the effectiveness  of "burners-out-of-service" in the following ways:
        1.  The air pressure  drop across  the burner is  reduced
            which  can result  in  reduced  fuel/air mixing rates
            in  the near-burner region.
        2.  Mixing between  in-service and out-of-service burners
            will be reduced due  to  the decreased momentum.   This
            can result  in too much  heat  transfer  from  the  fuel-
            rich  region  precluding  CO and smoke burn-out upon mixing
            with  the  air from the out-of-service burner.
        On existing units without modifications to the fuel delivery
 system, operation  with  burner out of service  requires  that the  unit
 be derated.  The  load limit is determined by  the  number of burners
 removed from  service.   If actually  applied as  a nitrogen oxides
 control technique, modification  to the  fuel delivery systems of the
 in-service burners would be required to allow operation at full load,
 such as increasing the  oil  burner tip orfice  and  fuel  line sizes.
                                 133

-------
 5.1.2.4 Other Staged Air Test Results -
        The  staged  air results obtained from the oil and gas fired
 units can be compared to previous studies of "staged combustion" in
 single burner commercial and industrial type boilers that have been
 conducted.  The application of staged combustion to an 883 kw  (90
                                                                        (12)
 boiler horsepower) firetube-type combustor was studied by Muzio, et al.,
                        (11)
 and Turner and Siegmund    applied staged combustion to a 490 kw (50 boiler
 horsepower) Cleaver Brooks firetube boiler.
        In the studies conducted by Muzio, et al.,  the "staged" air was
 injected downstream of the burner through sidefire ports located along
 the sides of the combustor or through a water-cooled rear boom.  The
 results of this study indicated that:
        1.  Staged combustion resulted in 20% to 25% reductions in
            nitrogen oxides while firing No. 6 oil.  (The burner was
            operated with a theoretical burner air level of 93% and
            17% overall excess air.)
        2.  Downstream air injection increased nitric oxide unless
            it was injected at least 1.5 combustor diameters down-
            stream from the oil nozzle.  This result indicates that
            for the particular burner studied,  the near-burner flame
            was effectively "naturally staged"  without any deliberate
            method of staging the combustion.  [The same appears to
            have been true of the unit at Location 19 that was
            investigated during test series  190 to 206 of Phase II.]
        In the studies by Turner and Siegmund,  the staged air was added
•-o the combustion gases through a rear injector.   The location at which
-he air was added was fixed.   The length of  the combustion section was
increased  by 0.9 meters (3 feet)  and provision  was made to vary the
 imount of  cooling of the burner combustion products prior to adding
•:he air.   With the 490 kw (50 boiler  horsepower) unit fired with
 esidual oil,  their results showed:
        1.   Nitrogen oxides reductions on the order of 33% were
            achieved.
        2.   The  amount that the  combustion products were cooled prior
            to adding the staged air  did not significantly affect the
            level of nitrogen oxides  reduction.
                                134

-------
        3.   The nitrogen oxides  reductions  were  obtained without
            smoke emissions  becoming a problem.
        The differences in the  results of these  studies further
indicates the variability between boilers and the influence that
this can have on the successful  application of a nitrogen oxides
reduction technique.

5.1.3   Air Register Adjustments
        During Phase I and Phase II the local air/fuel mixture ratio
was controlled by varying the burner air register settings.  Air
registers  on face-fired boilers typically consist of a group of inter-
connected  vanes  oriented  so that they all move simultaneously.  This
movement varies  the area  and angle  through which the air enters the
burner, providing control of the air  flow rate and degree of swirl.
The area and direction  are  usually  changed simultaneously by a lever
mechanism,  so  that  a decreasing  flow  area  is  accompanied by in-
creased air speed and  swirl.  On most  of the  small single burner
boilers tested,  the vanes on the register were bolted or tack-
welded  in  a fixed position, thus the  effect of swirl could not be
investigated.   On the  large single  burner or  multiple burner boilers
a  single adjustable register usually  was utilized.  The boilers at
Locations  32,  36, 29 utilized a  single burner with dual  registers
which could be manually adjusted to control  the  flow rate  and  swirl
of the  secondary and tertiary air.
         Experience  with multi-burner boilers  has shown  the most
 important  effect of air register adjustments  to  be the altering  of
 the air flow distribution between  the burners.   The  swirl  effect on  the
 NOx production of an  individual burner usually  appeared to be
 relatively small.   At  constant  air flow,  closing an  air register
 should  increase the swirl,  resulting in increased mixing and a
 shorter,  more intense  flame.   However, this increased swirl had
 less effect on NOx  production than did the change in air flow rate.
                                 135

-------
         Table 5-4 summarizes the results of tests run on face-fired
 boilers where the excess air and load were held practically constant,
 while the air register settings were changed.  The column entitled
 "Burner Pattern" shows the number and arrangement of the burners and
 registers.
         The  data for  face-fired boilers  presented in Table 5-4
 incorporate  two  effects:   {1}  effect of  swirl,  (2)  effect of air
 distribution  among  the  burners in multiple  burner units.  The effect
 of swirl  on nitrogen  oxides  emissions can be  seen in the data from
 tests  30, 70, and 10.   Opening the  registers  (e.g.,  reducing the
 swirl  level)  for both Tests  30 and  70 resulted  in slight increases in
nitrogen  oxides  emissions.   For Test 10  opening the  registers from the
 65/65 position to the 100/100  position also caused  the  nitrogen  oxides
emissions to  increase,  although a portion of  'the  increase  was due  to
an inadvertent increase in the  excess  oxygen  level.
        The effect of swirl  can be explained by considering  the  general
flow patterns of a swirling  flame as  shown in Figure  5-22.
                                • WATER TUBES
                  OIL
                                    V  EXTERN}
                                    X. RECIRC
                                      lone
         Figure 5-22.  Idealized flame flowfield.
                                                               6001-43
                                136

-------
Table 5-4.  EFFECT OF AIR-FUEL MIXING BY CHANGING THE AIR REGISTER SETTING
                            Face-Fired Boilers

Test
Run
Number
30-14

30-19

70-11

70-10

10-2

10-12

10-10

7-10

7-13

143-3

148-1
148-3

148-4



Fuel
Type
NG

NG

#2

#2

#6

#6

#6

#2

#2

NG

NG
NG

NG


Test Load
GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
273
(259)
268
(254)
106
(100)
106
(100)
57
(54)
52
(49)
54
(51)
93
(88)
87
(82)
88
(83)
87
(82)
37
(82)
87
(82)


r\ 3-
o2%
3.0

2.8

6.6

6.6

4.7

3.9

5.2

5.7

6.6

4.4

4.2
4.0

4.7



Burner
Pattern
0 0

0 0


0




0 0




0
0



0 0
0 0




Register
Setting
% Open
70

100

50

100

65/65

100/45

100/100

100/100

100/70

5£ 60
60 60
45 40
40 50
45 40
30 40
45 40
3TT 3TT
NOx
Meas
ng/J Change
(ppm) %
100
(197)
104 + 3 5
(204) +J':>
215
(383)
227 +5 7
(405) 5-'
104
(186)
98 -6 5
(174) b>3
128 +22 6
(228) +22"6
99
(177)
101 +1 7
(180) +1-'
117
U30)
(SJ, -»•'
97 -17 4
(190) 1/-4
111 , ,
(218) ~3^



Comments
Baseline

All 4 registers
reset
Baseline



Baseline





Baseline



Baseline

Bottom closed
more than top
Bottom closed
further
Bottom closed
further



Major Effect




Swirl decreases
as register is
opened .










Redistribution
of air among
burners with
changes in
register
setting




                                                                         6001-43

-------
 At a  fixed  air  flow,  as  the registers  are  closed  the  level of swirl
 increases.   This  increased swirl will  cause increased mixing between
 the burning gases of  both the external recirculating  flow and the
 internal  recirculating flow.  The gases comprising the external
 recirculation zone are bulk gases at the relatively low bulk gas
 temperatures, having  had heat removed by radiation to the cooler water
 walls; whereas, the gases in the central recirculation zone are combus-
 tion products near their adiabatic flame temperature.  Thus if the
 state of  the swirling flow is such that an increase in swirl predom-
 inantly increases the mixing between the burning  gases and gases from
 the external recirculation zone, the nitrogen oxides  emissions would
 be expected  to  decrease  due to the quenching effect of the cooler
 external  bulk gases.  In a flow regime where increased swirl primarily
 effects the mixing of the internal recirculation  zone one would expect
 increasing nitrogen oxides emissions with increased swirl.  It appears
 that the  burners tested  during Phase I and Phase  II were operating in
 a region  where  opening the registers (decreasing  swirl) primarily
 increased the mixing  with the internally recirculating gases thus
 causing an increase in nitrogen oxides emissions.
        On multiburner units changing air register settings on
 individual burners not only changed the swirl at  the burner but also,
and most  important,  changed the air distribution between the burners.
On a unit with two rows of burners,  top and bottom, closing the bottom
row will  reduce  the  air flow to the  bottom (while increasing its
swirl)  and increase  the flow to the  top row.   This will have the
following effect on  the nitrogen oxides formation:
           The bottom rows will tend to produce less nitrogen oxides
           per burner due to the reduction in the local excess air
           level at  the burner.
           The increased swirl  at the bottom burners will also tend
           to reduce nitrogen oxides formation; based on the Phase I
           and Phase II data.
                               138

-------
           The nitrogen oxides formation in the top burners will
           tend to increase due to the increased local oxygen
           levels at the top burners.
        For Test No. 7 it appears that the increase in oxygen level
at the top burner was the predominant effect resulting in an overall
slight increase  (1.7%) in nitrogen oxides emissions.  For Tests 143
and 148 the opposite was found.  Initially, as the registers were
closed the nitrogen oxides emissions decreased indicating that the
increased swirl and decreased local oxygen levels at the bottom row
were the predominant factors.  However a point was reached where
further closing of the bottom registers  (Test 148-4) resulted in an
increase in nitrogen oxides emissions from 107 to 122 ng/J  (190 to
218 ppm).  Presumable this was due to the increased oxygen levels
at the top burners becoming the more important factor.
        Particularly interesting results were obtained from tests
conducted on a dual register  (Peabody type HT) burner with an 84 cm
 (33 inch) diameter throat operating on natural gas.  The dual air
register design  consisting of conical registers at the rear of the
burner which determine  the amount and swirl of the center air
 (secondary) and  cylindrical registers just upstream of the burner
throat which determine  the amount and swirl of the outer  (tertiary)
air.  The ring burner injects  gas radially into the swirling air
streams.  Figure 5-23 shows a  diagramatic  sketch of the burner.
        The dual register design allows  extreme flexibility in
tailoring flame  shape to a particular furnace geometry.   Test series
 140 and 141 involved  adjusting the  registers  to reduce the  flow
 resistance to  the center air passage relative  to  the  outer  air
passage.  The  normal  register  settings  had both the secondary  (center)
 and tertiary  (outer)  air registers  set  at  the sixth notch out  of a
 total of  13 notches  (13 is  full open).   Table 5-5 summarizes  the
 effect  of these  air register  adjustments on  nitrogen  oxides and carbon
 monoxide  emissions and  the  differential pressure, AP, between the
windbox and furnace.
                                139

-------
1
'1


D
.
i
^-
                                     Conical secondary register




                                     Cylindrical tertiary register



                                     Gas  ring  burner
          Figure  5-23.   Peabody HT dual register  burner
Table  5-5.  EFFECT OF DUAL REGISTER ADJUSTMENTS  ON  NOx AND CO EMISSIONS



Test
140-2

141-5

141-6


Load
GJ/hr
(I03lb/hr)
81
(77)
85
(81)
84
(80)

Excess
o,
%2
7.1

6.7

6.7

Register
Setting
secondary/
tertiary*
6/6

7/6

7/5

NOx
ng/J
% (ppm @
Change 3% O.)
83
(163)
+20 100
(196)
+43.5 119
(234)
CO
ng/J
(ppm @
3% 02)
70
(227)
0
(0)
18
(58)

AP
kPa
(IWG)
1.69
(6.8)
2.32
(9.3)
2.86
(11.5)
* a setting of 13 is  fully  open  (radial flow)
                                                          6001-43
                                140

-------
        One would expect that opening the secondary register,  with
all other variables fixed, would result in a decrease in the differ-
ential pressure between the windbox and furnace.  As is apparent from
Table 5-5 this was not found to be the case and the differential
pressures increased.  This can be explained as follows:  As more air
is diverted to the center passage  (secondary air) the relative velocity
between the natural gas jets and the tertiary air decreases.  The gas
jets will not be deflected downstream as much by the tertiary air,
thus penetrating closer to the center line of the burner.  The flame
will then be moved closer to the burner throat, and the density change
and its effect on the central recirculation zone will increase the
flow resistance through the throat.  This change in flame location
also results in a more intense flame with increased nitrogen oxides
production.
        The effect of air register adjustments on emissions is presented
in Figures 5-24 and 5-25.  The registers are adjustable in a range of
zero to 100%, with a setting of zero corresponding to  fully-closed
while 100% is fully-open with the  register vanes radial to the burner
center.  In Figure 5-24 the tertiary air register setting is constant
at 70% and emissions vary as the secondary air  register is adjusted.
Emissions increase from 250 ppm to a maximum of  approximately 265 ppm
as the secondary setting  is increased  from 50 to 70%.  Then emissions
drop sharply to 236 ppm as the secondary setting is  further increased
to 90%.  Figure 5-25 shows that emissions increase as  the tertiary
register is moved  from 60 to 85% with  a secondary setting of either
55 or 70%.  The highest total nitrogen oxides reading  of 292 ppm was
obtained with secondary and tertiary air register  settings  of 70 and
85%, respectively.
                                141

-------
                                    Test Run Nos.  174-1 thru 174-16 3

                                    Rated Capacity:   84 GJ/hr (80x10  Ib/hr)

                                    Test Load:   66 GJ/hr (63xl03 Ib/hr)

                                    Fuel: No. 6 Oil
                                    Excess 0,
                                 3.5%
g
H
X
o
     160. -
   CM
S3 O
W z

O en
at ITS
EH
     ISO -
g % 14Qi
     130
o


          •o
               2&0
               280
2^70
260
200
               240
               230
           Tertiary Air

           Register Setting 70%
                  40
               50          60           70           80



           SECONDARY AIR REGISTER SETTING, % OF FULLY OPEN
     Figure  5-24.  Effect of  secondary  air register setting on  total

                   nitrogen oxides emissions.



                                                            6001-43
                                  142

-------
                              Rated Capacity:  84 GJ/hr  (80x10  lb/hr)
                              Test Load:  66 GJ/hr  (63xl03 Ib/hr)
160-
150.
140.
CO
3 13°-l
8 8"
§ tn
r
i^
25 o>
A C
£ 160.
150.
140
i ^n
•
280
270
260
250
240
r^i
O
- * 230
m A
4-1
n>
& 30°
TJ
6 290
o.
••
280
270
•
260
250
m
240
230
Test 17
Thru I/
Seconda
Registe



Excess
4-40
4-44
ry Air
r Setting, 55
I
-t


3 02: 3.3%

' J
y~^\



r
^
)



r




10 50 60 70 80 90
Test 17
Thru 1 /
Registe




4-17
4-39
iry Air
•r Setting, 7


J



0%
-
-------
        The effect of secondary damper position on NOx emissions
and smoke levels is shown by the results of testing done at Location
No. 36 and presented in Figure 5-26.  In addition to the secondary
damper percentage open, an approximate ratio of secondary to primary
air flow is noted on the ordinate.  Opening the secondary damper to
its 100% open position decreased the amount of primary air, resulting
in decreased fuel air mixing rates near the burner and a 22%
reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions.  However, the reduction in
nitrogen oxides was obtained through a tradeoff in smoke level.  The
smoke level increased by three Bacharach smoke numbers.
        A couple of tests were performed to investigate the effect
of secondary register position (swirl) on the NO  emissions from the
                                                X
unit.   Due to the low air velocities through the burner at low loads,
at which the test series was conducted, register setting (or swirl)
had no effect on the emissions.

         In  general the  tests  involving air register adjustments on
 these face-fired boilers have shown the following:
         .   Decreasing  swirl  (opening registers)  on  single  register
            burners tended to  increase NO  emissions by 3 to 20%.
            The  major effect on NOX of register  adjustments  on
            multiple burner units  is due to an alteration of the
            air  distribution between the individual  burners,  and
            not  to  changes in  swirl.
         .   On dual register burners the major effect of register
            adjustment on NOX  emissions appears  to be the redistri-
            bution  of air between  the  secondary  and  tertiary air
            passages with swirl playing a minor  role.
                              144

-------
   W
   Q
   M

   g
^*

8
a;

H
2
      o
      2

      M
         60..
      50_ .
         40- •
         30- -
         20. -
120,
100]
fN
O
dP
CO
 oo




\-~~~-









•^O*2








-r|

)/40
1
1ARY AIR
)
                            20      40      60      80      100

                               SECONDARY AIR DAMPER, % OPEN
Figure 5-26.
           Effect of secondary air damper position  on  total  nitrogen

           oxides emissions and smoke level.

                                                         6001-43
                                145

-------
 5.2     ENTHALPY MODIFICATION
 5.2.1   Combustion Air Temperature
         Boilers that have combustion air preheat are  usually found in
 sizes above  53 GJ/hr (50,000 Ibs  steam/hr)  and preheat air  temperatures
 typically are  in the range of 400 K to  600  K (250°  to 650°F).   The
 level of combustion air preheat has a direct effect on the  temperatures
 in the combustion zone.   For example a  50 K decrease  in air temperature
 results in approximately a 25 K reduction in the adiabatic  combustion
 temperature  which can have a direct impact  on the formation of  thermal
 nitrogen oxides.   Figure 5-27 (from Ref.  13)  shows  a  prediction of the
 kinetic effect of the combustion  air temperature on nitrogen oxides
 formation.   The calculations predict a  reduction in thermal nitrogen
 oxides formation of 0.5% per 1 K  (27% per 100°F)  decrease in
 air preheat.   Since the  air preheat temperature  primarily affects  the
 thermal nitrogen  oxides  formation  it  is expected that preheat will
 have  its  greatest effect,  in terms  of percent change,  on fuels  with
 low fuel  nitrogen contents  (e.g. natural  gas  and distillate oils).
        During  Phase  II,  combustion air temperature was varied  on
 six separate units.   However  at three locations,  Nos.  28, 29, 32,
 the air temperature only  could be increased by a  maximum of 8 K
 due to  the nature of  the  air preheater system.   When  this was done
 the nitrogen oxides increased.  The other three units  had capabilities
 for varying the combustion air temperature on  the order of 100  K
 (150°F).  The results for the latter  three boilers are presented
 in Figure 5-28  for both natural gas and oil fuels together with
 the results from  Test No. 177 where the temperature was varied  by
only 50 K.  The shaded points in Figure 5-28  represent the normal
air temperatures  for the units.  Except for the test series 177,
nitrogen oxides emissions decreased by about  22 ng/J  (45 ppm) per
 50 K decrease in  combustion air temperature.
                              146

-------
 8
   1000
    500- •
    250. .
    100 J_
            Characteristic  time
            within primary  combustion
                   zone
           2000
           1000
             500
            200
u
g
H
2

3
   o
   55
   (0
I
C
     25--
             100
     10. .
       1
                                                       Combustion Air
                                                       Temperature/ K
                       0.01    0.02   0.03   0.04    0.05

                            TIME IN COMBUSTION ZONE, SEC.
                                                            0.06   0.07
Figure 5-27.
             Effect of combustion air   temperature  and time  within
             the primary combustion  zone  on  total nitric oxides
             formation
                                                          6001-43
                                 147

-------
    200. .
    150
W r-t
W -A
Q O
H
X M
O .0
!5
U  01
    100..
^
H
2
  en
     50
            200 ..
            150 ..
                      400
                      300
          4J
          rd
            100
          O
          M-l
           (N
          10
          10
          hi

          c
             50
                      200
                   TJ
                      100
                                  100
                                 300
                                          O
                                                        Test 189
                                         Test 177.
  Test 155  .^
   I      rf-
Jest 182/-1

D  I/
                                               Symbol

                                               '•,•
                                                   D
                                                   O
                                                          Fuel

                                                       Baseline Air
                                                       Temperature
                                                       Natural Gas

                                                       No. 6 Oil
                                            200

                                            °F
                              500
                                         350
        400
450
500
                                              K
                                     COMBUSTION AIR TEMPERATURE

 Figure 5-28.  Effect of combustion air temperature on total nitrogen
              oxides emissions, gas and oil fuels
                                                            6001-43
                                 148

-------
        Test series 155 was performed on a 264 GJ/hr (250,000 Ib
steam/hr)  gas-fired, watertube unit.   The test conditions were 211
GJ/hr (200,000 Ib/hr steam flow) and 2.6% excess oxygen.  Reducing
the combustion air temperature from the normal 389 K (240°F) to
300 K (80°F) dropped the NO emissions by 25% or by 14 ng/J  (29 ppm)
per 50 K change in preheat temperature.
        During test series 182 the combustion air temperature was
varied over the range of 550 K to 480 K  (167°F to 408°F) on a gas-
fired watertube boiler rated at 47 GJ/hr  (45,000 Ib/hr  steam flow).
The NO emissions were quite sensitive to air temperature over this
range exhibiting an increase of 26 ng/J  (50 ppm) per 50 K  (90°F)
increase in combustion air temperature.
        The effect of combustion air temperature with No.  6 oil firing
was also investigated on the same 47 GJ/hr watertube boiler during
test series 189.  The nitrogen oxides emission decreased by 20 ng/J
 (66 ppm)  (20%) as the combustion air temperature was reduced from
about 430 K to 350K  (320°F to 175°F) .  This corresponded to a
sensitivity of 23 ng/J  (41 ppm) increase  in nitrogen oxides per 50 K
 (90°F)  increase in  air preheat  temperature which was similar
that observed while  firing natural gas.   A similar  effect  was not
expected since changes  in  air preheat primarily effect  the thermal
nitrogen oxides formation  and  the nitrogen oxides emissions from
No. 6 oil  are due  in a large part to the conversion of  the fuel
nitrogen  to nitrogen oxides.
        Nitrogen  oxides emissions varied by  only  3.7 ng/J  (6 ppm) per
 50 K increase in  the 42 GJ/hr (40,000 Ib/hr)  unit tested during series
 177.   The  unit was firing No.  6 oil at a load of 34 GJ/hr  (32,000 Ib/hr
 steam flow)  with  a normal air preheat temperature of about 95 K  (200°F).
 It appeared that  the thermal nitrogen oxides emissions, as opposed to
 the fuel nitrogen NO  emissions, were initially low for this test and
 that changes in air preheat temperature had a small effect on the
 overall nitrogen  oxides formation.
                                  149

-------
         Reducing the air preheat temperatures  as  a means  of reducing
 nitrogen oxides emissions will  result in  a  decrease in  the  boiler
 efficiency of about 2.5% per 50 K increase  in  stack temperature.   Thus,
 it will be necessary to increase the  effectiveness of the boiler  heat
 exchange components,  e.g.,  increase economizer area,  in order  to  maintain
 overall boiler efficiency if this is  used as an nitrogen  oxides control
 technique.
 5.2.2    Flue  Gas Recirculation
         Testing of  utility  size  boilers has established that the
 recirculation of flue gas into  the combustion  air reduces flame
 temperatures  in the furnace  and is similar  in  concept to  other low
 enthalpy firing techniques,  such as reduced combustion  air  preheat.
 The effectiveness of  flue gas recirculation on utility  boilers in
 reducing the  thermal  nitrogen oxides  emissions is dependent upon
 burner  heat release rate  and the type  of  fuel  being fired.  Generally
 nitrogen oxide  emissions  from gas  fuels are more  affected by recircu-
 lation  than are the emissions from oil or coal fuels.   The  reason is
 deemed  to be  that with  oil and coal fuels the  nitrogen  oxides  formation
 resulting  from  the  conversion of fuel nitrogen to nitrogen  oxides are
 significant,  and they are influenced but  little by flue gas recirculation.
        For the flue gas  recirculation investigation  the  watertube
 furnace boiler  at Location No. 19 was modified following  the Phase I
 testing.  The flue  gas  recirculation  tests achieved reductions in
nitrogen oxides of  73%  and 36% with natural gas and No. 6 fuel oil
 firing, respectively.   Reductions typically had not been  so large
in utility boilers.
        The boiler was  the watertube furnace design with  a  rated
capacity of 18.5 GJ/hr  (17,500 Ib/hr steam flow),  and the majority
of testing was  done at a load of approximately 15 GJ/hr.  Ambient
 temperature combustion air was fed to a single burner by  a  forced
draft fan.  Natural gas fuel was injected through a ring  type burner.
                                 150

-------
The No. 6 oil fuel at an approximate temperature of 375 K (200°F) could
be atomized by either air or steam.  Saturated steam at a pressure of
1.14x10  Pa  (150 psig) was generated and the stack gas temperature was
approximately 530 K  (500°F).

        The  flue gas recirculation installation is pictured in
Figure  5-29.  The flue gas was drawn from the bottom of the smoke
stack by a flue gas  recirculation fan as indicated in the photograph.
The flue gas was pumped through the recirculation duct and up into
the right hand side  of the windbox through a windbox addition that
had been fabricated.
        The  windbox  had been lengthened to accommodate the flue gas
inlet and an additional set of registers was installed within the
lengthened section to give the flue gas swirl before it mixed with
the combustion air.  The combustion air came in through the top of
the windbox  and through the original burner registers.  The amount
of flue gas  being recirculated was controlled by a butterfly valve
located in the recirculation duct.
        Tests 192, 197, and 202 were conducted with natural gas,
steam-atomized No. 6 oil,  and air-atomized No. 6 oil fuels.  Test
206 was also run in  which  the fuel was a 50/50 combination of
natural gas  and air  atomized No. 6 oil fuel.
        The  results  for the gas fuel tests  (Test 192) are presented
in Figure  5-30 wherein nitrogen oxides emissions are plotted as
a function of the percentage of the flue gas recirculation.  The
percentage of the recirculation is defined here as the mass of the
recirculated flue gas divided by the sum of the mass of the
recirculated gas and the mass of the combustion air.  Baseline total
nitrogen oxides emissions  were  31  ng/J    (60 ppm) with no
recirculation.  Adding approximately 20% flue gas recirculation
reduced emissions by 50%,  down  to  15 ng/J    (30 ppm).  Emissions
                                151

-------
Qurnor
                        Stack
Windbox
Addition
                  Recirculatlon

                  Fan
                                                        Recirculated

                                                            Flow-

                                                        Direction
      Reclrcuiation
      Duct
                                                                          c
                                                                          o
                                                                         •H
                                                                         4J
                                                                          n3
                                                                          o
                                                                         -M tN
                                                                         ?fl O
                                                                           O)
                                                                         c
                                                                         O 13
                                                                         •H C
                                                                         4J 
-------
           35--
    w
    w
    a
    H
    X
    o

    2
    w
i
m
(IS
    i
           30-
           25, _
20.
           15-
           1G-
                               Location 19

                               Boiler No.  1

                               Rated Capacity:   18.5 GJ/hr

                                    Load;   14.8 GJ/hr

                               Fuel:   Natural Gas

                               Test 192
                 (M
O

&>
ro

o

S
k
•O
                 1
                    10
                                 10           20           30


                                %      GAS RECIRCULATION
Figure 5-30.
       Effect of flue     recirculation on the total nitrogen

       oxides emissions, natural gas fuel.
                                                              6001-43
                               153

-------
were lowered to a minimum of 8  ng/J  (16 ppm),  for a total
nitrogen oxides reduction of 73%, by introducing 33% flue gas
recirculation.  Variations in the excess air level effected NOx
emissions only slightly.
         The effects of flue gas recirculation on nitrogen oxides
 emissions from No.  6 fuel oil firing are illustrated in Figure 5-31.
 Test 197 was conducted with steam atomization and Test 202 with
 air atomization.  Baseline nitrogen oxides emissions with steam
 atomization were 95  ng/J  (170 ppm) at the nominal excess oxygen
 of 3%.  Adding 20% flue gas recirculation lowered steam atomized
 No. 6 oil nitrogen oxides emissions by  15% to  81 ng/J  (145 ppm) .
 By reducing the excess oxygen to 2%, the nitrogen oxides emissions
 with 20% recirculation were dropped to  a minimum of 74 ng/J  (132 ppm),
 representing a total reduction of 50% for steam atomization.
         The effects of flue gas recirculation on the total nitrogen
 oxides emissions from air atomized No.  6 oil with the nominal excess
 oxygen level were not quite as pronounced.  Baseline emissions with
 3% excess oxygen were 90  ng/J   (162 ppm).  Using 20% flue gas
 recirculation reduced the nitrogen oxides by 8%   to 83 ng/J
 (148 ppm).   Using 25% recirculation resulted in a further drop to
 80 ng/J   (142 ppm), a total  reduction  of  11%.   With the lower
 excess oxygen of 2%, the nitrogen oxides emissions were reduced
 further.   At 18% recirculation the nitrogen oxides emissions were
 71 ng/J   (126 ppm).  At 27.5% recirculation, emissions were lower
 at 65  ng/J  (lie ppm).   By cutting the excess  oxygen still further
 to 1.3% and running with approximately  24% flue gas recirculation
 the emissions were  a minimum  of 58  ng/J  (104  ppm), representing
 a  total reduction of  35%  from baseline conditions for air
 atomization.  For oil firing,  flue gas  recirculation rates greater
 than 27% caused flame instability and blow-out.  No test data
 was obtained with higher recirculation  rates.
                                    154

-------
     100--
PJ
Q
H
X   CM
O  O
   z
H  \
2!  Oi

 ,  C
      85 _
      80+.
          (2)
      75..
      70-
      65 -•
      601_

170C
1
160
150
<»
140
130
120
110
100

i
s
"?V
3% E






Location 19 |

X
^"\
xcess O



,;


Boiler No. 2
Rated Capacity: 18
lest Load: 14.8 GJt
Fuel: No. 6 Oil
Test 197,
O Steam Atomizatio
rjTest 202,
^ .Air a.tqmi nation
.
^i^


/**
>% Excess
*N,

'


-b^.

^,
'V


L.3% Exces
1
. 5 GJ/hr (
/hr (14x1
n


0
O^
>^' "^^^^^
O
)
X
^•v
s 02 O
L7xl03 lb/
O3 Ib/hr)




[Q.


NX


hr)


                                  10        15       20


                                %  FLUE GAS RECIRCULATION
                                                 25
30
Figure  5-31.
Effect of flue gas recirculation  and excess oxygen level

on the total nitrogen oxides  emissions.   No. 6 oil fuel.


                                              6001-43
                                155

-------
         The  results of  flue gas recirculation on dual fuel firing
 are  shown  in Figure 5-32.  Natural gas and No. 6 fuel oil were
 combined at  a  50/50 ratio, based on fuel heat content, and fired
 simultaneously.  Baseline nitrogen oxides emissions with the nominal
 excess oxygen  of 3% were 69.7  ng/J (130 ppm).  Using 20%
 recirculation  at excess oxygen levels of 1.6%, 3.0%/ and 3.3%
 reduced  emissions by about 27% to 51 ng/J  (95 ppm).  Increasing the
 flue gas recirculation  rate to as high as 35% resulted in no
 further  significant reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions.
         The  results of  all the testing are summarized in Figure  5-33.
 The nitrogen oxides reduction is plotted versus the flue gas
 recirculation  rate.  Recirculation was most effective in reducing
 nitrogen oxides emissions from natural gas fuel firing.  This can be
 expected because gas nitrogen oxides emissions occur solely from the
 thermal  fixation of atmospheric nitrogen at elevated temperatures.
 The flame  temperature reducing potential of the recirculated combustion
 products is  fully realized.
         The  effectiveness of flue gas recirculation is not as great
 for No.  6  fuel oil firing.  The reason is that a significant
 fraction of  the total nitrogen oxides emissions is due to the low
 temperature conversion of fuel nitrogen.  In addition, oil fuel
 combustion is slower in relation to the intense burning of natural
gas from a highly mixed ring type burner.  The oil fuel goes through
 three major processes before it is burned, i.e.,  atomization,
vaporization, and mixing.  In the course of these processes a
 significant amount of natural recirculation of combustion products
within the flame zone occurs and the flame is self-cooled.  The
effect of flue gas recirculation on the gas and oil fuel mixture is
 less than  for gas alone, yet greater than for oil alone.
                                156

-------
                        3.0
         65. _
         60..
   in
   a
   Q
   H
       CM
      to
         55
         50--
         45--
                    130
                    120
 (N

O  HO



n
                 •0
                 g  100
                 R<
                 a
                     90
                     00
k



\
\
\








Numbers Be
Test
204 & 206 Lc
•cation 19
Rated Capacity: 18.5 GJ/hr
Test Load: 14.8 GJ/hr
Fuel:
50% Natural Gas,
50% No. 6 Oil
Air Atomization



3.2

\w \/
"X
N

1.
3
side Symbols





3.2
A
(y
""•s^^
) ^-^^__
2.8
. 0

Indicate Excess 0


2
\




2.75
0


2.0
o
- _ "





                                   10           20           30


                                    % FLUE GAS  RECIRCULATION
                                                       40
Figure  5-32.  Effect of flue gas recirculation on the total nitrogen

               oxides emissions.  Mixed natural gas and No. 6 oil  fuels,


                                                            6001-43
                                 157

-------
                100
                80
             w
             2
                60
<*>
 *
§

I
Q
             O
             2
                40
                20
                      O No- 6 Fuel Oil, Air Atomized


                      O No. 6 Fuel Oil, Steam Atomized


                      D Natural Gas Fuel
                   0
                                 Gas Fuel & No. 6 Fuel

                         Oil, Air Atomized
                 10           20          30


                   FLUE GAS RECIPCULATION,  %
40
Figure 5-33.
 Summary  of flue  gas  recirculation test results with

 normal excess  air.


                                            6001-43
                                158

-------
        Testing was done to evaluate the effect of flue gas
recirculation on particulate emissions.   Baseline solid particulates
for steam atomized No. 6 fuel oil were 8.6 ng/J (0.020 Ib/MBtu).
Operating with 16.5% flue gas recirculation on steam atomized No.  6
oil resulted in a particulate level of 9.5 ng/J (0.022 Ib/MBtu).
With air atomization, the baseline solid particulates were 10.8
ng/J  (0.025 Ib/MBtu). No particulate tests were conducted while
firing with air atomization and flue gas recirculation.
        The boiler used for Tests 149 through 152 was a combined
cycle unit consisting of a natural gas-fired turbine and a supplementary
fired watertube boiler.  The boiler could use as an oxidant either the
gas turbine exhaust  containing approximately 17% oxygen by volume at
630 K  (680°F) or slightly heated atmospheric air at approximately
340 K  (150°F).  Using turbine exhaust was a form of flue gas recircu-
lation.  Refinery  gas was used as the boiler fuel, and the specifica-
tions of this  fuel are  listed on Table  6-1.
        With air as  the boiler fuel oxidizer, baseline nitrogen oxides
emissions were  76.0  ng/J  (149 ppm)  at an excess oxygen of  5.5%.  Base-
line nitrogen oxides emissions with turbine exhaust as the oxidizer
were 74 ng/J  (146  ppm)  at an excess oxygen of  5.1%.  The boiler
emissions with  turbine  exhaust were not as low as might be expected;
since this type of firing is very similar to flue gas  recirculation,
and flue gas  recirculation has proved to be effective  in reducing
nitrogen oxides emissions.   An uncertain  factor was that there was  a
significant amount of nitrogen oxides produced by the  gas  turbine  that
entered the boiler with the  turbine exhaust.
        In order  to  assess  the effect that the nitrogen oxides in  the
turbine exhaust had  on  the  stack  emissions from the boiler,  the mass
flowrate of nitrogen oxides  into  the boiler and  out of the stack has
to be determined.  However,  previous  studies^^'have  shown that  the
nitrogen oxides entering with  the  turbine exhaust often  is decomposed
                                 159

-------
 to free nitrogen by the combustion process, rather than passing through
 the boiler as nitrogen oxides.  Therefore, it is not possible to directly
 assess this inlet nitrogen oxides effect for these tests, since it was
 not possible during the testing to determine the degree to which the
 nitrogen oxides in the turbine exhaust was decomposed.  Using the
 emissions data taken while operating the boiler with air, the effect was
 approximated, and the results of this approximation are shown in
Figure 5-34.
        At a nominal baseload of 485 GJ/hr  (460,000 lb/hr steam
 flow) the nitrogen oxides emissions measured in the boiler exhaust
were 59.9 kg/hr (132 lb/hr).  The nitrogen oxides emissions measured
 in the boiler intake (turbine exhaust)  were 24.5 kg/hr (54 lb/hr).
 By difference, the nitrogen oxides produced by the boiler fuel
 combustion were approximately 35.4 kg/hr (78  lb/hr).  The
baseline boiler nitrogen oxides emissions with air as the oxidizer
were 76 ng/J,  which is equivalent to approximately 52.2 kg/hr
 (115 lb/hr).  The resulting reduction in nitrogen oxides emissions
 in going from air as an oxidant to turbine exhaust as an oxidant was
 16.8 kg/hr (37 lb/hr),  a reduction of 32.2%.
 5.2.3   Firing Rate
        The KVB field crew found that it is common in industry to have
additional boiler capacity that is not used in the day-to-day production.
Sometimes these boilers are used for standby in case of breakdown and
sometimes they are installed to provide for an occasional high demand
and/or future growth.   When there is additional capacity available,
the use of a reduced firing rate to lower the nitrogen oxides emissions
from a boiler is a possible control strategy for some boilers.
        The effect of firing rate on the level of nitrogen oxides
emissions was investigated in Phases I and II by raising and lowering
the boiler load from the base load point of 80% of nameplate capacity.
                                160

-------
                160
         70 -
                 140
         60
                 120
          50.
   tn

   §
   H
   U3
   in
   H
   s
   w
   H


   §
   06

   H
   55


   3
          100
       CM 40 _
        O


        en
                      Curve 1 - Curve 2 = Curve 3
n
n)
80
          3(
             D
                  40
          10
                    300
                    y


                                                          Q

                                    Boiler Intake

                              (Turbine Exhaust)
                                                                  U
                           l
                       350       400         450

                            10  Ib/hr  Steam Flow

                       	I	-J	L
                                                              500
                                                      550
                                                                    1
Figure  5-34.
                   350       400        450      500       550

                       GJ/hr of Equivalent Saturated Steam




         Reduction in total nitrogen oxides emissions in a combined

         cycle boiler.



                                                          6001-43
                                  161

-------
 The  boiler  control  settings, including  the  level of excess oxygen fired,
 were normal for  each  load.   In general, changing the  firing rate did
 not  have  a  strong effect on  nitrogen oxides emissions, however.  Usually
 the  NOx reduction effect of  lowering the  load was nullified by the
 increase  in excess  air  at the reduced load  that was called for by the
 boiler firing procedure.  The net result  was that the nitrogen oxides
 emissions either did  not change significantly or even increased at the
 lower firing rate.
          Watertube  gas-fired boilers were relatively insensitive to
 load changes unless they had air preheaters.  The measurements from
 Tests Nos.  15, 25,  77,  146,  154, and 180  that are plotted on Figure 5-35
 are  the data collected  from boilers with  preheated combustion air.
 The  nitrogen oxides dropped about 26 ng/J  (50 ppm) as the firing rate
 dropped from 85% of capacity to 60% of capacity for Tests 15, 25, and
 77.   For  Tests 146, 154/ and 180 the reduction was not quite as great,
 only a 5  ng/J (10 ppm)  reduction in going from 85% to 60% of capacity.
 A combination of lower  air preheat temperatures, poorer fuel-air
 mixing, reduced  heat  release per unit heat  transfer area, and the
 resulting lower  temperature of the combustion products probably caused
 these decreases  in  total nitrogen oxides production.

         Generally,  coal fired watertube boilers showed an increase in
nitrogen oxides  emissions when operating below 60% capacity.   This increase
usually coincided with an increase in the excess air level.
Oil-fired boilers showed little or no relationship between nitrogen
oxides emissions and firing rate.
                               162

-------
                Numerals At End of Curves
                are Test Numbers
     150 -
 CO
X O
o SB
2 tn
   1-3

   c
     100
_ ts200
      50
       0
           300
          •a
           100
          I
                    FUEL:  Natural Gas
                             25            50            75

                            TEST LOAD,  % OF BOILER CAPACITY
                                                                          15
                                                                 13
                                                                 14
                                                              100
Figure 5-35.
     Effect of  firing  rate  on total nitrogen oxides emissions,
     natural gas  fuel.

                                                     6001-43
                                163

-------
5.3     INPUT MODIFICATION
5.3.1   Fuel Properties
5.3.1.1 Fuel Nitrogen Content -
        There are two important mechanisms for the formation of
nitrogen oxides.  One is thermal fixation of atmospheric nitrogen,
and the other is conversion of nitrogen compounds in the fuel.
The magnitude of the potential fuel nitrogen effect is about 730
ng/J  (1300 ppm) of nitrogen oxides for complete conversion of 1%
nitrogen  (by weight) in a typical oil.  For coal, the fuel nitrogen
per volume of flue gas at a given oxygen content is greater, and
the corresponding figure is about 1200 ng/J (1900 ppm) of NOX per
1% nitrogen in the coal.  Actually, only partial conversion of the
fuel nitrogen occurs and the percent conversion depends on the'fuel
nitrogen content and the availability of oxygen.  The percentage
conversion is high for low nitrogen oil and decreases with increasing
                  (14)
nitrogen content.
        The fuel nitrogen content of residual oils used in industrial
and utility boilers ranges from 0.1 to 1.0% by weight.  Distillate
oils are less than 0.2% in nitrogen content.  Crude oils, which contain
distillate and residual fractions, are intermediate.  Shale oils have
nitrogen contents as high as 2.5%, and pyrolytic oils made from waste
materials could conceivably contain 5% or more of nitrogen.  The
nitrogen content of bituminous coals can vary from as low as 0.8% up
to 3.5%.  The oils tested during this program varied in nitrogen content
from 0.002 to 0.77% by weight.  The nitrogen contents for the No. 2
oils were from 0.006 to 0.045%, the No. 5 oils were from 0.10 to 0.52%,
and the No. 6 oils were from 0.26 to 0.46%.  One oil which is designated
by the refiner as PS 300 had a fuel nitrogen of 0.77%.  This oil has
other properties similar to a No. 5 oil.  The nitrogen contents of the
majority of coal fuels tested during this program varied from 1.29 to
1.80% by weight as fired.  Two coals had fuel nitrogens of 0.83 and 0.94%,
                                 164

-------
     The baseline nitrogen oxides emissions as a function of fuel
nitrogen content are plotted as circles connected by a solid line in
Figure 5-36.  Not all data points were included since a lot of the
data were nearly identical and would lie on the top of the points
shown.  The oil fuel Tests 63 and 68, which are inconsistent with the
remaining data, are PS 300 oil tests conducted with nearly ambient
temperature fuel oil at the burner instead of the 71 to 82°C  (160 to
180°F) typical for No. 5 oils.  The dashed curve is a fit to empirical
data from an in-house KVB, Inc. laboratory investigation of the
                                                (14)
influence of oil fuel nitrogen on NO emissions.      The KVB laboratory
curve is nitric oxide concentration measurements versus fuel nitrogen
content for 130% of theoretical air at the burner.  The percent
theoretical air for the measurements of this study are written beside
each data point.  The Phase I and II data are slightly above the KVB
laboratory curve.  The intercept at  zero fuel nitrogen content is the
thermal NO contribution, and  the slope of the curve is the contribution
of converted fuel nitrogen.   This interpretation leads to the conclusion
that  for normal operating  conditions with oil fuel the thermal NO for
the tests shown was in the  34 to 110 ng/J  (60 to 200 ppm) range and the
fuel nitrogen  conversion averaged 46%.
        The thermal NO and fuel nitrogen conversion in the field-tested
boilers were similar  to the laboratory burner used for the subscale
study.  This further  indicates a lack of nitrogen oxides variation
with  unit size for  oil fuel.  Other  investigators have reported
similar values of  fuel nitrogen  conversion.    '     Sufficient data
were  not collected  to allow evaluation of  fuel  nitrogen  conversion
under off-stoichiometric conditions; however, the  KVB laboratory  tests
discussed above  showed a reduction  in  fuel  nitrogen  conversion to
about 20%  for  fuel  rich combustion.
                                165

-------
       1000
       900
        800
        700
        600

     in
     H
     X
     o
     H
     z
                         115
                                           153
                              EPA Phase I and  II  46* Fuel
                            Nitrogen Conversions  +  105 ppm
                                            Thermal HOx
                                                                       119
                                                                      -&
                                                                    ISO'
                                                                     FUEL TYPE
                                                                     Oil    A  Coal
                                                               NUKrali within Symbol* ar«
                                                               Baseline Test Number«.  Numerals
                                                               Above Symbols are Theoretical
                                                               Air in Percent. One  Hundred
                                                               Percent Theoretical Air i* Zero
                                                               Excess Air.
                                                                   I	I	1	
                                                  1.0
                                                          1.2
                                                 1.4
                                                                          1.6
                                                                                  1.8
                                                                                          >.o
                                     FUEL NITROGEN CONTENT,  *
Figure  5-36.
Effect of  fuel nitrogen  content  on  total nitrogen
oxides emissions.

                                                       6001-43
                                       166

-------
        During Phase L fuel oils of varying nitrogen contents were
burned in the same type boiler at four test locations.   Table 5-6
summarizes these data.   At Location 19 changing from No. 2 oil with
0.006% nitrogen to No. 6 oil with 0.44% nitrogen resulted in a 43%
conversion of the fuel nitrogen to nitrogen oxides for air-atomized
tests and 51% conversion for steam-atomized tests.  Tests conducted
at Location 23 with air-atomized No. 5 and 6 oils with fuel nitrogen
contents of 0.28 and 0.27%, respectively, resulted in 44% conversion
of the fuel nitrogen to nitrogen oxides for the No. 5 oil and 52% con-
version for the No. 6 oil.  Similar air atomized tests conducted at
Location 24 on No. 5 oil with 0.20% fuel nitrogen resulted in 41%
conversion of the fuel nitrogen to nitrogen oxides.  The test
series conducted at Location 26 when No. 2 oil with 0.02% fuel nitrogen
and No. 5 oil with 0.1% fuel nitrogen were burned both with air and
steam atomizers resulted in 60% and 56% fuel nitrogen conversion to
nitrogen oxides, respectively.  The average for these tests is 50%
fuel nitrogen conversion which agrees quite well with the average
of 46% for all the  Phase  I and Phase  II data.
        Figure 5-38also presents nitrogen oxides emissions plotted
versus fuel nitrogen content for the  coal fuel tests.   The data
indicate that no dependence of NOx emissions upon coal  fuel nitrogen,
per se, exists.  Other  factors including furnace geometry, excess
air,  firing  rate,  burner  type and possibly additional fuel properties
are all contributing  to the variations in nitrogen  oxides production.
        The majority  of coals exhibited fuel nitrogen contents of
between 1.29  and  1.80%  and the NOx  emissions ranged from 122  to
490  ng/J  (200 to  800  ppm). When  a  western  coal  with 0.83% nitrogen
was  fired  in  a pulverizer unit  for  Test  131, nitrogen oxides
emissions  were higher than any  other  coal  test;  563 ng/J (922 ppm).
                                  167

-------
 Table  5-6.  EFFECT OF FUEL OIL GRADE ON TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS
 AND CONVERSION OF FUEL NITROGEN TO TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS
Location
Number
19
19
19
19
19
23
23
23
24
24
26
26
26
26
Test
No.
1
2
52
53
54
64
51
34
73
46
56
57
44
45
Fuel
#6 oil
#6 oil
#2 oil
#2 oil
#2 oil
#2 oil
#5 oil
#6 oil
#2 oil
#5 oil
#2 oil
#2 oil
#5 oil
#5 oil
Burner
Type
Steam
Air
Steam
Air
Pressure
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Steam
Air
Steam
NOx dry

-------
The western coal differed significantly from the other coals not only
in nitrogen content, but in oxygen content.  This western coal contained
12.5% oxygen while the other coals averaged about 7%.  It is theorized
that the high oxygen content in intimate contact with the fuel nitrogen
enhanced the low temperature conversion of fuel nitrogen to nitrogen
oxides and contributed significantly to the overall high nitrogen
oxides level.
        For Test 165 the nitrogen oxides emissions were the lowest of
any coal-fired boiler; 100 ng/J  (164 ppm).  The fuel averaged about
0.94% nitrogen and the fuel oxygen was 9.9%.  It is believed that the
low nitrogen oxides emissions are related to the furnace geometry and
the nature of the combustion process.  The boiler was equipped with a
traveling stoker chain grate burner which combusts large coal particles
at a relatively slow rate.  The  combustion equipment was in poor
condition.  Visual examination of the  furnace during the tests revealed
low intensity combustion flames  of a very  lazy  and random nature.  The
addition of overfire air actually improved the  mixing of fuel and air
and resulted in an  increase of nitrogen oxides.  The excess air was
extremely high and  the heat release rate per unit volume was comparatively
low, 0.496  [GJ-hr   -m    (0.013x10  Btu-hr   -ft   )],  considering the
rated boiler capacity.

5.3.1.2 Temperature -
        The  effect  of oil  temperature, or  viscosity, on  nitrogen oxides
emissions was investigated at  five locations during  the  course of the
program.   In all  cases  the tests were  conducted with steam atomized
No.  6  fuel  oils over a  temperature range  of  69°C to  121°C  (157°F  to
250°F).  As  seen  in Figure 5-37  no consistent  trend  was  observed,
although in  all cases  the  changes  in  nitrogen  oxides emissions  were
less  than  10%.
                                  169

-------
     200
     150..
 w
 a
 w
    100
     50..
      e_L
                 350
                 300
                 250
                200
o

PO


-o
              I
                150
                100
                 50
                                  178
                                 The numbers beside
                                 curves are test numbers.
                                                   The normal oil
                                                   temperature
                                                      Test!
                                 Test   Fuel Capacity Load!
                                 Series Oil   GJ/hr   GJ/hr
                                  173
                                  129
                                  120
                                  178
                                   34
                #6
                #6
                #6
                #6
                #6
             84
             74
            158
             42
              7.4
                   150
                               200
                                250
                     I
                    340
               350
360
370
 I
380
 I
390
                                       OIL TEMPERATURE

Figure  5-37. Effect of fuel oil temperature on total nitrogen oxides
             emissions
                                                               6001-43
                                170

-------
        The main property change due to increasing the oil temperature
is the reduction of the viscosity; for a typical No.  6 oil the viscosity
will drop from 400 SSU to 110 SSU as the temperatures is increased from
240 K to 365 K  (150°F to 200°F).  Number 5 and 6 oils are normally
atomized in the viscosity range of 150 to 300 SSU.  Fundamentally, as
the temperature decreases and the viscosity increases the energy required
to overcome viscous effects increases, and this detracts from the energy
available for droplet breakup resulting in coarser atomization.  This is
minimized somewhat in steam or air atomizers which produce much smaller
drop sizes than their mechanical counterparts since the energy contained
in the atomizing gas stream can be independent of the quantity of liquid
being atomized.  Thus, one would not expect nitrogen oxides emissions to
be greatly dependent on oil temperature or viscosity for air or steam
atomized systems.
        Another field test crew  from KVB, Inc.  tested a twin boiler  at
Location 38  for the effect of  fuel oil temperature on particulate
emissions.       They  found that  the particulate  emissions  as indicated
by the mass  monitor showed a  57% decrease with  increasing  oil
temperature  as  shown  in  Figure 5-38 and a further decrease with increase
oil  atomization pressure.

 5.3.2    Burner  Characteristics
 5.3.2.1  Burner  Tune-up  -
         The  effect on total  nitrogen  oxides  emissions of tuning  the
 burner was determined by first measuring the emissions from a boiler
 that had not been tuned for  a year or so.   The  local serviceman for
 the  burner manufacturer then was brought in and he tuned the boiler
 to the manufacturer's specifications.   Tuning involved examining the
 nozzle for worn tips, adjusting the spray angle to make sure unburned
 fuel did not strike  the side or rear walls of the furnace and adjusting
 the flame length so  it did not wash the side or rear walls.  Much of
 this is done by means of adjusting the amount and swirl of the combustion
 air.
                                 171

-------
^ICULATE EMISSIONS
ng/J
to cj *». t
o o o c
1 i i i
10.
0
IP
0.2
mm
0.15
m
3
-M
m
*° 0.1
X.
(0
H
0.05
m*
0


\





V
N




Atorslzation
Pressure
kPa
(psig)
k585
(70)

722
O (90)






                360
              370         380        390

                  OIL TEMPERATURE^ K
                                                                400
Figure 5-38.
Effect of fuel oil temperature and of atomization pressure
on solid particulate emissions, No. 6 oil fuel. "•' '
                                                         6001-43
                                172

-------
        Oil Fuel;   The chief effect of burner tune-up was a reduction
in carbon monoxide emissions rather than a significant reduction of
nitrogen oxides emissions.  During Test 108 at Location 1, the carbon
monoxide from oil fuel was reduced from 139 to 38 ng/J (407 to 110 ppm)
and during Test 112 at Location 27, from 40 to zero ng/J  (116 to zero
ppm).   During Test 108 this was accomplished by raising the excess
oxygen from 2.7 to 3.8%.  The increase in excess air and stack tempera-
ture compensated for the decrease in carbon monoxide in the stack gases
and the heat loss efficiency did not change.  After the tune-up during
Test 112, it was possible to operate at a lower level of excess oxygen
than originally without any carbon monoxide in the stack gases and the
efficiency increased by 1% from 81 to 82%.
        There was a 13% reduction in the nitrogen oxides emissions from
oil fuel during Test 112  at Location 27 after tune-up, but no  reduction
during Test 108 at Location 1.
        At Location 27  the particulates were relatively  unaffected/
increasing by about 5%.   At Location 1, however, the particulate
emissions increased substantially, i.e., doubled, after  tune-up.  This
increase may have been  due to the  impingement of the  flame on  the water
walls of this particular  boiler.   Even  after tune-up  there was a
substantial amount of impingement  and  the  relatively  cold water walls
may have quenched  the flame and  increased  the creation of unburned
carbon particles.  The  spray angle was  very large and there  was not
time during the test  for  the burner manufacturer  to  secure and install
a smaller  angle burner  tip  for  test purposes.
         However,  at both  locations the  total particulate emission was
well below the Environmental Protection Agency  limit for new units
of 43 ng/J (0.1  Ib/MBtu)  for  solid particulate  alone.
                                  173

-------
        Natural Gas Fuel;  With natural  gas  fuel, tuning  the burner
 resulted  in an increase  in nitrogen oxides at both  locations.  When
 the excess oxygen was increased sufficiently during Test  106 at
 Location  1 to eliminate  the  carbon monoxide, the efficiency decreased
 due to the larger amount of  excess air.  For Test 110 at  Location  27,
 however,  it was possible to  decrease the excess oxygen and not incur
 an increase in the carbon monoxide above ng/J  (10 ppm) and the
 efficiency increased slightly.
        Summary!  Thus for both oil and gas  fuels,  if the burner was
 tuned to  reduce the carbon monoxide to near  zero and/or to improve
 the flame texture and color, the nitrogen oxides emissions either
were unchanged or increased.  Tune-up universally was successful in
 reducing carbon monoxide, however.  Reducing carbon monoxide to near
zero generally increased the heat input efficiency:  e.g., 0.6 to  1.0%,
because the decrease in  combustibles was slightly greater than the
corresponding increase in heated air exhausted up the stack.
        In both instances when the fuel was  oil and the particulates
were measured before and after tune-up, the  particulate increased
rather than decreased when the burner was tuned.
        It appears that  the most effective way to reduce  nitrogen
oxides emission by burner tuning is simply to reduce the  excess oxygen
and accept some carbon monoxide, perhaps up  to 35 ng/J (100 ppm).  The
remaining combustibles in the exhaust gases  are offset by the decrease
in excess air exhausted  up the chimney and the heat loss  efficiency is
not affected significantly.
                                174

-------
5.3.2.2 Coal Burners -
        The data shown in Figure 4-3 have been analyzed to determine
if certain types of coal burners as a class,  such as underfed stokers,
spreader stokers and pulverizers, emit less nitrogen oxides than other
types.  It was found that boilers equipped with spreader stokers and
pulverizer type burners had the highest nitrogen oxides emissions.
Chain grate and underfed stokers had the lowest emissions.  The chain
grate and underfed stokers had less intense flames and larger furnaces
than the others, and this combination of less intense combustion and
large furnace produced a lower level of nitrogen oxides emissions.
        The chain grate burner of Test 165 produced the lowest emission
levels, as Figure 4-3 indicates.  Nitrogen oxides were 100 ng/J  (164
ppm) and particulates were 175 ng/J  (0.41 Ib/MBtu).  The emissions from
underfed stokers were the next lowest, 134 to 208 ng/J  (220 to 340 ppm)
nitrogen oxides, but all boilers with this type of  firing were small,
less than  63 GJ/hr capacity.  Spreader stokers produced nitrogen
oxides emissions of 220 to 336 ng/J  (360  to  550 ppm) .  Particulates
from  spreader  stokers ranged  from  103 to  1300 ng/J  (0.24  to 3.05
Ib/MBtu),  depending on whether  the samples were taken before or after
the dust collector.
        The  cyclone burner of Test 32 was a  high emitter  of nitrogen
and a  low  emitter  of  particulate.  These  emissions  were what one  would
expect from the very  small volume  furnace and a very intense flame of
this  type  of burner.
         The highest nitrogen  oxides  emissions were  from the pulverizer
at Location 31, Tests  131 and  169.   The  reason  for these high emissions
is not known.   Originally measurement error  was  suspected,  and the
field crew returned two months  later and repeated the  test.   The results
of Test 169 duplicated those  of Test 131, so the high  emissions appear
to be real.
                                  175

-------
         Particulate emissions  from coal burning boilers were slightly
 dependent on  burner type.  Pulverized  coal burners generally produced
 more particulates  than  stoker  equipped boilers, as is discussed in
 Subsections 4.2  and 5.4.
 5.3.2.3  Oil Burners -
         The types  of oil atomizers evaluated during the program were
 steam, air, pressure -  mechanical, and rotary cup.  The No. 2 oil
 burners  were  evenly divided between steam and air atomized, with one
 test conducted using a  pressure-mechanical atomizer.  The No. 5 oil
 burners  were  divided into about one-fourth steam-atomized, one-half
 air-atomized, and  the remainder rotary cup-atomized.  The majority of
 the No.  6 oil tests were with  steam-atomized oil guns, the remainder
 being air-atomized.  All No. 2 oil atomizers operated with ambient
 temperature oil  at the  burner.  The oil and steam/air pressures at
 the burner varied  from  unit to unit; but typically, steam/air pressure
 was about 0.446  MPa (50 psig), and oil pressure was about 0.377 MPa
 (40 psig) at  top load.  The No. 5 oils were normally fired at from
 545 to 355 K  (160  to 180°F) at the burner with steam/air and oil
 pressures similar  to the No. 2 oil atomizers.  The No. 6 oils were
 normally fired at  approximately 365 K  (200°F) at the burner, and the
 steam/air and oil  pressures at the burner were similar to No. 2 and
 5 oil atomizers.
        A special  series of tests, Tests 1, 2, 52, 53, 54, 195, 196,
 200, and 201 were  run at Location 19 to investigate the effect of the
oil atomization method  and oil grade on the total nitrogen oxides and
particulate concentrations.  The boiler used was a Keeler Company
packaged steam generator rated at 18.5 GJ/hr (17,500 Ibs/hr steam flow)
and was installed  in 1970.   The furnace ceiling and side walls consisted
of tangent-wall tubes with a tile floor and burner wall.  This saturated
 steam boiler operated at a nominal steam pressure of 1.14 MPa  (150 psig).
 During this test series, both No. 6 and No. 2 fuel oils were tested with
                                176

-------
steam and air atomizing oil guns,  and No.  2 fuel oil was also
tested with a mechanical-pressure  atomizing oil gun.  Ambient
temperature combustion air was used in all tests.  The measurements
are summarized in Table 5-7 and Figure 5-39.  It should be noted that
the No. 2 and No. 6 oils  (Tests 1  and 2) used for these tests were the
extremes in API gravity, carbon residue, ash, nitrogen, and sulfur
(see Table 6-1).  As a result, relatively high nitrogen oxides and
particulate values were measured for Tests 1 and 2 with No. 6 oil
and low values were measured for No. 2 oil.
        The field test measurements from Tests 1, 2, 44, 45, 52, 53,
54, 56, and 57, which were done during Phase I are  summarized in
Table  5-8.  This table is an excerpt of Table 4-1 of the Phase I
Final  Report, Reference 4.
        Test No. 1:  Steam-Atomized No. 6  Fuel Oil.  The steam-atomized
oil burner used  for this  test operated  at  the baseline  load with oil
pressure and temperature  at the burner  of  0.62 MPa  (75  psig) and 93°C
 (200°F).  The oil was  atomized by  steam impingement within the atomizing
tip and injected into  the furnace  through  burner tip orifices, which
were  similar to the common B&W Y-jet  atomizer  design.   These tests were
repeated during Tests  200 and 201  with  a different  shipment  of No. 6
fuel  oil.
        As  shown in Figure 5-39,  the  nitrogen  oxides  emissions  increased
with  increasing excess oxygen up  to about  5% excess oxygen where  a
maximum nitrogen oxides value of  213 ng/J  (380 ppm) was reached and
beyond this oxygen level the  nitrogen oxides emissions decreased with
 increasing excess  oxygen.  The minimum excess  oxygen level,  below which
 incomplete combustion occurred, as evidenced by excessive CO emissions
 and a visible smoke plume, for this test was 1.6%.   Particulate emissions
 of 65.5 ng/J (0.1524  lbs/10  Btu)  were measured for the low air Test
 Run No.  1-11,  which is one of the higher emission levels recorded for
 steam-atomized No. 6  fuel oil.
                                 177

-------
Table 5-7.   EFFECT OF OIL ATOMIZATION METHOD ON TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES,
            PARTICULATE EMISSIONS AND BOILER EFFICIENCY
Test
NO.
1'
2
195"
200
198
203
44
45
52
53s
54
56
57
Oil
Grade
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 6
No. 5
No. 5
No. 2
No. 2
No. 2
No. 2
No. 2
Fuel
Nitrogen
(*)
0.44
0.44
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.10
0.10
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.02
0.02
Atomiza-
tion
Method
Steam
Air
Steam
Air
Steam
Air
Air
Steam
Steam
Air
Mech.
Air
Steam
Test
Load
GJ/hr
(103 Ib/hr)
15
(14)
16
(15)
15
(14)
15
(14)
15.1
(14.3)
14.8
(14.0)
18.6
(17.6)
18.3
(17.3)
15
(14)
15
(14)
13
(12)
16.8
(15.9)
16.6
(15.7)
Normal1
Excess
Oxygen
(%)
3.6
4.4
3.1
2.9
3.1
2.9
7.2
6.7
3.6
3.0
4.3
8.0
8.0
N0x
ng/J
(ppm)
196
(350)
187
(334)
95
(169)
91
(162)
75
(133)
73
(131)
99
(177)
90
(161)
36
(65)
54
(97)
45
(80)
65
(116)
66
(118)
Solid
Particulars
ng/J.
(lb/10 Btu)
62.1
(0.1447)
125
(0.2818)
8.60
(0.020)
10.8
(0.025)
9.90
(0.023)
18.1
(0.042)
17.5
(0.0448)
32.0
(0.0779)
14.6
(0.0339)
5.01
(0.0163)
4.96
(0.0151)
"~
"™
Boiler
Efficiency
(t)
85
85
84
83
82
83
86
86
85
85
85
85
96
 Normal operating 02 level defined by burner manufacturer.
 ppm is measured value corrected to 3% excess 0  dry.
 Particulate data for Test No. 1 were taken for low air run
  (2.3% oxygen).
 A different shipment of No. 6 oil was used for Test 195, 200
 than for Tests 1, 2.
 Particulate data for Test 53 were taken for high air run  (4.3% oxygen)
                                                      6001-43
                               178

-------
            400
    200. .
    150
w
8
H
X  C-
°s
§
   - 100
t-i  ^
.2  O<
Z  C
                                       Normal Excess Oxygen Level
                   Test No.  1
                   Steam
                   Atomization
                   No. 6 bil
                                                   Test  No.  2
                                                   Air Atomization
                                                   No. 6 Oil
                                      Normal Excess Oxygen Level
                  Test No. 195,196
                 Steam Atpmizatio
                 No. 6 Oil
                                      Tests 200i 201
                                      Air Atomized No
                                                   Test No. 54
                 Test No.  53
                         FivLzation
                                                       1 Atomization
                  —-Test No.  52
                  Steam Atomization
                     No.  2 Oil
      50..
                                  3.0      4.0       5.0

                                  EXCESS OXYGEN,  DRY, %
 Figure 5-39.
               Effect  of  oil  atomization method and excess oxygen level
               on  the  total nitrogen  oxides  emissions.
                                  179
                                                                   6001-43

-------
                                   Table 5-8.  PHASE I FIELD TEST  MEASUREMENTS
00
o
Mt
•». '
1-13
i-a
1-11
2-5
2-4
2-6
44-4
44-1
44-3
44-6

45-7
4S-1
45-J
4S-S
51-1
52-S
52-2
53-1
53-6
53-2
54-S

55-1
3£~1



turn ir
i»e
St««a
St««M
Steu
Air
Air
Air
Mr
Air
Air
Air

Steaa
Stem
Steui
stem
Air
Steaa
Stea*
Air
Air
Air
Mech

Air
Air



IMC
T»el
16 Oil
16 Oil
16 Oil
16 Oil
16 Oil
16 Oil
15
15
IS
|5

IS
IS
IS
IS
15
12
12
12
12
12
12

12




Twt
*»•
Ba*«-
llm
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line
Low
Air
LoAt*
Press.
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Low
Low
Air

lines
Hi Loac
Base-
line
Low
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Air
Low
Air
Base-
line
Air
Base-
Hi Load


line
cwxitr
vw
ttf/Vrl
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
8.17
(18)
8 17
(18)
fi 17
(18)
B 17
(18)
8.17
(18)
8.17
nut
8.17
8.17
(16)

(7)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(175)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(175)
7.95
(175)
(17.5)
4.99
81?

BM
(18)
«Mt
LM
It/he)
«M/hrl
6.36
(14)
2.72
(6)
6.36
(14)
6.81
(15)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
7.99
(17.6)
(22)
341
(7.5)
{17.61
7.85
(17.3)
9.99
3.22
7.72
(17.01

(6.7)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
£.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
S.4S
(12)
(12)
5.13


"i 1 *
(15.7)
^.^
%v
3.C
11.0
2.3
4.4
2.8
4.7
7.3



6.7
4.7
6.7
3.8

6.3
3.6
2.6
3.0
4.3
1.6
4.3

4.7




•OB
•* LiM
*/*»!
to*
-sot
(350)
.986
(428)
.763
(331)
.770
(33D
.638
(277)
.687
ijqa)
.408
(177)
(188)
(154)
(1831
.371
(161)
.394
.355
.350
(152)

(275)
.ISO
(65)
.145
(63)
.224
(97)
.235
(102)
.198
(86)
.184
(80)
(BO)
.295



(118)
w>
*>X lift*
9/Meal
CH»>
.797
(346)
.961
(417)
.737
(320)
.760
(330)
.611
(265)
.675
(293)
.403
(175)
(185)
350
(152)
(182)
.371
(161)
.385
MR71
.346
.346
(151)

(270)
.147
(64)
.143
(62)
.224
(97)
.230
(100)
.196
(85)
.184
(80)
(78)
.290



(117)
"° J
-oU LtoJ
9/Ncal
in-i 1
.834
(362)
.933
(405)
.758
(329)
.774
(336)
.601
(261)
.664
(288)
.371
(161)
387
(US)
323
(140)
(164)
.357
(155)
.369
f 1Crt\
.327
.320
(139)

(260)
.147
(64)
.145
(63)
.212
(92)
.194
(84)
.184
(80)
(79)
.272



(105)
«,
efy
%
13.4
8.2
14.8
12.9
12.6
10.4
12 4
10 2


10.9
12.6
10.8
13.2

12.6
13.1
13.1
12.5
14.2
12. 0

11.8




CO
•/•C41
lK»>
0
(0)
0
(0)
.062
(45)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
.018
(10)
.031
(2n\
0
.030
(20)

(0)
.069
(47)
.675
(485)
0
(0)
0
(0)
.272
206
0
(0)
(0)
0


<")
(0)
•c
t/Mcal
lit-)
.026
<32)
.022
(28)
.053
(60)
	
	
	

	
	
	

	
.002
(3)
.010
(12)
.OO 7
(9)
	

	



	
tern
«AK»1
(H-)
4.64
(1448)
4.42
(1378)
2.513
(784)
	
—

2.590
(808)
—
	

.199
(62)
.221
(69)
	

	



	
•O.
«/N&a
iw->
4.S6
(1424)
4.36
(1359)
2.487
(776)
	
	

2.567
(801)
	
	

.173
(54)
.199
(62)
	

	



	
Total
>*rtle.
a/Heal
U/taul
.2743
(.1524
. S238
(.2910)
.1175
(.0653)
	
	

.1402
(.0779)
	
	

.0680
(.0378)
.0295
(.0164)
.0349
(.0194)

	



— .
(0114
9«tU.
«/XC«l
(l/iatel
.2605
(.1447)
.5072
(.2818)
.0806
(.0448)
	
	

.1188
(.0660)
	
	

.0610
(.0339)
.0293
(.0163)
.0272
(.0151)
	
	



	
keilac
tm-
clwcr
%
-
81
86



87
87
88

83
83
63
83
84
BO

8(5
85


8S
•Kk*-
»cm
l*et •»•
—
;




1.0
-
-


-
*

-




                                                                                                    6001-43

-------
        Test No.  2:   Air-Atomized No.  6 Fuel Oil.   At the baseline
load of 15.0 GJ/hr (14,200 Ibs/hr) the oil pressure and temperature
at the burner were 0.36 MPa (37 psig)  and 101°C (214°F) and the atomizing
air pressure at the burner was 0.31 MPa (30 psig).   The nitrogen oxides
emissions increased by 6.6% with increasing excess  oxygen over the range
investigated.  The flame appearance changed with excess oxygen, and the
best flame characteristics occurred at the lower oxygen levels.
Particulate emissions of 125 ng/J  (0.2910 lbs/10  Btu) were measured
for Test Run No. 2-6, which was substantially greater than the values
obtained with steam atomization on Test No. 1.
        Test No. 52:  Steam-Atomized No. 2 Fuel Oil.  The steam-atomized
oil burner used for this test at  a steam flow of 14.8 GJ/hr  (14,000
Ibs/hr) operated with 0.55 MPa  (65 psig) pressure, ambient temperature
oil and the  steam pressure at the burner of 0.60 MPa  (73 psig).  The
nitrogen oxides emissions increased with increasing excess oxygen  up
to about 4%,  and between excess  oxygen levels of 4 and 5%, the nitrogen
oxides emissions appear to reach a maximum value.  A  visible haze  from
the smoke  stack occurred  at  the  lowest level of excess oxygen of 2.6%.
The baseline total  particulate emissions of  16.25  ng/J (0.0378 lbs/10
Btu)  were  measured for this  test at an excess oxygen  level of 3.6%,
which is about average for  steam-atomized  No.  2 fuel  oil.
         Tests 195,  196, 200, 201.  The tests were  repeated with  another
shipment of No.  6  oil and during tests 195,  196, 200, and 201 and  the
results  are tabulated in  Table 5-7 and trends  in nitrogen oxides with
excess oxygen are  shown in Figure 5-41.  The trends obtained with this
 series of  tests were similar to those obtained during Tests  1 and 2 with
 steam atomization producing about 10% more nitrogen oxides than air
 atomization.  The difference in the absolute levels of the nitrogen
 oxides emission is attributable to the nitrogen content of the two
 different No. 6 oils.  The oil of Tests 1 and 2 had a nitrogen content of
 0.44% and for Tests 195,  196, 200, and 201 it was 0.14%.
                                  181

-------
         Test  No.  53:  Air-Atomized  No.  2  Fuel Oil.  At the
 baseline steam flow of  14.8 GJ/hr the oil burner operated with 0.29
 MPa  (27  psig)  oil pressure, ambient oil temperature and 0.26 MPa
 (23 psig)  atomizing air pressure.   The  NOx emissions increased
 with  increasing excess  0  up  to  about 4.0% O  beyond which the
 NOx was  relatively  constant at 101  ppm.   Particulate emissions
 were  56.7 ng/j (0.0164  lbs/10 Btu), which is one of the lower
 values for air-atomized No. 2 fuel  oil.
         Test  NO.  54:  Mechanically-Atomized No. 2 Fuel Oil.  The
 mechanically-atomized oil burner used for this test operated with
 ambient  temperature fuel oil  at  a burner  pressure of 2.03 MPa
 (280 psig)  for  a  boiler load  of  12.1 GJ/hr  (11,500 Ibs/hr).  The
 NOx values  did  not  vary significantly over the excess O  range
 investigated of 3.7 to  6.6%.  Particulate emissions of 8.34 ng/J
 (0.0194  lbs/10  Btu) were measured, which is one of the lower
 values measured for No. 2 fuel oil.
        The No. 6 oil data presented in Figure 5-40 show
 steam atomized  fuel oil burners  to  have slightly higher NOx
 emissions than  air  atomized burners for normal operating excess
 oxygen levels.  As  the  excess O  level is increased, both of the
 NOx emissions increase  until, at  5% excess 0 , the NOx emissions
 for steam atomization are less than for air atomization.
        The NOx emissions with No.  2 fuel oil were not very
 sensitive to excess oxygen.  Air atomization resulted in the
highest NOx emissions [56 ng/J (100 ppm)]  with steam atomization
being the lowest NOx producer [39 ng/J  (70 ppm)].   The mechanically
atomized No. 2  fuel oil tests were conducted at a reduced load
and yielded NOx emissions greater than the steam,  but less than
 the air-atomized data.
                                 182

-------
        The boiler efficiency did not vary measurably due  to  use  of
different oil and atomizers.
        The particulate emissions for both the No.  6 and No.  2  fuel
oil tests were inversely related to the nitrogen oxides emissions.   For
No. 6 fuel oil, atomization resulted in the lowest nitrogen oxides
emissions at the normal operation oxygen level, but yielded substantially
greater particulate emissions than did steam atomization.   For the  No.  2
fuel oil tests, steam atomization resulted in the lowest nitrogen oxides
emissions and yielded the greatest particulate emissions.   The air
atomization test had the greatest nitrogen oxides emissions and yielded
lower particulate emissions than the steam atomized test with No. 2 oil.
Mechanically-atomized No. 2 fuel oil nitrogen oxides and particulate
emissions were in between the air and  steam results.
        A  second special series  of tests, Tests 44, 45, 48,  56,  and 47,
was  run at  Location 26 with No.  2 and  No.  5 oils with both steam and air
atomization.   In Tests  56 and 57 with  No.  2 oil, the nitrogen oxides
emissions  listed in Table  5-7 for air  and steam atomization  were the
same, whereas  for Test  52, steam atomization  produced  significantly
 less nitrogen  oxides emissions.   With  No.  5 oil in  Tests  44  and  45, the
emissions  with air atomization  were  greater than with  steam, rather than
 less,  as  for Tests 1 and 2 with No.  6  oil.
         Tests  3 and  36 were  run on a rotary cup type atomizer  firing
 No.  5 and NSF oil, respectively.  Although rotary  cup oil burners  once
 were commonplace,  now  they are  becoming rare.  The total  nitrogen  oxides
 concentrations were  somewhat high for oil-fueled boilers  of this small
 size, but not seriously so.   The particulate  emissions were slightly
 less than those of boilers burning No. 6 fuel oil.
                                  183

-------
 5.3.2.4 Oil Atomization Pressure -
        During three test series data were collected to determine the
 effect on nitrogen oxides emissions of changes in the pressure of the
 atomizing fluid.  The results were that when the fuel and/or atomization
 pressure was increased the nitrogen oxides increased too.  In the one
 instance where the effect on particulate emissions was measured, they
 decreased.
        At Location 36 the pressure of the atomizing steam was varied
 to determine the effect of atomization pressure on the nitrogen oxide
 emissions.  These tests were carried out in a steam-atomized watertube
 boiler firing No. 2 fuel oil.  At a steam rate of 55 GJ/hr  (52,000 Ib/hr)
 and an excess oxygen level of 5.9%, the steam atomization pressure was
 varied from 340 kPa to 670 kPa  (35 psig to 83 psig).  The normal pressure
 setting at this load was 590 kPa  (59 psig).  The effect of nitrogen
 oxide emissions and smoke are shown in Figure 5-40.  As the steam
 atomization pressure was increased over the pressure range, the nitrogen
 oxides emissions increased by 6% and the smoke levels decreased by two
 Bacharach smoke numbers.
        Although the changes in the total nitrogen oxides emissions
were small in these tests, the trend was consistent with that obtained
           (4)
previously-     The results of Test 2 of Phase I were that when the
pressure of the atomizing air was reduced the nitrogen oxides emissions
decreased.
        The ASME heat loss boiler efficiency was not significantly
affected by this combustion modifications, remaining at 85% throughout
the tests at Location 36.
        The effect of atomization pressure on nitrogen oxides and
particulate emissions was investigated at length by Laurendeau, et al.
They tested a boiler at Location 38 that was a twin to the one tested
 under this program.   One  set  of  runs  consisted of raising  the  fuel
                                 184

-------
w
w
a
o
W Q 50-
o 2
§ CO
EH It)
H
2 h)
, X 40-
rij C
g
«Ninn _
dC
PI
*
& 80
•a
'&
<;n
163-2















163- 3Q







j



ii J
—



-O
163-1







Load: 55 GJ/hr of equivalent
Excess 0 : 5.9% saturated steam
1 i 1
^ 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

psig
ill1


400 500 600 700
kPa
H
CD O
                O
                sz

                e
                3J
                O
DA
30
                            40
                                 70
80
                                                90
                                       PSi
                        I-
                               400
                     500

                    kPa
                                   600
      700
Figure  5-40.
Effect of steam atomization pressure on total nitrogen
oxides emissions and smoke level.
                                                           6001-43
                                 185

-------
 and  steam atomizing pressure while  maintaining  a  140 kPa  (20 psig)
 spread between  them.   Raising  the pressures  caused  the particulate
 emissions to  decrease  as  is shown in  Figure  5-38  when the  atomizing
 pressure  was  raised from  585 to  722 kPa  (70  to  90 psig).   However,
 raising the pressure also caused the  nitrogen oxides emissions
 to increase.  At  fuel  and atomizing steam pressures of  515 kPa  and
 650  kPa  (60 and 80 psig)  the nitrogen oxide  emissions were about  140
 ng/J (250 ppm).   When  the  pressures were raised to  700 kPa and  825 kPa
 (87  and 105 ppm)  the NO emissions rose to about 163 ng/J  (290 ppm).
 5.3.2.5 Natural Gas Burners -
        The majority of the industrial-sized boilers tested in  Phases
 I and II  were equipped with multijet  ring type  natural gas burners.
 This type  of burner injects the  gas jets radially inward  (toward  the
burner center axis) into  a swirling air stream.   The ring  burner  produces
 good fuel  and air mixing  and the combustion  starts  in the  fuel-rich
combustion zone near the  injection  orifices  and continues  downstream
of the burner throat.  Ring burners have generally  been found to  be
low nitrogen oxides producers  and have the capability of operating
 fuel-rich  over  a  large range of  fuel  flow rates with a stable flame.
        Two boilers, used  for  Tests 75 and 77 had corner-fired  furnaces
which use multijet gas nozzles where  the gas and  air streams are
injected  into the boiler  in parallel  directions.

        The boiler used for Tests 153-155 utilized  a single burner
comprised of three multi-orifice gas nozzles.   Combustion  air is
supplied through primary and secondary air registers.  The gas  guns
                               186

-------
are located within the primary (inner) air passage and inject fuel
outward into the swirling air stream at an angle of approximatley 45°
from the center axis.  The boilers used for Tests 149-152 and 207-212
were also fitted with gun type burners, however refinery gas was the
fuel.
        Because of the lack of variation in gas burner designs, no
concrete conclusions could be drawn on the effect of burner design on
emissions.  Emissions from the boilers equipped with nozzle type
burners were similar to those from boilers fitted with ring burners.
Generally, nitrogen oxide emissions from natural gas fired boilers
were found to be more dependent upon firing parameters, such as
burner heat release rate, excess air, and combustion air temperature.
5.3.2.6 Burner  Size -
        The total nitrogen oxides emissions measured during the program
were found to be  larger when  the burner size  in  terms of heat  release
level in  joules per  hour was  large.   The  relationship differed for  each
of  the three fuels,  but in general  it was  found  that the larger the
burner the larger the nitrogen oxides emissions.   This relationship
suggests  that an  effective form of  combustion modification would  be to
use two  smaller burners rather than one larger one.   It  is  recognized
that coal fuel  burning equipment  sometimes  can not be  defined  simply
in  terms  of  individual burners size;  however, pulverized coal  burners
and cyclone  furnaces are  similar  to oil and natural gas  burners in  that
a certain portion of the  fuel and air enters the furnace through a
burner  port.
         The  relationship  between  the  nitrogen oxides emissions and the
burner  heat release rate  or  size  for the  natural gas and coal-fired
boilers is depicted in Figure 5-41.  The  coal fuel data on Figure 5-41
                                 187

-------
w
w
Q
M
X
o

z
w
EH
H
2
     600
     500
     400
       id
       0
       o


       ^300
       O
   en
   C
     200
     100
         - 500
           400
           300
           "N
          O
          2

          tfl
          (0
          S1

           200
           100
                 1000
                  900
                                 Symbol Fuel Type


                                    /\ Coal
                                    D
                                        Natural Gas
                                            Numerals within symbols

                                            are test numbers.
                             50     100     150     200 6   250

                           RATED BURNER HEAT RELEASE,(10 Btu/hr)/burner
                             50
                                                          250
                                       100     150    200

                                       (GJ/hr)/burner

Figure  5-41. Effect of burner heat release rate on total nitrogen oxides

             emissions for coal and natural gas fuels.
                                                     60C1-43
                             188

-------
show a strong dependence of nitrogen oxides emissions on burner  heat
release level.   The natural gas burner data, however, show a somewhat
lower dependence of nitrogen oxides emissions on burner size than
does the coal burner data.
                        (4)
        The Phase I data    had been interpreted as indicating that
the dependence of emissions on burner size was stronger when the
combustion air was preheated than when it was not.  However, during
Phase II the measurements made for Tests 140 and 165 on boilers that had
preheated combustion air were the same level as those taken previously
for unheated combustion air.  It now appears that the degree of
sensitivity of nitrogen oxides emissions to burner size depends more
upon the characteristics of the individual boiler than upon whether or
not the combustion air is preheated.
        Figure  5-42 presents the effect of burner heat release   level
on the total nitrogen oxides emissions for  all of the oil-fired  boilers
tested.  The two data points for No.  5 oils which have nitrogen  oxides
emission levels greater than 225 ng/J  (400 ppm) are  from  tests where
the fuel oil was not heated, but was  near outside air temperature.
Atomization was poor, and  they  are  not considered to be representative
data points.
        The  effect of burner heat  release  rate  on nitrogen  oxides
emissions  from  oil fuels was not as great  as previously discussed  for
coal  fuel, but  was greater than for natural gas burners with or without
preheated  combustion air.   The  type of oil  atomizer  did not seem to
affect this  relationship.   The  No.  2 oil burners  were  smaller,  all
being below  53  GJ/hr  (50x10  Btu/hr), and  defined  the lower region  of
the oil data.   The No.  5 and No. 6 oil burners  included the complete
range of burner size investigated  from the smallest  up to 131 GJ/hr
 (125xl06 Btu/hr).
                                 189

-------
             800
Z
W
£H
H
a

g
8
iti
O
O
OJ
O
O
en
w
Q
H  o
X  g

NJ
O
O
ng/J as
M
O
O
             700
             600
             500
             400
           dP
           n

           ©
             300

             200
             100
       0«-
                                                                       250
                        RATED BURNER HEAT RELEASE, (10 Btu/hr)/burner
                           I	I	|	|	I
                 0
                           50        100       150
                                    (GJ/hr)/burner
200
250
 Figure 5-42,
              Effect of burner heat release  rate on total nitrogen
              oxides emissions, oil fuel.
                                                          6001-43
                                190

-------
5.3.3   Boiler Furnace Characteristics
5.3.3.1 Firetube Boilers -
        A large number of firetube furnace boilers in addition to
watertube furnace boilers was tested during Phase I, and the results
are discussed in Subsection 5.1.1.4.  Comparison of the test results
showed that the emissions of nitrogen oxides from firetube boilers
was less sensitive to changes in the excess air level than they were
                                                   (4)
from watertube boilers when burning the same fuel.     The Phase II
testing concentrated on watertube boilers only.
5.3.3.2 Furnace Volume and Area -
        Nitrogen oxides are formed at high temperature by the combina-
tion of oxygen and nitrogen, and the  length of time  that the products
remain at high temperature is critical to the formation of nitrogen
oxides.  Consequently, the furnace heat absorption  volume and area
were evaluated as design  parameters which could influence the time/
temperature history.  The furnace heat absorption  volume parameter
was defined as the products of the  furnace heat release per hour
divided by the furnace volume from  the burner face  to the end of  the
furnace.  The  furnace heat absorption area parameter was defined  as the
ratio  of the  furnace heat release per hour to the  projected wall,  floor
and ceiling areas of the  furnace.   The furnace heat absorption  parameters
are listed  in  Table 7-1 of Section  7, Test Boiler  Design Characteristics,
for each boiler  tested  in Phase  II.
         The heat absorption parameter data are discussed  in  Subsection
                             (4)
 7.2.2  of the  Phase  I  report,     and the  conclusion drawn  from these
 data was that the nitrogen oxides emissions were  not dependent upon
 furnace  heat  absorption  area  or  volume.   Phase  II test results support
 this  conclusion.
                                 191

-------
 5.4     PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
 5.4.1   Particulate Concentration
        Figure 5-43 compares the change from the baseline value in
 solid or  filterable particulate emissions and the corresponding change
 in the total nitrogen oxides emissions when the different combustion
 modification techniques were applied.  Data from both Phase I and Phase
 II are included.  The figure is divided into quadrants.  One is labeled
 "Best Quadrant" and a second "Worst Quadrant."  The criterion for the
 Best Quadrant with solid particulate emissions is that the effect of
 the modification was to reduce the emissions of both the total nitrogen
 oxides and the particulates.  The Worst Quadrant is when the effect was
 to increase both emissions.
        The effect of the various combustion modification methods was
 as follows:
 1.      Reduced excess air:  This was the best method because the
 particulate emissions decreased by as much as 30% in four out of the
 six tests.
 2.      staged combustion air:  The change in particulates was measured
 in three of the six staged combustion air tests.  In all three instances
 it increased by 20 to 48% of the baseline level.
 3.      Burners-out-of-service:  This method had the advantage that the
nitrogen oxides emissions always decreased and the boiler efficiency was
maintained.  However, the particulate emissions always increased by from
 25 to 95% of the baseline level.
4.      Burner register adjustment:  Readjusting the burner registers
had no significant effect on the particulate emissions.
 5.      Reduced combustion air temperature:  Only one test was run and
 the air temperature was increased by 11 K.  The particulate emissions
decreased by 53%.  However, a measurement of the particulate emissions
 change with an air temperature reduction of 100 K was made on the boiler
                                192

-------
      COMBUSTION  MODIFICATION METHOD

        ftir Temp.  Reduction  O Staged Air

        Reduced  Firing Rate  O Burner Tuneup

            Gas Recirc .

                Excess Air
                                         O  Burner-Out-Of-Service
            CO
            w
            Q
            H
            X
            O

            2
            W

            g

            H
g
J3
H

w
O
            u


            4-

            I
                   O     - -+20
                     D    - ^+1°
                Best  Quadrant ::xxX::x:::::::x:x:
                                                Worst Quadrant
                                         + 40
                                                 + 100
                                        _-io
                                        A   O
                                                  o
                             O
                             _-30
                                         -40
                                O
                            CHANGE IN PARTICULATES, %
Figure 5-43.
  Effect of  combustion  modification methods on solid

  particulate  emissions.
                                 193
                                                                6001-43

-------
 at Location 38 as part of the  work reported in Reference  17.   The
 results  were reported in a private communication and were that no
 change in  particulate emissions  occurred.
  6.      Flue gas recirculation:   Recirculating 25%  of  the flue gas
 resulted in a nitrogen oxides  reduction  of  about 12% and  a particulate
 emission increase of  about 15% of the  baseline levels.
  7.      Reduced firing rate:  In the  one  instance where  the  particulates
 emission change  was determined,  the  nitrogen oxides  emission  increased
 by 10% and the particulate emission  decreased by 45%.   This was one of
 the  largest particulate emission decreases  that was  encountered.
  8.      Fuel oil viscosity:   Another  KVB,  Inc.  field test crew measured
 the  particulate  emissions  change  as  the  oil  temperature of a  twin boiler
 at Location 38 was increased from 351  K  to  388 K.  The particulate
 emissions  "showed a pronounced decrease  with increasing oil temperature."
  9.      Burner  tune-up:   Tuning the burner  reduced  the nitrogen oxides
 emissions  and had no  effect on the particulates  in Test 112.   During
 Test 108 the  emissions  rose by 150%, because the  tune-up  resulted in
 increased  flame  impingement and  quenching on the  water walls.   The
 results of Test  112 are  deemed to be the more  representative,  since
 tuning the burner resulted primarily in  reducing  the carbon monoxide for
 a  given  level of  excess  air.   Reducing the carbon monoxide emissions
 should reduce, or at  the worst not affect, the particulate emissions.
 10.      Fuel oil  atomization  method:  No generalized conclusions can be
drawn from the five test sets  that are listed  in  Table  5-9.  There were
 four instances where  the atomization method  of  a  given burner was changed
 from steam to air.  When the oil was No.  6 the particulate  emissions
increased  by  from 26  to  101% of the baseline  level.  For the  one case
when the oil was No.  2 the  emissions decreased by 69%.
                                 194

-------
Table  5-9.  EFFECT OF ATOMIZATION METHOD ON THE
           PARTICULATE EMISSION LEVELS
Test
Run
No.
1-11

2-6
195-1

200-3
198-12

203-7
44-4

45-7
52-5

53-6
54-5

Test Type
Baseline

Changed
Atomization
Baseline

Changed
Atomization
Baseline

Changed
Atomization
Baseline

Changed
Atomization
Baseline

Changed
Atomization
Changed
Atomization

Oil
Grade
No. 6

No. 6
No. 6

NO. 6
No. 6

NO. 6
No. 5

NO. 5
No. 2

No. 2
No. 2

Atom.
Method
Steam

Air
Steam

Air
Steam

Air
Air

Steam
Steam

Air
Mech.
Solid Part.
ng/J
(lb/106 Btu)
62.1
(0.1447)
125
(0.2818)
8.60
(0.020)
10.8
(0.025)
9.90
(0.023)
18.1
(0.042)
17.5
(0.0448)
32.0
(0.0779)
14.6
(0.0339)
5.01
(0.0163)
4.96
(0.0151)
Change in
Particulate
Emission
%


+101


-1-26


+83


+83


-69
-69
                                                6001-43
                        195

-------
        When the change was made from air to steam atomization on
another bu/.ner, rather than from steam to air, the particulate emissions
did not decrease as would have been expected from the -results of Tests
1 and 2, 195 and 200, and 198 and 203.  Instead the emissions from
Tests 44 and 45 increased by 83%.
        Apparently, the effect of atomization method on the particulate
emissions is unique to each fuel-burner-boiler combination and it cannot
be generalized.
12.     Fuel oil atomization pressure:  The results of one set of tests
that are discussed in Subsection 5.3.2.3 were that an increase in the
atomization pressure of 23% reduced the particulate emissions by 75%.
Although this was only one test set, extensive data were taken carefully,
and one can conclude that it is possible to reduce the particulate
emissions by increasing the atomization pressure.
5.4.2   Particulate Size
        The effect of some of the forms of combustion modification on
the particulate size distribution also was determined and is discussed
in this section.  Table 5-10 lists the combustion modification methods
that were investigated and the corresponding size distribution results.
        Figure 5-44 shows the effect of the particulate size distribu-
tion of modifying the combustion of oil fuel by reducing the amount of
excess air/oxygen.  Test 176 was run with the baseline amount of
excess oxygen of 4.3%, while Test 179 was run with 4.0% excess oxygen.
Reducing the excess oxygen from 4.3% to 4.0% reduced the proportion
of fine particulates from about 58% to about 50%.  (The total nitrogen
oxides concentration dropped from 195 ppm to 174 ppm.)  Apparently the
modified combustion resulted in a decrease in the proportion of the
smaller and an increase in the proportion of the larger size particulates.
                                196

-------
Table 5-10. PARTICUIATE SIZE  DISTRIBUTION WITH COMBUSTION
                      MODIFICATIONS
                               OIL FUEL




Test

111
112
162-36
162-11
162-5
176
179
166-3

166-B

Location
27

36


37

35



Load
GJ/hr
(103lb/hr)
90(85)
90(85)
65(62)
63(60)
93(88}
34(32)
34(32)
116(110)

116(110)


Burner
or Oil
Type
PS 300
PS 300
NO. 2
NO. 2
No. 2
No. 6
No. 6
Chain
Grate
Chain
Grate
Proportion of Total Weight of Catch

Particles
Inhaled
Then
Exhaled
<0.5 \tm
%
60
-
1
3
0.3
31
27
11

18

Particles
In The
"Fine"
Particulate
Size Range
<3 pm
%
81
97
26
40
5
60
50
24

40

articles
Reducing
Visibility
by Hie
Scattering
0.4-0.7 lam
%
10
-
0.8
0.9
0.1
1
1
5

13





Soot
Included
No
NO
NO
No
No
No
No
NO

NO






Combustion
Modification
None (Baseline)
After Tuneup
None (Baseline)
Low Excess Air and
Registers Reset
Registers Reset
None (Baseline)
Low Excess Air
None (Baseline)

Low Excess Air

                                                         6001-43
                              197

-------
         100
0.1
   0.3
                               1.0      3.0        10

                                                  pm
                                                     100
Figure  5-44.
Effect of combustion modifications on particulate size,
Oil Fuel.
                                                           6001-43
                              198

-------
        Also shown in Figure 5-44 is the effect on the particulate size
distribution of modifying the fuel and air mixing by resetting the
burner registers.  The test fuel here was No. 2 oil, and the testing
was done at a very low firing rate, i.e., 33% of capacity.  The upper
curve for Test 162 was drawn from data taken after the registers had
been reset.  The most striking effect was that the proportion of fine
particulate rose from a baseline value of about 26% to about 40%.
        When the fuel was coal burned on a chain grate the effect of
reducing the excess air was different.  The reduction in the percentage
of excess air was 0.4.  This is illustrated on Figure 5-45.  Reducing
the excess air raised all of the proportions of the total weight of
the catch, rather than reducing them as with oil fuel.
        When the firing rate of the boiler used for Test  162 was
raised  from a level of 65 GJ/hr that was  33% of capacity  to 93 GJ/hr
 (47% of capacity) and the registers reset for  the  lowest  nitrogen oxides
emissions  the proportion of  fine particulate decreased from about 26%
to about  5%.
        The effect of modifying combustion by  tuning  the  burner  is
illustrated in Figure 5-46.  The data  for the  upper curve were taken
before  the oil burner at Location  27 was  tuned and those  for the lower
curve were taken after.  After tuning  there  was a  larger  proportion of
the  fine  particulate.  No  data were  available  below on aerodynamic  size
of about  0.5  pm  because  the  back-up  filter was damaged and  could not
be reweighed.
                                 199

-------
         100
  a
  o
CJ

OJ
O
f4
U
<
  M
    4)
    4J
    (0
    -U
    to
X!  to
4J  03



flj
J*~4  ^^
4-* X)
  B to
  O 10
  H €)
  O C
  &< o
  O -i-l
  ft M -H
    O 13
  W Qi
  > O
  H M
  O
      M
      
/
























1

Y
























6

•*


















0.1 0,3 3





e

.•

























_^-^
x?T^














Test
"~Chai







VH
**-



















A

A





















****





















*a»





















ma





















am





















Ml



















-AU_J=/__,





\
:^~
• ==C














A














3 166 arid 1G8, Location
rt Grate Stoker Fired














-0 3.0


























No
























•














































35-




























































0 30 T^



























00

figure   5-45. Effect of  low         air             modification on
               particulate  size.  Coal fuel,


                                                                 6001-43
                                  200

-------
30
g „ 10
f*°i _C!
IVE OF C
jportion less than
iiameter, % by
H W
0 0
COMULAT]
i.e. prc
stated c
o o
M Ul
0 	 - 	 - 	

_Befc
— Tune

















»rt>
•up.
f


















r



















t
§
\
— LL












































«M<

'
i
t














«
•*

r?















II

e
a














ter
leup













i 	 flLg




































S3


















•m





































mt


















•1 0.3 l.o 3.0
m


















K


















^^^





: 	 . — .
	 . — |








































































Symbol Test
O in
i i 1
10 30































[ML

















100
                                     DIAMETER, ]im
Figure  5-46,
Effect of burner tune-up on particulate size,
      oil fuel
                                                             6001-43
                                 201

-------
 5.5     BOILER EFFICIENCY
        The effect of the various techniques used to reduce nitrogen
 oxide emissions on boiler thermal efficiency have been evaluated and
 are  discussed in  this section.  The test data are from Phase II in
 which the nitrogen oxides reducing techniques of low excess oxygen,
 overfire air, burners out of service, reduced combustion air preheat,
 and  flue gas recirculation  were investigated.  The data are presented
 in graphs wherein the percentage change of nitrogen oxides (the change
 in NOx resulting  from a particular combustion modification divided by
 the  baseline NOx  level) is plotted versus the corresponding change
 in boiler efficiency.
        In general, the nitrogen oxide reduction techniques of low
 excess oxygen firing, burners out of service, and flue gas recirculation
 resulted in boiler efficiencies equal to or better than baseline
 levels.  Staged air and reduced combustion air preheat produced a
 degradation of efficiency.
 5.5.1   Effect of Excess Air
        The effect of low excess air firing on boiler efficiency is
 illustrated in Figure 5-47.  The majority of the data points are located
 in the best quadrant, i.e., where a reduction in emissions is accompanied
by an increase in efficiency.  Efficiency was bettered by as much as 2.5%
in two cases.   On a coal-fired boiler reducing excess oxygen resulted in
a 44% reduction in nitrogen oxide emissions along with a 2.0% increase
of boiler efficiency.  In three cases with gas fuel, lowering the excess
oxygen resulted in an increase in emissions at a higher efficiency.
This behavior of increasing nitrogen oxides with decreased oxygen is
unusual and is discussed in Section 5.1.1.   In two instances, lowering
excess oxygen resulted in a decrease of efficiency;  however,  the
magnitude of the changes were insignificant compared to the accuracy of
the procedure used to determine them.
                                 202

-------
         t

         <#>
         u
         H
U


4-


I
            BEST QUADRANT
                                   <9-
                                       +2

                                     CD
                 -50
4—1
•30
                   D
                                          D
                               +10     +30     +50
                                        -1
                                        -2
                               -3
                                             WORST QUADRANT
                        CHANGE IN  TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES, % •*• +
             ^ Coal Fuel


             O Oil Fuel

                Natural Gas Fuel
Figure 5-47. Effect on boiler efficiency of  reducing the excess

             combustion air.


                                                    6001-43
                              203

-------
         As  a whole,  the efficiency of the boilers tested during Phase
 II  responded as  expected to the effects of reduced excess oxygen.  In
 agreement with Phase  I results, the degree of efficiency increase
 averaged to be 0.5%  for each 1.0% decrease in excess oxygen.
 5.5.2    Effect of  Staged Air
         The effect of staged combustion air on boiler efficiency is
 illustrated in Figure 5-48.  Generally, the reduction of nitrogen oxide
 emissions by using staged air had a negative affect on efficiency.
 This behavior was  to be expected since staged air normally requires
 that the level of  excess oxygen be maintained at higher than baseline
 levels to assure complete combustion.  This greater quantity of heated
 air being exhausted through the stack contributes significantly to the
 negative influence on efficiency.  A few boilers exhibited increases
 in efficiency (best quadrant) when staged air was used.  These boilers
 had staged  air ports which were part of the original boiler design and
were therefore more carefully sized and located.
 5.5.3   Effect of  Burners Out of Service
        Figure 5-49 presents the effect of burners out of service on
boiler efficiency.   The efficiency changes were generally small, 0.6%
or less,  but were mostly in the positive direction.   One would expect
 the effect of burners out of service to be similar to staged air since
both techniques involve staging combustion.   The quantity of test data
from burners out of service is small,  making it difficult to draw any
concrete  conclusions.
5.5.4   Effect of Combustion Air Temperature
        The effect of varying the combustion air preheat temperature is
shown in  Figure 5-50.  As expected,  lowering the temperature to reduce
emissions resulted in a degradation of boiler efficiency,  because a
reduction in air preheat was accompanied by  an increase of flue gas
temperature.  The five instances where the efficiency increased were
                                 204

-------

+
•K
dP
B
M
U
H
Cn
lz
H
W
0
u
4-

i



BEST QUADRANT
•••



•w
D


All/
_+3
_ +2


udx



•
-so Or30 Df\ 1 +1° +3° +5°
u ^ A
0 ^ -
D
A
•••

D
D D
D
— i


- -2


- -3
WORST QUADRANT
                 - «- CHANGE IN TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES,  %







                Coal Fuel






                Natural Gas Fuel
Figure  5-48. Effect on boiler efficiency of staged combustion air.
                                                        6001-43
                               205

-------

+
t
dp
£
U
1
H
H
fe'
W
H
W
a
o
*
i


BEST QUADRANT
•••
WM




D
an
i m n i P
— r 1 1 A 1 r
-50 O £^30 -10

^^



^•^

_+3
+2
^^


+1



d 1 1 1 —
^H 1 1
+10 +30 +50

- -1

	 2

- -3
WORST QUADRANT
                       CHANGE IN TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES,  %
                Coal Fuel
             O Oil Fuel
             D Natural Gas Fuel
Figure 5-49.
Effect on boiler efficiency of operating with burners
out of service.
                                           6001-43
                               206

-------


+
t
rr
LNGE IN EFFICIENi
3
u
4-
i


BEST QUADRANT
•M
«•

Q
0
1 1 n
1 1
-50 -30 -10
DC
«••
o<&
•^

a o
^M
^

+3
••^
-4-2

-1-1
D| Pi 1°
1 1 1 1
+10 Q +30 +50
J
.=•1

-2
iHB>

_-3
WORST QUADRANT
                  CHANGE IN  TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES, % •+ +
          ^ Coal Fuel

          O Oil Fuel

          D Natural Gas Fuel
Figure 5-50.
Effect on boiler efficiency of the combustion air
preheat temperature.

                                           6001-43
                               207

-------
 tests  where  the  air  temperature was  raised,  rather than  lowered,
 e.g.,  Runs 130-1,  142-1,  118-1.  Efficiency  losses were  as high as
 3.3% with a  32%  reduction of nitrogen oxides emissions from a coal-
 fired  boiler where the air  temperature was reduced from  365 K to 355 K
 by opening a by-pass duct (Test 138-2).   If  reduced air  preheat is to
 be adopted as a  permanent nitrogen oxide  emissions reduction technique
 for a  particular boiler,  the stack losses can be recouped by redesigning
 the steam side of  the boiler for more heat absorption.   An example of
 this wou.ld be the  installation or enlargement of an economizer.
 5.5.5   Effect of  Flue Gas  Recirculation
        The  effects  of flue gas recirculation on boiler  efficiency
 are shown in Figure  5-51.  Also illustrated  are the effects of flue
 gas recirculation  combined with staged air.  Flue gas recirculation,
 per se, had  only small effects on efficiency.  The changes were 0.6%
 or less and  varied from positive to negative.  However,  when sidefire
 air was added, efficiency dropped by about 1.5% as would be expected
 due to the necessary increase in excess oxygen for complete combustion.

 5.6     GENERAL  NITROGEN  OXIDES EMISSIONS CORRELATION
        A general  correlation of nitrogen oxide emissions from
 industrial boilers was developed using the test data from Phase I and
 Phase II.  The correlation relates nitrogen  oxides emissions to three
boiler operational factors.  These factors are (1) the excess air level,
 (2) a term describing the rate of heat input, and (3) the nitrogen
 content of the fuel.   The correlation holds  for all combination of
boilers and  fuels  tested during the program.  To the knowledge of the
 authors of this  report, this is the first of any such general correlation
 and is believed  to be of major significance.
                                208

-------
        <#>
        u
        z
        w
        H
        u
        H
              BEST QUADRANT
                                      --+3
                   o
        w  Q
        2
                              Open symbols = flue
                                 gas recirculation
                                 only

                              Solid  symbols = flue
                                 gas recirculation
                                 plus overfire air
                                         +1
                             I    I   I   I    I    I
        w
        O
    -50      D  -   -10
+10     +30     +50
                                         "*•»!
                                         -2
                                         -3
                                               WORST QUADRANT
                -  •«- CHANGE IN TOTAL NITROGEN OXIDES,  %


             Q Oil Fuel

             D Natural Gas Fuel
Figure 5-51.
Effect on boiler efficiency of flue gas recirculation
and staged combustion air.
                                             6001-43
                               209

-------
        An overall review of nitrogen oxide emissions test data from
Phase  I and Phase II revealed that there was no single design or opera-
tion factor that could provide an acceptable correlation for the levels
of emissions  from industrial boilers.  Nitrogen oxide emissions were
dependent in  varying degrees upon fuel properties, excess air, boiler
design, boiler firing rate, combustion air temperature, etc.  The
effects of these factors on emissions are discussed individually
earlier in this section of the report, but no one factor correlated
with all of the emission trends that were encountered.
        For the majority of test cases it was found that nitrogen oxide
emissions consistently increased along with an increase in two factors:
excess air and a factor describing the rate of heat release.  This
second factor was more specifically defined as the ratio of total heat
release per unit furnace-heat-absorbing-area.  A third factor was the
fuel nitrogen content.  For coal and, especially, oil fuels, nitrogen
oxide emissions increased as the fuel nitrogen content became greater.
        It was found that by using the rate of heat release as the
basic parameter and then correcting for the excess air level and fuel
nitrogen,  a reasonable correlation of all the data could be achieved.
The correlation parameter was formulated as the produce of the three
individual factors and was as follows:
          NO   = (1 + 46N)(TA)(Q/A)
            X
where N = fuel nitrogen content, % by weight
     TA = fraction of theoretical air
                                                                 -1      -2
    Q/A = heat release per unit heat absorption area, joules-hour  -meter
        The nitrogen factor of  (1 + 46N) was developed from the field
test finding that the proportion of conversion of fuel nitrogen to nitrogen
oxides was 46%.  This conversion factor is discussed in Sections 5.3 and
6.0.  The unity portion of the term was included in the nitrogen factor
to account for nitrogen oxide emissions resulting solely from the thermal
                                210

-------
fixation of atmospheric nitrogen (for example,  when the fuel burned
contained no bound nitrogen, as with natural gas fuel).
        The fraction of theoretical air provides for the excess air
effect on nitrogen oxides.  One hundred percent of theoretical air is
the stoichiometric air required for complete combustion under perfect
conditions.  Anything greater than 100% is excess air.  For example,
when a boiler is operated with 55% excess air the "TA" factor would
be 1.55.
        As mentioned above, the heat release factor is the ratio of
the heat released by combustion to the furnace heat transfer area.
It is the product of the full load fuel flow, fuel heating value,
and the fraction of the boiler load for the test divided by the area
of the furnace heat transfer surfaces surrounding the  flame.  This
area factor is very difficult to evaluate, since a boiler furnace
usually has an odd shape and a variety of waterwall tube sizes and
spacings.  A significant amount of scatter in the correlation data
is caused by this uncertainty in the actual heat absorbing area.
        The results of the  correlation are presented  in Figures  5-52
and 5-53, wherein the nitrogen oxide emissions  level  is plotted versus
the correlation parameter.  One variable that affects  nitrogen oxides,
but was not taken into consideration  for the correlation, was the
temperature of the combustion air.  For this reason,  two plots were
made, one  for boilers with ambient temperature  combustion air and one
for preheated air.  The plot  for preheated air  has more scatter  than the
ambient  air plot.  This is because the amount of preheat temperature
varied  significantly and  the variation in ambient  temperatures was
quite small.  Additional  scatter  in  the data bands  may be due to
different  burner  designs  and  fuel oil atomization  schemes,  fuel  oil
temperature, and  coal particle  size.
                                  211

-------
         1000
N)
H
to
CO
w
Q
H
X
o

Z
W
0
      frf
      H
      z

      a
      <
 fsj
O 100
*
PI

©

>1
u
•o
  1
           10
                                                                    NOx = 1.51[(1+46 N)(TA)(Q/A}]

                                                                      Q  - Natural      fuel

                                                                      O  - Oil fuels

                                                                      ^-J  - Coal  fuels
                                                                                                    .362

                                                                          ft2
               Figure 5-52. MOx correlation for boilers with ambient  combustion air.
                                                                                                   6001-43

-------
            1000
to
i-j
u>
                                                                       NOx =  9.21 [(1+46 N) (TA) (Q/A)]
                                                                            -  Natural     fuel
                                                                        O -  Oil fuels
                                                                            -  Coal fuels

            Figure 5-53.     correlation for boilers with           combustion air.
                                                                                             6001-43

-------
        Curves have been drawn through the data points by eye and
the curves behave according to the following equations:
and
        A = 1.51 B°"36   for ambient air
        A = 9.21 B°'     for preheated air
where
        A = nitrogen oxides emissions in ppm, dry @  3% 0,
        B = (1 + 46N)(TA)(Q/A).
                                214

-------
                            SECTION 6.0
                          FUEL PROPERTIES

        The physical form and chemical composition of the fuel have
a strong effect on pollutant emissions and emission levels can be
reduced readily by shifting to a different fuel.  For example, oil-
fueled boilers generally have lower nitrogen oxides emissions than
do coal-fired boilers.  A shift from residual oil to distillate oil
would result in lower nitrogen oxides emissions because the fuel-
bound nitrogen content of the lighter oil is less.
        Gas fuel presents the simplest situation, since only gas-
gas mixing is involved.  Natural gas fuel is mostly methane with
minor amounts of ethane and heavier constituents.  Natural gas is
relatively consistent and already in a state allowing easy mixing
and combustion.  The properties do  not materially affect the
emissions.  An exception to this generalization may exist for
process waste from chemical plants or refineries where gas streams
high in organic nitrogen may be burned, or with future fuels, such
as low Btu gas derived from coal.
        Combustion of oil fuel is significantly more complex.  It
must be atomized and vaporized to burn properly; so fuel properties
such as viscosity, specific gravity, volatility, ash, Conradson
carbon, and heating value become important parameters.  Atomization
can be accomplished in different ways and can significantly affect
emissions.

        In evaluating the effects of oil parameters on emissions, the
degree of sameness and difference from one oil to another should be
considered.  All oils were formed by the same basic mechanism, so
crude oils have a great deal of similarity.  At the same time,
location-to-location differences in temperature, pressure, and raw
                                 215

-------
material cause variations in chemical composition and characteristics.
Typically, crude oil is further processed and segregated into fractions,
classified for commercial purposes as No. 1 through No. 6, where each
oil designation has a specific allowable range of properties.  The
result is that a given grade of oil from two sources will typically be
very similar in chemical and physical properties and in nitrogen oxides
emission characteristics.  Variation will exist due to location differ-
ences, and these variations may sometimes be magnified by blending
procedures which can result in unusual characteristics.  One effect of
this situation is that correlations of emissions with a particular oil
property become somewhat questionable.  It is not clear whether emissions
and API gravity have a causal relationship or whether gravity indicates
a particular oil which has a certain typical fuel nitrogen content
and consequently a characteristic level of nitrogen oxides emissions.
Fuel nitrogen content is known to be very important and is discussed
in detail, and other properties such as ash and sulfur content are
discussed because of their effect on particulates and sulfur oxide
emissions.
        Coal presents even more problems, since it is mined as solid
material, contains more impurities, is highly variable, and must be
crushed or pulverized for burning on grates or in air suspension.
The difficulties of coal handling, grinding, feeding, slagging,
and flyash collection can easily become the predominant design and
operating problems.

6.1     NATURAL GAS
        Table 6-1 lists the properties of the gaseous fuels which
were tested in Phase II.   Natural gas comprised the majority of
the gaseous fuels.   Refinery gas was tested on one boiler and a
mixture of natural and refinery gas was tested in another instance.
                                216

-------
Table 6-1.  FUEL ANALYSIS SUMMARY
            Gas Fuel
Test No.
101
104-106
109-110
113-115
122-125
140-148
149-152
153-155
180-185
190-194
207-212

Type
of Gas
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Ref .
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.+
Ref.
CH4
%
94.52
94.52
90.00
88.11
88.11
91.8
76.40
93.91
96.99
97.26
48.43
	
C2H4
C2H6
%
4.26
4.26
2.90
4.33
4.33
5.84
5.10
4.37
1.98
1.82
10.96

c#
C3HB
0.20
0.20
0.40
0.68
0.68
0.51
5.30
0.71
0.10
0.027
1.68

C4;8
c'>
0.062
0.062
Trace
0.15
0.15
0.08
0.40
-
0.04
0.08
0.15

%""
0.032
0.032
-
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.20
-
0.01
-
0.02

C,H
V4
0.032
0.032
-
0.02
0.02
0.01
-
-
-
-
-

H2
%
-
-
-
-
-
-
8.80
0.25
-
-
35.67

*?
0.35
0.35
0.10
0.67
0.67
-
1.40
0.74
0.60
0.37
-

°l
0.12
0.12
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.01
0.02

N2
%
0.37
0.37
6.60
5.96
5.96
-
1.60
-
0.28
0.28
2.68

H20
%
0.05
0.05
-
0.04
0.04
-
-
-
-
-
-

Density
kg/m3
0.725
0.725
0.746
0.765
0.765
0.720
0.765
0.733
0.710
0.705
0.576

Ib/ft3
0.0447
0.0447
0.0460
0.0472
0.0472
0.0444
0.0472
0.0452
0.0438
0.0435
0.0355

Higher
Heating Value
GJ/n>3
0.0388
0.0388
0.0364
0.0373
0.0373
0.0391
0.0391
0.0390
0.0377
0.0381
0.0310

Btu/ft3
1042
1042
976
1000
1000
1050
1050
1047
1011
1023
831

                                               6001-43

-------
         The  natural  gases were composed mostly of methane with small
 amounts  of ethane  and  traces of heavier hydrocarbon gases.  The
 methane  contents varied from 88 to 97% and the ethane proportions
 were  between 1.8 and 5.8%.  The nitrogen contents of natural gases
 varied significantly,  from zero to as high as 6.6%.  Nitrogen in
 natural  gas  does not add significantly to the production of nitrogen
 oxides as with liquid  or solid fuels.  The reason is that the
 nitrogen is  in its molecular form  (N2) as in the combustion air.
 Nitrogen contained in  liquid or solid fuel is released in its atomic
 form  (N) and reacts  at relatively low temperatures with oxygen to
 form  the pollutant.  The heating values of the natural gases varied
 from  0.0364  to 0.0391 GJ/m3  (976 to 1050 Btu/ft3).
         The  refinery gas used for Tests 149 through 152 was composed
 of 76% methane, approximately 5% each of ethanes and propanes,
 and 8.8% hydrogen.   The heating value was comparable to natural
 gas at 0.0391 GJ/m   (1050 Btu/ft3).
        For  Tests 207-212 a mixture of natural and refinery gas was
 fired.  The  proportion of methane was comparatively low at 48%.
 The ethane of about  11% and 36% of the gas was hydrogen.  The gas
 had a heating value  of 0.0310 GJ/m3 (831 Btu/ft3).

 6.2     COAL AND OIL

        Coal and oil fuel properties are discussed together in this
 section since their  characteristics influence emissions similarly.
The properties of the coals and oils tested in Phase II are
 summarized in Table  6-2.  The effects of the individual fuel
properties are discussed in the following subsections.
                                218

-------
                                         Table 6-2.  FUEL ANALYSIS SUMMARY

                                                 Coal and Oil Fuels
Test No.
102-103
107-108
111-112

116-121
126-130
131-133
134-139
156-159
159
160-164
165-168
169
170-175
176-179
186-189
195-206
Type of
Fuel
#2 Oil
#2 Oil
PS 300
(#5 Oil)
#6 Oil
#6 Oil
Coal
Coal
Coal
#6 Oil
#2 Oil
Coal
Coal
#6 Oil
#6 Oil
#6 Oil
#6 Oil
c
i *
o <* S of o *
85.94 12.72 0.89
85.94 12.72 0.89
86.46 10.31 1-07

85.95 10.21 0.22
No Fuel Sample Obtaii
62.50 5.21 12.51
68.30 4.70 11.01
69.89 4.67 8.10
85.44 11.35 0.002
87.14 12.71
63.42 4.84 9.85
62.50 5.12 12.51
86.60 10.94 0.31
86.17 11.55
85.10 11.10 3.12
86.68 12.16 0.65
•>.
C
0)
M IP
3 0
«H ^ »
i-l -P A
3 -H ra
w <* ys * < *
0.40 0.045 0.003
0.40 0.045 0.003
1.29 0.77 0.10

2.74 0.31 0.03
led For Analysis
1.15 0.83 10.5
1.16 1.46 9.71
1.36 1.50 14.48
2.80 0.33 0.078
0.31 0.013 <0.001
3.05 0.94 13.7
1.15 0.83 10.5
1.60 0.30 0.25
1.91 0.30 0.07
0.19 0.49 0.08
0.37 0.14 0.009
g) * «•
H i
3 C 3 4J
4j o 'O --H H
01 XI "H > Oj
•H H W «J rtj
O rt 0> ^
a <*> o os <» o o
0.071 31.1
0.071 31.1
8.50 15.1

_ - -

7.29 -
3.66 -
3.37 -
12.33 15.8
0.027 35.1
4.15 46.2
7.29 -
9.00 15.1
_
8.53 25.7
1.61 29.2
Higher Heating
Value
GJ/kg
0.0452
0.0452
0.0426

0.0423

0.0276
0.0286
0.0286
0.0432
0.0451
0.0276
0.0276
0.0434
0.0436
0.0446
0.0450
Btu/lb
19,440
19,440
18,333

18,213

11,863
12,293
12,300
18,580
19,390
11,873
11,863
18,660
18,773
19,227
19,365
to
O
O
CO

-------
6.3     VUEL SULFUR CONTENT

        The results of the measurements of total sulfur oxides in
the flue gas are shown in Figure 6-1.  The curve shows sulfur
oxides concentration emitted as a function of the sulfur content
of the fuel and compares it with calculated values assuming 100%
conversion of fuel sulfur to sulfur oxides (SOX).  The measurements
of which these data are a part indicate that the sulfur emissions
were dependent almost solely upon the sulfur content of the fuel.
        It is apparent that for oil  fuel, practically all of the
sulfur is emitted as gaseous products of combustion and an
insignificant amount is contained in the fly ash or other
particulates.  The coal fuel data are not as consistent as the oil
data, and this may indicate that the higher sulfur coals  (greater
than 3%/ dry) have inorganic sulfate which does not convert to
gaseous sulfur oxides but, rather, contributes to the particulate
emissions.

        Figure 6-2 shows that the ratio of sulfur trioxide  (SO ) to
total sulfur oxides  (SO ) is typically 1% to 2%, except when the
                       X
sulfur oxides concentration dropped below about 400 ng/J  (500 ppm).
The steep rise below 400 ng/J is deemed to be due to the measurement
method itself, since the standard Shell-Emeryville method always
yields relatively high sulfur trioxide ratios when the total sulfur
oxides concentrations are below 400 ng/J.  The instant of the color
change when titrating is difficult to determine precisely, and only
one drop of titrating solution can have a large effect on the calculated
concentration of SO  when the absolute concentration of SO  is low.
                              220

-------
I
§
2000
1800.
1600-
1400-
1200'
ki
O
800-
I
600-
400-
200-
0.
1800 .
1600 '
1400 .
1200 -
M
1000-
3
fc 800 -
»
•.
c 600 -
400 -
200.
0 .
2400
2000
1600
»
•
CM 1200
O
*
CO
0
&
•a
.^ son
- a
04
400
»
0


A



15
£
/

^/W
/3-I02
^°°





f
"TO ^


^\P)


1 I
Typical Type of Coal
/ 100% Conversion
/
/
/ /
/(D
/
176

&

A
, Typical Type of Oil
' 100% Conversion


\
Numerals within
are Test Numbers








Symbols

FUEL TYPE
/\ Coal
O <*

1
1
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.
                                        FUEL SULFUR CONTENT, DRY, %
 Figure  6-1.
Total sulfur oxides emissions  at baseload for oil and
coal fired boilers.
                                                   6001-43
                                  221

-------
                                             FUEL AND BURNER TYPE
SULFUR TRIOXIDES TO TOTAL SULFUR OXIDES, PERCENTAGE
f— ' 1— * k_i i_i L_| t
u *. c* pop 10 E £ co !
=> ° o OfTT— 1° b b b b J
&
2 o



0
m
_u
fe
^JCD~

(T
or







^

i/rr >
e<








A
^^
^-C->'

I 1 Nature
(J) Oil #:
Q Oil #£
^ Oil #€
/yy Coal £
/^. Coal F
AA Coal U
^\ Coal C



/^.
— «. t
&>L
ffi
il Gas
>
preader
ulverizer
nderfed
yclone



^/v
^o- 	
4Sf
ffiSP

| 0 400 800 V*"/ 1200 1600 2000
ppm, dry @ 3% 0
h ' '
0
0
i i "i 	
400 800 1200
ng/J, for Natural Gas

l | i -
400 800 1200
ng/J, for Oil Fuel

0 400 80*0 12*00 1600
                              ng/J,  for Coal Fuel

                     TOTAL SULFUR OXIDES CONCENTRATION
Figure IS-HT  Ratio of sulfur trioxides to total sulfur oxides at
             baseload as a function of total sulfur oxides measured.
                                222
                                                               6001-43

-------
        There appears to be no strong effect of fuel type other than
its sulfur content.  For example, No. 6 oil data are shown between
400 and 1200 ng/J  (500 and 1500 ppm) and the SO,/SOV decreases
                                               J   x
with total sulfur oxides just as with the other fuels.  For coal
the type of coal burner has no significant effect on the SO /SO
                                                           3   x
ratio in the exhaust gas.
6.4     FUEL ASH CONTENT
        A coal and oil  fuel property that correlates reasonably well
to solid particulate emissions is the  fuel ash content.  Figure 6-3
illustrates baseline solid particulates as a function of fuel ash
content for coal and Nos. 2,  5, and 6  fuel oil testing  from Phase I and
II.  Particulates  were  the lowest for  the relatively ash-free No. 2 oils,
then increased as  the oils became heavier and higher in ash content,
as with the No. 5  and 6 oils.  Particulates were the highest with
coal.
        Figure 6-3 also shows a  line of equality corresponding to the
mass of solid particulate matter contained in the  combustion produce
gases being equal  to the mass of fuel  ash input.   The data do not lie
on this line.  For oil  fuels  more solid particulate matter was emitted
than ash input.  For coal  the particulates were less than the ash
input.  The coal data are  easily explained; a significant amount of
the fuel ash drops out  in  the furnace  bottom as dry ash or slag and
does not appear as part of the particulate measurement.  For oils the
answer is slightly more complex.  When the ash content  of a fuel is
determined by an ultimate  analysis  all combustible materials including
sulfur are eliminated from the  fuel sample prior to the determination
of ash content.  However,  the combustion process occurring in  the
boiler is incomplete, resulting  in  carbon particles being present in
the combustion gases.   In  addition, a  very small amount of sulfur may
combine with other materials  to  form solid sulfate compounds.   The
                                 223

-------
                                                                                                100
                                                                                      10,000
                                                FUEL ASH CONTEKT

Figure 6-3.  Effect of fuel ash content on  baseline solid particulate emissions  for coal and
             oil  fuels.
                                                                                            6001-43

-------
carbon and sulfate particles are combined with the fuel ash and
the sum can be larger than the amount of ash in the original oil.
        A limited number of particulate tests were conducted on
natural gas fired boilers in Phase I.  The particulate levels were
very low, nevertheless, they were significant.  This suggests that
airborne dust particles may contribute to particulate emissions
since natural gas contains no ash.
        The amount of  volatile substances, such as unturned
sulfur or carbon, contained in the fly ash from six coal fuels and
one No. 6 oil fuel burned at baseline conditions was determined
during Phase I and Phase II.  A quantity of fly ash was placed in a
crucible, weighed, baked in a furnace and then reweighed.  The results
are tabulated below:
                                              Fuel Content   Ash Volatile

Test No.
19-6
20-6
32-4
134-2
156-2
165-1
Ref. 17
Loc.
No.
21
21
20
30
13
35
38
Test Load Carbon
Burner Type
SpStk
SpStk
Cyclone
SpStk
Pulv.
ChGrt
Steam Atom.
GJ/hr
42
66
338
87
422
110
47
%
76
76
77
68
70
63
85
Sulfur
%
0.
1.
2.
1.
1.
3.
2.

76
6
9
2
4
0
0
Ash
%
6.
6.
7.
9.
14
14
o.

8
9
8
7


05
Content
%
74
29
12
20
89
73
2
        The ash  from the cyclone burner was the lowest in volatile
content of the coal fuel tests.  This low residual volatile content
is not surprising, because the combustion zone temperature of a cyclone
burner is very high and nearly all of the volatile substances in the
coal should be driven off.
        The fly  ash that had the highest  volatile content
was from a pulverizer.  This was expected, since other information had
indicated that the carbon content of the particulate  from spreader
                                225

-------
                                      (8)
stokers should have been the highest.     However, the sulfur content
of the coal was 1.4%, and the presence of sulfur and sulfates in the
fly ash could account for the high  volatile   content.  An analysis
of No. 6 oil fuel fly ash that is reported in Reference 17 found that
71% of the fly ash was sulfur and sulfates and only 8% was carbon.
        The  volatile   content of the fly ash from a spreader stoker
found in Test 19-6 was relatively high, but the contents from Tests 20-6
and 134-2 using spreader stokers were not.  The volatile content of
the chain grate fly ash was high, which is consistent with the
contention that the larger the size of the coal as fired, the larger
is the carbon content of the fly ash.  It is likely that sulfates also
are a significant factor, since the sulfur content of the coal was a
high 3.0%.  The grouping of variations in volatile content is deemed
to be due to the characteristics of the combustion process as well as
the coal feeding method, because there appears to be no fuel property,
such as sulfur content, that would cause certain test results to
belong to one group or another.  This contention can be verified by
referring to Table 6-1 of this report for the properties of the coal
burned during Phase II and to Table 6-1 of Reference 1 for the Phase
I coal properties.  Phase I tests were numbers 19-6, 20-6, and 32-4.

 6.5      API  GRAVITY
        An oil fuel property which correlates with nitrogen oxide
and particulate emissipns is the API  gravity measured at  20°C.
This is not a unique correlation, since fuel nitrogen and  ash
contents decrease in going from heavy to light oils or as the
gravity increases.
        The nitrogen oxides and solid particulates are shown as a
function of API gravity in Figure 6-4.  The measured NO   fell into
*:wo groups:   (1) where the fuel oil gravity matched the API gravity
                                226

-------
  450
  400 „
i
IA
n)

51
o>
g
  350
  300

  250
  200
Q
H
  150
   50
     10
(ill
                                            \/
                                                Nitrogen
                                                Oxides

                                                Particulates
                                       Numbers within symbols
                                       are test numbers
                                                               90
                                                               80
                                                               70
                                                               60
                                                               50
                                                               40
                                                               30
                                                               20
                                                               10
                                                    i
                                                    D
                                                    U
                                                                  i-
                                                                  8
15       20        25        30         35

    API GRAVITY OF FUEL OIL  AT  293 K
                                                              40
 Figure 6-4.
              Effect of API gravity on baseload  nitrogen oxides
              and particulates  emissions.
                                                          6001-43
                                 227

-------
specification for diesel or No. 2 oil the nitrogen oxides was
between 56 and 110 ng/J  (100 and 200 ppm) , and  (2) where the fuel
oil gravity matched No. 5 or 6 oil and the nitrogen oxides was
between 95 and 350 ng/J  (170 and 620 ppm).  The fuel burned for Tests
63, 68, and 70 was designated as PS 300 which when analyzed was found
to have properties much like No. 5 oil.
        It should be noted that the data might be correlated as well
by fuel grade number, as indicated at the top of the figure.  While
fuel grade number could in no way be considered a natural property,
it does reflect a grouping of properties and reflects the similarity
between different oils as previously discussed.
                                228

-------
                            SECTION 7.0
                   BOILER DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS

7.1     FURNACE AND BURNER CHARACTERISTICS
        Although the design of existing boilers cannot be adjusted day
to day, the influence of boiler and burner design on emissions is of
interest in terms of new unit design and potential modification of
existing units.  The major influences are expected to be in burner
design  (degree of mixing, ingestion of recirculated gases, atomization,
etc.) and the rate of heat loss from the flame  (burner face cooling,
burner spacing, furnace area, furnace volume, etc.).  The specifications
of the boilers tested in Phase II are listed in Table 7-1.
7.2     COST OF MODIFICATION
        Four methods of combustion modification that required modifi-
cation of the boiler were investigated during Phase II.  These were:
        Staged combustion air
        Variable combustion air temperature
        Flue gas recirculation
        An 18.5 GJ/hr  (17.5xl03 Ib/hr) D-type boiler at Location 19 was
modified to add  a staged air and flue gas recirculation capability.
The  installation is discussed and pictured in Subsection 5.2.2.  The
cost of modifying this boiler was estimated at  about $5,000.  The
current cost of a new boiler of this  type is about  $60,000.
        The cost of a similar modification on other modern D-type
boilers could  run as high as  $7,500 if the existing burner registers
could  not be used.  At Location  19 the windbox  depth was  increased
and  a  second set of registers to control  the flue gas being recirculated
was  installed  within the extension.
                                 229

-------
                                          Table  7-1.   TEST  BOILER DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS





Test Ho.
Fron-Thru
101 only

102-103

104-106

107-108

109-110

111-112

113-115
116-121

122-125

126-13O
131-133

134-139

140-142

143-148

149-152


153-155

156-159


160-164

165-168

169 only






Loc.
No.
1

1

1

1

27

27

29
29

28

28
31

30

32

32

33


34

13


36

35

31

BOILCR




No.
2

2

1

1

1

1

5
5

1

1
7

8

4

1

32


2

2


6

6

6





Mfg.
BtW

BtW

BtW

BtW

BtW

BtW

Rile)
Rile;

Erie

Erie
Erie

Erie

ClBrl

Erie

BtW
(Con
Cyc)
CE

BSW


BtW

Erie

Erie





Date
1964

1964

1964

1964

1967

1967

1972
1972

1957

1957
1963

1963

1969

1963

1965


1972

1967


1971

1960

1963




Cap
GJ/hr
(10 Ib/hr)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
31
(29)
106
(100)
106
(100)
158
(150)
158
(150)
74
(70)
74
(70)
274
(260)
132
(125)
137
(130)
127
(120)
580
(550)

264
(250)
528
(500)

211
(200)
227
(215)
274
(260)
FURNACE




rype
WT

WT

WT

WT

WT

WT

WT
WT

WT

WT
WT

WT

WT

WT

WT


WT

WT


WT

WT

WT





Hall
Const
RT

RT

RT

RT

WF

WF

TT
TT

RT

RT
TT

RT

TT

TT

TT


TT

TT


TT

TT

TT



Size
L-H-H
Meter
(feet)
4.0-1.8-2.1
(13-6-7)
4.0-1.8-2.1
(13-6-7)
4.0-1.8-2.1
(13-6-7)
4.0-1.8-2.1
(13-6-7)
6.4-1.8-2.7
(21-6-9)
6.4-1.8-2.7
(21-6-9)
8.5-3.4-5.8
(28-11-19)
8.5-3.4-5.8
(28-11-19)
2.7-4.3-6.1
(9-14-20)
2.7-4.3-6.1
(9-14-20)
6.4-6.4-12
(21-21-39)
5.2-4.3-10
(17-14-33)
1O. 4-2. 1-5.'
(34-7-18)
5.2-4.0-8.6
(17-13-29)
11-10-8
(35-32-27)

14-3.7-2.4
(46-12-8)
26-6.1-6.1
(86-20-20)

11-2.1-3.0
(35-7-10)
4.3-8.2-13
(14-27-43)
6.4-6.4-12
(21-21-39)


Area
7ft2,
49.7
(535)
49.7
(535)
49.7
(535)
49.7
(535)
68.6
(738)
68.6
(738)
167
(1795)
167
(1795)
104
(1115)
104
(1115)
460
(4950)
193
(2080)
181
(1949)
200
(2150)
488
(5250)

158
(1700)
684
(7360)

117
(1260)
398
(4282)
460
4950)


Vol.
m3
21.4
(755)
21.4
(755)
21.4
(755)
21.4
(755)
32.1
(1134)
32.1
(1134)
154
(5450)
154
(5450)
76.5
(2700)
76.5
(2700)
552
(19500
190
(6700)
123
(4340)
177
(6250)
856
(3024Q
HEAT
ABSORPTION
Area
GJ/hr
n2
(S
.631
:.0556)
.631
(.O556)
.631
[.0556)
.631
.0556)
1.53
1.135)
1.53
1.135)
.946
.0833)
.946
.0833)
.693
.0610)
.693
[.0610)
.847
.0746)
.931
1.0820)
1.05
[.09261
.902
(.0794)
1.19
.105)
1
123 1.67
(43S5)|t.l47)
988 1 .772
( 3490U|( . 068O)
j
69.4 j 2.15
( 2450) k. 189)
460 1 .568
(16254TI.0500)
552 | .847
(19500^.0746)
Vol.
GJ/hr
™"in^
eft
1.62
(.0435)
1.62
(.0435)
1.62
(.0435)
1.62
(.J435)
3.30
(.0885)
3.30
(.0885)
1.02
(.0275)
1.02
(.0275)
.965
(.0259)
.965
(.0259)
.70S
(.0190)
.946
(.0254)
1.55
(.0415)
1.01
(.0272)
.678
(.0182)

2.14
(.0575)
.533
(.0143)

3.65
(.0980)
.496
(.0133)
.708
(.0190)
BURNER




Test
Fuel
NG

12

NG

*2

NG

PS
300
NG
16

NG

•6
Coal

Coal

NG

NG

Ref
Gas

NG

Coal
Oil

•2

Coal

Coal




Type
Ring

Stean

Ring

Steal

Ring

Steal

Ring
Steal

Ring

Steai
Pulv.

SpStic

Ring

Ring

Spud


Spud

Pulv.
Stean

Steav

ChGrt

Pulv.




Mfg.
BtW

BtW

BtW

BtW

Coen

Coen

Coen
Coen

Todd

Todd
CE

Oet
Stk
Pea-
body
Erie

B&w


CE

BtW
Pea-
body
BtW

CE

CE




No.
of
1

1

1

1

1

1

2
2

3

3
4

4

1

4

1


1

6
3

1

4

4

BURNER SPACING


Horis.
Dilt.
(in.)

_
_
_
_
^
_
_
_
_
.
_
_
-
.
91.4
(36)
91.4
(36)
198
(78)
150
59

_
183
(72)

_

_
_
183
(72)

_
_
.
_
198
(78)

Vert.
Dist.
cm
(In.)

_
_
.
.
_
.
_
_
_
_
.
168
(66)
168
(66)

.
_
193
(76)

_
_
_
122
(48)

_

..
_
168
(66)

_
_
_
_
193
(76)


Brn.
Load
CJ/hr
Brn.
HBH/Brn.
30.6
(29.0)
30.6
(29.0)
30.6
(29.0)
30.6
(29.0)
106
(100)
106
(100)
79.1
(75.0)
79.1
(75.0)
24.6
(23.3)
24.6
(23.3)
96.1
(93.0)
44.3
(42.0)
190
(180)
45
(43.0)
101
(96.0)

264
(250)
87.9
(83.3)

253
(240)
56
(54)

(93.0)


Fuel
Temp.
« Brn.
•C
(V)

_
Aib
Anb

_
Anto
Anb

_
71.1
(160)

118
(245)

_
93.9
(201)
_
»
_
_
.
_
_
Aato
Amb

_
_
65.6
ISO

„
_
Aib
Anb

-


Prim.
Air
Teep
•c
CF)
Amb
Amb
Anb

tatt
Amb
Anb
Anb
Anb
Anb
Anb
Anb
193
(380)
202
(395)
168
(335)
171
(340)
260
(500)
93.3
(200)
199
(390)

*
443
(830)

110
(230)
216
(420)

Arab
Anb
107
(225)
26O
1500)



Sta<*
Tecip>
•c
(*F)
268
(515)
288
(550)
293
(560)
243
(470)
171
(340)
168
(334)
143
(290)
154
(310)
127
(260)
135
(275)
166
(330)
160
(320)
149
(300)
160
(320)
171
(340)

377
(71O)
216
(420)

199
(390)
143
(290) .
166
(330)
U>
O
        •O»it haa air preheat, but it waa not po«aible to
                                                   coafcuaUon air temperature.
                                                                                                         6001-43

-------
                                                               Table  7-1.   Continued
Test No.
rr^B»-'n.ru
170-175

176-179

180-105

186-189

190-194

195-199

200-203

207-212

Loc.
Mo.
20

37

38

38

19

19

19

39

HO1LLK
Ho.
4

2

2

2

1

1

1

BIOS

Hfy.
CE

HicXra

CE

CE

Koole

Heeler

feeler

BCN

Date
1966

1955

1951

1951

1970

1970

1970

1974


Cap
GJ/hr

HEAT
ABSORPTION
Area
c.l/lir
(S-)
1.81
(.159)
.OlS
(.0806)
.710
(.0625)
.710
(.0625)
.6075
(.0535)
.6075
(.0535)
.6075
(.0535)
.263
(.0232)
vol.
C.j/hr.
(£)
2.91
(.0781)
1.04
(.0278)
.846
(.0227)
.846
(.0227)
1.66
(.0446)
1.66
(.0446)
1.66
(.0446)
2.93
(.0787)
UUKNUK
Test
Fuel
16

16

NG

16

NG

16

16

Ref.
Gas
Type
Steam

steam

Ring

Steam

Ring

Steam

Air

Spud

Mfg.
Coen

Pea-
body
Pea-
body
Pea-
body
Faber

Faber

Fabar

BtW

No.
of
1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

BUKNKR St'ACINo
lloriz.
Dist.
cm
(in.)
.
-
112
(44)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

VOL- I.
Dist.
on
(in.)
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

Brn.
Load
GJ/hr
Brn.
MDll/Di n .
121
(115)
21.1
(20.0)
47.5
(45.0)
47.5
(45.0)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
18.5
(17.5)
211
(200)
Fuel
TVmi>.
9 Brn
"C
CF)
65.6
(150)
9O.O
(194)
-
-
113
(235)
-
-
93
(200)
93
(200)
-

Prinv
Air
Tempi
•c
CF)
Amb
Arab
141
(285)
177
(350)
160
(320)
Anb
Anb
Amb
Anb
Anb
Amb
Anb
Anb
itaJ<.
Tcwpv
•c
CF)
332
(630)
218
(425)
227
(440)
204
(400 )
254
(490)
254
(490)
254
(490)
166
(330)
NJ
U)
                •Unit has air preheat, but it was not poMibl* to Baasura combustion air tufxratur*.
                                                                                                                         6001-43

-------
        During discussions with a manufacturer of boilers in the
320 GJ/hr  (300x10  Ib/hr) and one million dollar size and cost range
it was estimated that a staged air installation in general would add
two to four percent to the cost of the boiler.  For A-type boilers the
additional cost would be about two percent and for D-type boilers about
three percent.  If another booster air fan were required the cost would
be increased by about an additional one percent.
                               232

-------
                            SECTION 8.0
                          FUTURE RESEARCH

        Staged combustion air,  variable combustion air temperature  and flue
gas recirculation were very effective in reducing the emissions of nitrogen
oxides.  But before the advantages of incorporating these forms of
combustion modification into current boiler designs can be determined,
a large body of parametric data is needed.
        In the past it was not practicable to gather good design data
on these combustion modification methods.  Laboratory research suffered
from scaling inconsistencies.  Research with full-size boilers in the
field was limited, because it was difficult to reproduce prior conditions
exactly, and process needs frequently interrupted testing.  But most
serious was the complete lack of flexibility.  For example, industrial
boilers with staged combustion air ports are in service, but the
port location is  fixed and the effect of port number  and location
cannot be investigated.
        Two boilers now  exist at Locations 19 and 38, where controlled
research over a wide range of combustion parameters can be done readily.
It is  recommended that a field research program be initiated to
investigate one or all of the staged combustion air,  variable combustion
air temperature and flue gas recirculation combustion modification
methods.
        The measurement  of emissions and the effect on emissions of
combustion modifications should be extended to industrial  combustion
equipment.   Industrial combustion  equipment includes  waste-product-
fueled boilers, kilns, glass melting furnaces, steel  furnaces,
incinerators,  etc.
        Industrial combustion  devices  contribute  a  large  fraction  of
the  total  air pollution  from stationary sources.   Recent studies have
 shown as  much as  40%  of  the  stationary source  nitrogen oxides emissions
                                 233

-------
originate from industrial devices.  A similar figure was obtained for
oxides of sulfur, while particulate emissions from stationary industrial
sources account for more than 80% of the total.  '  '    Combustion
modifications for industrial boilers have been demonstrated in this
report which can reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide,
and hydrocarbons while improving boiler efficiency.  Application of
these modifications to industrial combustion devices, if successful,
could have a profound impact on air quality and energy conservation.
In order to apply these modifications,  baseline emissions and efficiency
from industrial combustion devices must be determined.  Then, applica-
tion of combustion modification techniques under controlled conditions
can be performed to determine efficiency and emission trends.
                               234

-------
                            SECTION  9.0

                            REFERENCES


 1.   Bartz,  D.  R. ,  et  al.,  "Control  of Oxides of Nitrogen From Stationary
     Sources in the South Coast Air  Basin,"  KVB Engineering Report No.
     5800-179,  State of  California Air resources Board, September 1974.

 2.   Barrett,  R.  E., et  al.,  "Field  Investigation of Emissions From
     Combustion Equipment For Space  Heating,"  Battelle-Columbus
     Laboratories,  EPA-R2-73-084a, June  1973.

 3.   Ehrenfield,  J.  R.,  et  al., "Systematic  Study of Air Pollution From
     Intermediate Size Fossil-Fuel Combustion Equipment," Walden Research
     Corp.,  NTIS No. PB  207110, July 1971.

 4.   Cato,  G.  A.,  et al., "Field  Testing:  Application of Combustion
     Modifications to  Control Pollutant  Emissions From Industrial
     Boilers - Phase I," Report No.  EPA-650/2-74-078-a, NTIS  No. PB 238
     920/AS, October 1974.

 5.   Cato,  G.  A.,  et al., "Field  Testing:  Toxic Metals and Organic
     Emissions From Industrial Boilers," KVB, Inc., Report No. EPA-650/2-
     74-078-c,  To Be Published Spring 1976.

 6.   Smith,  W.  B., et  al.,  "Particulate  Sizing Techniques  for Control
     Device Evaluation," EPA Report  No.  EPA-650/2-74-102a, August  1975.

 7.   Burchard, J.  K.,  "The  Significance  of Particulate Emissions," J.  Air
     Pollution Control Assoc., V  24, No. 12, December  1974.

 8.   Dorsey, J. A. and J. O. Burckle, "Particulate  Emissions  and Process,"
     Chem.  Engr. Progress,  67, 92,  1971.

 9.   Cuffe,  S. T. and  R. W. Gerstle, "Emissions  From Coal-Fired Power
     Plants:  A Comprehensive Summary,"   U.  S. Dept. of Health, Education
     and Welfare, Public Health  Serivce  Publication No. 999-AP-35,  1967.

10.   "Power Test Codes for  Steam Generating  Units," The American  Society
     of Mechanical Engineers, PTC 4.1-1964,  December  1964.

11.   Turner, D. W. and C. W. Siegnumd,  "Staged Combustion and Flue Gas
     Recycle:  Potential for Minimizing NOX from Fuel  Oil Combustion,"
     Presented at the  American Flame Research Committee Flame Days,
     Chicago, IL, September 1972.
                                235

-------
12.  Muzio, L. J., et al., "Package Boiler Flame Modifications for
     Reducing Nitric Oxide Emissions, Phase II of III," EPA Report
     R2-73-2925, API Publication 4208, 1974.

13.  Bell, A.  W.,  et al.,  "Combustion Control for Elimination of Nitric
     Oxide Emissions from Fossil Fuel Power Plants," Proceeding of the
     13th International Symposium on Combustion, University of Utah,
     August 23-29, 1970.

14.  Setter,  J.  G.,  "The Effect of Fuel Nitrogen on NOX Production in
     Oil-Fired Utility Boilers," Final Report, KVB, Inc. prepared for
     WEST Associates, Report No. 51-137, December 17, 1973.

15.  Kato, K., et al.,  "Formation and Control of Fuel Nitric Oxide,"
     Published at a  conference of thermo-engineering held by the
     Japanese  Society of Mechanical Engineers, November 1973.

16.  Blakeslee,  C. L. ,  and H.  J. Burbach,  "Controlling NOX Emissions
     from Steam Generators," Presented at the Air Pollution Control
     Association's 65th Annual Meeting.

17.  Laurendeau, R.,  et al./ "The Reduction of Particulate Emission
     from Industrial Boilers by Combustion Optimization," ASME Paper
     75-WA/APC-3,  1975 Winter Annual Meeting,  November 1975.
                               236

-------
                                                                                       SECTION  10.0
                                                                                    GLOSSARY  OF  TERMS
SJ
Ul
  ABIS
  Air

  Air Reg
  Amb
  API
  Atm
  Atom Press
  Base
  BOOB
  Bt X COS
  Brn
  BrTune
  Btu
  Bumh
  BtN
  c
  c
 c2
 CE

 C2H6
 ChGrt
 CI
 CL
 Cl Brk
 CO

 Coen
 Comb Cyc
 Con Part
 Coppus
 oor.
 Cup
 cyclone or eye
 D
 Damper
 •C
 •r
Det Stk
EPA
Equivalence Ratio,
    All burners in service
    Usually referring to air atomized fuel oil
    burner
    Air Registers
    Ambient temperature
    American Petroleum Institute
    Atomization
    Burner atomizing pressure adjustment
    Baseline
    Burnur(s)  out of servlca
    Burner number X out of  service
    Burner
    Boiler tune-up
    British Thrnul  Unit
    Burnham/Golden Scotch
    The Bibcock and Hilcox  Company
    Coal
    centii  one-hundredth
    Multiple carbon  atom hydrocarbons
    Combustion Oiglneering,  Incorporated
    Methane
    Ethane
    Chain  Grate
    Cast iron  furnace walls
    Unheated sample  line (cold line)
    Cleaver-Brooks Division
    Carbon  sonoxide
    Carbon  dioxide
    The Coen Company
    Combined cycle
    Condensible particulates
    Coppus  Engineering Corporation
    Data corrected to standard conditions
    Rotary  cup fuel oil atomizer
    Cyclone  furnace coal conbustor
    Diameter
   As  test  typei  air danper adjustment
   Degrees  Centigrade  or Celsius
   Degrees Fahrenheit
   Detroit Stoker Company
   Environmental Protection Agency
#  The actual fuel to air ratio divided by the
   otoichiometric fuel to air ratio.
   « > li   Fuel rich
   • < li   Air rich
  Faber
  FD
  FGR
  ft
  FT
  FW
  9
  G
  H
  HC
  High Air
  Mi load
  HL
 hr(s)
 Hz
 IBM
 ID
 in
 in. Hg
 Ind.  Cost).
 IR
 iwj
 J
 K
 k
 Keeler
 Kewan
 L
 Low Air
 Ibs or t
 H
 n

 MB o* MBtu
 NBH or MBtu/hr
 Meal
 MCH or Mcal/hr
 Mfg
 •in
MR

V
Vm or u
  Faber Engineering Company Incorporated
  Forced draft
  Flue gas recirculation
  foot
  Firetube furnace
  Foster Wheeler Corporation
  Grams
  Giga,  one billion
  Height
  Unburned hydrocarbons  measured as methane
  High excess  air
  High load
  Heated sanple  line  (hot line)
  Hour(a)
  Hertz; cycles  per second
  International  Boiler Works Company
  Inside diameter
  Inches
  Pressure in inches of mercury,  usually gage
  Industrial Combustion Incorporated
  Infrared
 Pressure in inches of water  column gage
 Joule
 Kelvin temperature scale
 Kilo; one thousand
 E. Keeler Company
 Kewanee Boiler  Corporation
 Length
 Low excess air
 Pounds
 Mega; one million
 As prefix:  milli; one-thousandth
 Meter
 One million British thermal units
 One million British thermal units per hour
 One million calories
 One million calories per hour
 Manufacturer
 Minutes
 Mixture ratio in terms of the air  flow rate
 divided by the fuel flow rate
Micro; one-millionth
«ierom»ter or "micron" (1O~*  meter)

-------
03
"2
Nebr
HG or G
NO
No.

No. Am.
NO I
Nrml Air
NSF-Oil

OD
OTA
o/s
p
Pa
Pea body
t
ppm

PS 300

psi
psia
psig
Pulv.
R
Ray
Ref Gas or RG
Riley
Ring
rms
RT

SCA

S

Sec
Sid.  Put.
Molecular nitrogen content of fuel, percent
by weight
Nitrogen gas
Nebraska Boiler Company
Natural Gas Fuel
Nitric oxide
Number
Nitrogen dioxide
North American Company, Cleveland, Ohio
Total nitrogen oxidea  (NO + NO  )
Normal excess air
Navy standard fuel-oil  (similar to No. 5 oil)
Oxygen gas
Outside diameter
Overfire air
Of f-stoichiometric
Preheated combustion air
Pascals, newtons per square meter
Pcabody Engineering  Company
See Equivalence  Ratio
Parts of constituent per million parts of
total volume
Pacific standard fuel-oil  No.  300
 (similar to No.  5  oil)
Pressure in pounds per square  inch
Pressure absolute  in pounds  per square inch
Pressure gauge  in  pounds per square  inch
Pulverized  coal  burning equipment
Refractory
Ray  Burner  Company
Refinery gas
Riley  Stoker Corporation
Natural  gas ring
Root  mean  square
Water  wall  tubes spaced such that  refractory
tile  is  exposed to flame
 Staged combustion air
Sulfur  content  of  fuel, percent by weight
Seconds
Seconds
Solid Particulates
Sngl Cyc
"2
S03
SOX
Sprd. or SpStk
Spud
Steam
Steam Injac.
Supr*
t
Temp.
TIW
Todd
TP
Trane
TT
U or UFS
uncor.

Union
V
viscosity

Vol
VPH
W
w
Wall Const.
WF
Kinkier
VTT
wtgh
Single cycle
Sulfur dioxide
Sulfur trioxide
Total sulfur oxides (SO  + SO )
Spreader stoker coal burning aquipaant
Natural gas gun
As Burner Type:  steam atomized  oil burners
Steam injection
Superior Combustion Industrial
Metric ton (103 kilograms)
Temperature
Titusville Iron Works
Todd-CEA Incorporated
Toxic Particulate
The Trane Company
Furnace walls wh^-re the watertubes arc tangent
Underfed stoker coal burning equipment
Data presented as measured and not corrected
to a standard condition
Union Iron Works
Voltage in volts
As test type:  fuel oil viscosity variation
via temperature change
Volume
Variable combustion air preheat
As unit of power:   Watt
As a dimension:  Width
Furnace wall construction
Furnace wall constructed  with welded  fin design
Winklei- burner manufacturer
Matertube  furnace
Westinghouse

-------
                                                          SECTION  11.0
                                                      CONVERSION  FACTORS
                                                  SI  Units to Metric or English Units
                                                                           To Obtain ppm
To Obtain
g/Mc.al
106 Btu
MBH/ft2
MBH/ft3
Btu
10 3 Ib/hr* or MBH
Ib/MBtu
ft
in
ft2
ft'
Ib
Fahrenheit

psig
psia
iwg (39.2eF)
From
ng/J
GJ
GJ-hr"1-^2
GJ-hr~1.m~3
gra cal
GJ/hr
ng/J
m
cm
D.2
B3
Kg
Celsius
Kelvin
Pa
Pa
Pa
*lb/hr of equivalent saturated steam
                                                    ~3
Multiply By
 0.004186

 0.08806
 0.02684
 3.9685 x 10
 0.948
 0.00233
 3.281
 0.3937
10.764
35.314
 2.205
tF = 9/5
-------
English and Metric Units to SI Units
                                                               Multiply Concentration
To Obtain
ng/J
ng/J
GJ-hr"1-*"2
GJ-hr""1-*"3
GJ/hr
m
cm
2
m
Kg
Celsius
Kelvin
Pa
Pa
Pa

*lb/hr of equivalent






From Multiply By
It/MBtu 430
g/Mcal 239
MBH/ft2 11.356
MBH/ft3 37.257
103 Ib/hr* 1.055
or 106 Btu/hr
ft 0.3048
in 2.54
ft2 0.0929
ft3 0.02832
lb 0.4536
Fahrenheit tc = 5/9 (tF~32)
tK - 5/9 (tp-32) + 273
psig P - (P . + 14.7X6.895X10 )
pa psig
psia P - (P . )(6.895X10J)
^ pa psia
iwg (39.2«F) P - (P.) (249.1)

saturated steam






To Obtain
ng/J of
Natural Gas Fuel
CO
HC
NO or NOx (as equivalent
SO2 or SOx
Oil Fuel
CO
HC
NO or NOx (as equivalent
SO or SOx
Coal Fuel
CO
HC
NO or NOx (as equivalent
SO2 or SOx
Refinery Gas Fuel (Location 33)
CO
HC
NO or NOx (as equivalent
SO2 or SOx
Refinery Gas Fuel (Location 39)
CO
HC
NO or NOx (as equivalent
in ppm at 3% 02 by
0.310
0.177
0.510
0.709
0.341
0.195
0.561
0.780
0.372
0.213
0.611
0.850
0.306
0.175
0.503
0.700
0.308
0.176
0.506
                                                  N02)
                                    S02 or SOx
                                                                 0.703

-------
                            APPENDIX A

             BOILER EMISSION MEASUREMENTS OF PHASE I

        All of the measurements made during Phase I on the test boilers
when operated at normal settings and at low total nitrogen oxides
                                                         (4)
emissions settings are summarized in the following table.  The data are
tabulated in order of Test Run Numbers.  The Test Run Number consists
of two parts:  the basic test designation which corresponds to a
particular boiler-fuel combination to the left of the dash and the run
number within the given test to the right of the dash.  A typical test
consisted of six to ten individual measurement runs made with different
settings of the boiler controls.
        The Location Number in the second column positions the test site
geographically on Figure 2-1.  The columns  from Boiler Number through
Capacity indicate where the particular test falls  among  the principal
test variables.
        The columns to the  right of the  one labeled "Test  Load"  are
data taken during the corresponding Test Run.
        For almost  all boilers  four basic  types of measurements  were
made:
        1.  Baseline:  ^80% of  rated  capacity  and  normal control settings.
        2.  High  Load:  Highest load  obtainable  at the  time on  the  unit
                        under  test.
         3.   Low Load:  Minimum load  at which unit  normally is  operated.
        4.   Low Air:  Minimum  excess  air level at  baseline load at which
                      the boiler could be  operated without smoke, excessive
                      carbon monoxide, or  hydrocarbon emissions.
        When  a boiler had  two  or more burners, often a test was run with
 the  fuel  to  one of  the burners  turned off  and  only air passing through
 the  burner and into the furnace.   The air-only burner then was acting
 like an overfire  air port.   This type of test  was designated by  "BOOS"
                                  241

-------
for burners-out-of-service.   The test type designation "Register"
indicates a test that investigated the effect on the emissions of
increasing or decreasing the air swirl by changing the register
setting.
        The column titled Test Fuel indicates the fuel being fired at
the time of the test run.  When more than one fuel type was being
burned, e.g., Test run 23, the entry so indicates.
                                 242

-------
Table A-l.  FIELD TEST MEASUREMENTS

TWt

*..
1-12

1-8

i-11

2-5

2-4

2-G

3-5

3-2

3-6

4-1

4-2

4-5

5-1

5-2

5-3

6-6

6-2

6-5

6-17

6-26



Loca-
tion
19
«
19

19

19

19

19

15

15

15

5



5

1

1

1

7

7

7

7

7


M-
• i
«e.
2

2

2

2

2

2

4

4

4

9

9

9

9

9'

9

9

9

9

9

9



Data
•JVM
5/14

5/13

5/14

5/14

5/14

5/15

4/9

4/9

4/9

12/13

12/13

12/13

11/9

11/9

11/9

1/7

1/7

1/7

1/7

1/7



•ollar
no.
1

1

1

1

1

1

123-1

123-1

123-1

716-3

716-3

716-3

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3


ta«t
cata-
oorr
1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

m-
naca
IYP-
WT

WT

WT

KT

V.T


•urnar
trf*
Steam

Strain

Stear.

Air

Air

WT

WT

WT

CT

WT

WT

W7

2 WT
1
2

WT

2 WT

2

2

WT

WT
1
2

2

2

WT

WT

WT

Air

Cup

Cup

Cup

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Fang

Ring


Taat
ru*l
*6 Oil

«6 Oil

#6 Oil

*6 Oil

#6 Oil

t;6 Oil

#5 Oil

#5 Oil

X5 Oil

NG

.NG

NG

NG

NG

:;c

Steam j>5 Oil
!
Stoair.

*5 Oil

Steam *5 Oil

Stear.

Steam


*5 Oil

*5 Oil



Taat
Typa
Base-
line
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line
Low
Air
uOAun
Press.
Ease-
line
Mi
Load
Low
Load
P.-.sc-
linc
Hi
Load
Low

Capacity
t/hr
(kl/hr)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.35
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
S.63
(19)
8.63
(19)
8.63
(19)
11. <
'25)
11.4
(25)
11.4
Load (25)
Sjso-
line
Hi
Lc-ad
Lew
13.2
(29)
13.2
(25)
13.2
Air (29)
Base-
line
hi
Load
Lo1*
Load
Low
Air
hit
Load
t/hr
(Hl/lir)
6.36
(14)
2.72
(G)
6.36
(14)
6.81
[151
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
5.45
(12)
6.36
(14)
3.G3

&»•«;•••
<*°2
(fcdry
3.6

11.0

2.3

4.4

2.8

4.7

MOK
•MUM
a/Ncal

.806
(350)
.936
(4.-S)
no
lot UM
1/Hcal
(P1-)
.797
(316)
mo
COUUM
•/Meal

.834
(362)
.OC1 .933
(417) (405)
.763 .737 .753
(331)
.770
(334)
.633
(320)
.700
(329)
.774
(330) (336)
.611
(277) (265)
.637
(293)
7.6 .461

5.3

14.4
(200)
.320
(135)
.673
(223)
.449
.601
(261)
.664
(2b3)
.461
(1?5) (2CO)
.290
(126)
.627 .018
(8) ! (272)
5.03
(20)
10.4
(23)
3.36
(7.4)
9.99
(22)
9.09
2.9 i .157
(72)
2.15

12.5
.142
(65J
.175
(208)
.143
(63)
.135
(62).
.170
(SO) ' (78)
3.4

».o
(22)
9.99 2.7
(22)
30.6 26.8
(05)
38. C
(55)
38.6
(35) C25)
3C-.6
(35)
30.6
(05)
t»3 ;o.o
DCS
«i5)
9.99
(22)
25.4
ISii)
22.1
(50)
7.6

4.7

.153
(70)
.164
(75)
.162
(74)
.758
( 329)
.742
(322)
14.5 .862

4.5

8.0

-
-
-
.
.
-
.304
(132)
.604
' (202)
.140
U4)
.135
(62)
.190
(37)
.146
(67)
.157
(72)
.153
(70)
.CC2 : .604
(346) <349)
.797 ; .763
(346) (342)
.917 .894
(374) | (203) <3r.8)
.560 .505
(243) i254)
. 567
(246)
.571
(243)
.555 .560
(241)
(243)


"l
%dry
13.4

8.2

14.8

12.9



12.6

10.4

11.8

5.8

9.6

10.1

4.0

9.6

9.2

10.0

10.2

12.2

6.2

12.0

9.5


CO
VMcal
ipp-l
0
(0)
0
(0)
.062
(45)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
<0)
0
(0)
.332
(234)
0
(0)
.228
(170)
>2.57
(>2COO)
0
(0)
.219
(159)
.030
(56)
.331
(2r,0)
.119
(1C)
.0-14
(2£)
.114
(29)
.012
(0)
.039
(20)

DC
o/Mc.l
IPT-I
.026
(32)
_
_
.022
(28)
-
-
-
-
.053
(60)
_
-
-
-
-
-
.023
(30)
.030
(41)
.0'15
(28)
-
-
-
-
-
-
.103
(12)
.103
(15)
.022
(10)
.014
(1C)
.016
(14)

Kx
3/Mcal
(PF-I
4.64
(1448)
.
-
_
-
4.42
(1378)
-
-
„
_
2.78
(868)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
-
-
—
-
-
-


•°2
«/Hcal
(Pt»>
4.56
(1424)
.
-
-
-
4.36
(1353)
-
—
_
_
2.76
(861)
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
—
-
—
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
—
-
-
-

Total
Partle.
«/Xc«l
(l/HBt^l
_
-
_
.
.2743
(.1524
-
-
-
-
.5238
(.2313)
.2020
(.1122)

-
-
-
.OC90
(.0050)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
"
-
-
-

Solid
Fartlc.
o/Hcal
(I/MB tu>
_
-
_
-
.2C05
(.1447)
-
-
-
—
.5072
(.2813)
.1728
(.0260)

-
-
-
.OC23
(.0013)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
—
-
-
-
-
-

Bollaz
Effi-
ciency
%
65

-

86

85

65

-

74

78

74

78

73

70

60

77

77

86

63

77

84

61

ueh-
arach
Sao It.
spot no.

-
-

-

-

—

-
-
-

-

-
-

-
-

-

-

—

-

-

*

™

~

~

                                                           6001-43

-------
Table A-l.  Continued

TMt
ftun
7-10
7-5

7/9

7-4

7-13

7-15

8-5

8-2


8-4

6-6

9-1
9-<

9-3

9-6

9-10

10-2

10-7

10-4

10-12
12-20

Loca-
17
17

17

17

17

17

20

20


20

20

18
ie

18

18

18

16

16

16

16
1

M-
110.1
2
2

2

2

2

2

2

2


2

2

2
2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2
9

cat.
4/29
4/29

4/29

4/29

4/30

4/30

5/20

5/20


5/20

5/21

5/8
5/8

5/8

5/9

5/9

4/22

4/23

4/22

4/23
12/4

Boll.r
HO.
T-8
T-8

T-8

T-6

T-8

7-8

4

4


4

4

2
2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
1

c»t»-
2
2

2

2

2

2

2

2


2

2

2
2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2
2
rur-
nac«
Typ.
wr !
WT

WT

WT

HT

WT

rfT

WT


WT

WT

WT
WT

WT

WT

WT

WT

WT

WT

WT
WT

[Buziwr
Stca.ii
Steam

Steari

Steam

Stean

Stean

Steam

Stean


Stean

Stea--n

Steani
Steam

Stean

S Lean

Stean

Stean

Steam

Steajn

Steam
Ring

Fuel
*2 Oil
*2 Oil

*2 Oil

32 Oil

*2 Oil

*2 Oil

#6 Oil

*6 Oil


£6 Oil

16 Oil

»6 Oil
#6 Oil

*6 Oil

#5 Oil

*6 Oil

«6 Oil

*6 Oil

*6 Oil

*6 Oil
T!G

Typ.
Base-
line
Hi
Lead
Low
Load
Low
Air
Air
Peci.
Air
Reg. K
TopBOC
Base-
line
63ltfax
Hi
Load
75-Majc
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Lev
Air
D»l
COS
Bare-
line HJ
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Air
Heqi.
Ease-
Lire
Capacity
(kt/hi)
49.9
(110)
49.9
(110)
4?. 9
(110)
49.9
(110
49.9
(110)
49.9
(110)
)S
36.3
(80)

36.3
(30)

36.3
(80)
36.3
(80)
40.9
(30)
40.9
OO)
4C.9
(90)
40.9
(90!
40.9
(90)
29.5
I (65)

29. 5
(65)
29.5
(65)
29.5
(£5)
13.2
(29)
" £2 IE,,,.;'
Ul/hr) ( "o dry)
40 5.7 \
(88)
49.9 5.8
(110) :
14.5 8.2
(32)
40.4 3.8
(89)
37.2 6.6
(82)
25 12.0
(55)
23.2 • 5.7
(51)

27.2 5.2
(60) ,

15 6.5
(33)
23.2 4.7
(51)
32.2 7.4
(71)
35.9 6.8
(79)
18.6 8.6
(41)
32.7 7.0
(72)
27.2 8.2
(CO)
24.5 4.7
(54)

11.4 13.3
(23)
24.1 i -.6
(53)
22.0 3.9
(43.5)
10.9 2.5
(24)
•Ot LIB.
- Ig-i
.408
.177)
.541
;235)
.364
USE)
-
-
.415
(180)
.502
(218)
.703
(305)

.742
(322)

.634
(275)
.618
(2tS)
.5?7
(246)
.553
(240)
.445
(193)
.423
(214)
.4"
(175)
.429
(186)

.034
(275)
.424
(184)
.•101
(174)
.212
197)
Hot Lin.
9/Mc.l
{pp»1
.401 i
(174)
.532
(231)
.359
(1S6)
-
-
.396
(172)
.498
(216)
.687
(298)

.7=4
(314)

.624
(271)
.604
C62)
.560
(243)
.546
(237)
.;33
(190)
.s24
'.2101
.403
(175)
.417
(181)

.615
(267)
.4?2
(103)
.399
(173)
ColdLiM
f/Kc.1
(PF-)
.406
(176)
.541
(235)
.357
(155)
.373
(162)
.408
(177)
.456
(198)
.689
(229)

.730
(317)

.643
(279)
.618
(268)
.553
(240)
.j:-s
(232)
.'.35
(189)
.477
(207)
.406
(176)
.412
(179)

.622
(270)
. 372
(170)
.410
(178)
.201
(92)

%dL
11.6
11.4

9.8

13.0

11.2

7.6

11.4

11.6


10.7

12.0

10.7
10.8

9.7

10.7

10.2

12.4

6.6

13.0

12.8
10.0
00
1/HC.1
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

0
(0)

0
(0)
0
(C)
0
(0)
.180
(100)
0
(0)
.016
(9)
C
(0)
0
(C)

0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
.194
(145
BC
(PP.I

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
-

-
-

-
-
-
"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_

-
-
-
-
-
.032
(42)
*0*
,/Hc.L
.35
(108)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
-
1.54
(480)

-
-

-
-
-
-
1.55
(485)
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
-
1.56
(488)

-
-
-
-
-
.014
(4.72
•°J
9/K.l

.32
(100)
-
—
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
™
1.5
(468)

-
-

-
-
-
"
1.49
(465)
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
—
1.52
(473)

-
—
-
—
-
.013
(4.30
f.rtlc.
<«/mtu>
.0353
(.0196)
—
—
—
—
-
—
-
~
-
"*
.1562
(.0368)

"
-

-
-
-
™
.1964
t. 1091)
-
-
-
—
*•
~
—
"*
.2032
(.1129

-
—
-
*•
-
.0045
(.002G
Partic .
9/Hc.l
(1/MBtU)
.0329
(.0183)
•~
"*
~
~
—
~
~
"
-
*
.1267
(.0704)


-

-
•
-
**
.1642
(.0912)
-
-
-
-
-
~
-
"
.1881
t (.1045

-
[ —
-
—
-
.0027
(.0015
Jti-
ijncy
S7
--

— •

--

—

--

80

80


82

83

82
83

83

83

82

85

82

88

85
77
.each
SM««
Spot.,,
-
—

—

-

-

-

-

-


-
t
-

-
-

-

-

-

-

"

~

*
-
                                                    6001-43

-------
                                                    Table A-l.  Continued

tMt
•0.
12-28

12-22

12-29

13-4

13-3


13-10

13-1

14-1

14-6

14-9


14-4

15-1

15-6

15-8

15-3

15-12

16-12


16-8


16-16


16-10




loea
ticn
: 1
I
1

1

2

2

t
2

2

10

10

10


10

9

9

3

9

9

15


15


15


15



«•-
- (ion
NO.
9

9

9

9

9


9

9

6

6

6


6

6

6

6

6

6

4


4


4


4




D.t«
73/74
12/4

12/4

12/4

11/28

11/28


11/28

11/18

2/26

2/26

2/26


2/26

2/22

2/22

2/22

2/22

2/22

4/3


4/3


«/3


«/3




•oiltr
No.
1

1

1

2

2


2

2

4

4

4


4

BC-1

8C-1

BC-1

BC-1

BC-1

32-10


32-10


32-10


32-10



Tut
c«t«-
JS£Z_
2

2

2

2

2


2

2

2

2

2


2

2

2

2

2

2

2


2


2


2



fur-
MC«
Typ«
V>"

WT

WT

WT

WT


WT

WT

WT

VT

OT


WT

WT

KT

WT

KT

W7

WT


WT


WT


WT




Burn«r
Tn>«
Ring

Ring

Rir.g

Ring

Ring


Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring


Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring

Under
Fed
Stoker
Ur.Ucr
Fed
Stoker
Under
Fed
Stokez
Under
Fed
StoXez


TMt
n»l
SC

KG

NG

KG

NC


NG

NG

NG
,
NG

NG


NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

NG

Coal


Coal


Coal


Coal




TMt
Typ«
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
3-ise-
line
Hi
Load

Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
IiOad

Low
7.ir
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Lead
Low
Air
BS4
COS
Base-
line

Hi
Load

Low
Load

Low
Air


Capacity
t/hr
(kl/hr)
12.2
(29)
13.2
(29)
13.2
(23)
2ft. 8
(59)
26.8
(59)

26.8
(59)
26.8
(59)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(6C)

27.2
(60)
27.2
(C-0)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(60)
27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

f..t
Load
t/hr
2000)
1.37
(1015)
. 17o
(125)

.133
(55)
.858
(665)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)

.378
(290)
.013
(1C)
.051
(40)
>2.33
(>2000)
>2.48
(>2COO)
.015
10
0
(0)

0
(0)

0
(0)

0
(0)


MC
«/!*•!
Ion)
.019
(24)
.050
(43)
.023
(34;
.021
(27)
.022
(28)

.037
(27)
.020
(28)
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
-

-
-

-
-

-
—


XX
9/Hcal
(oo>)
_
-
-
-
.017
(5.S)
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.88
(540)

-
-

-
-

-
-


«°l
9/Hcil
_
-
-
-
.015
(5.0)
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
—
1.79
(513)

-
-

-
-

-
—


P.rtic.
J/Mc.l
tl/HBtj)
.
-
-
-
.0189
(.0105)
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
.0030
(.0045)
-
-
-
-

-
-
.0083
(.0046)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
•

-
-

-
—


Futlc.
9/nc«l
ll/mtu)
_
-
-
-
.0009
(.0005)
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
.0047
(.0026)
-
-
-
-

-
-
.0045
(.0025)
-
-
-
-
-
—
-
—
-
-

-
—

-
•'

-
—


Effi-
ciency
4a
77

73

79

77

76


72

78

80

78

77


79

79

75

76

77

77

76


74


74


77



• raeh
^ok«
spot He.
-

-

-

-

-


-

-

-

-

-


-

-

-

-

-

-

-


-


-


-


to
*>
Ln
                                                                                                         6001-43

-------
                                                 Table A-l.   Continued
*M
m.
17-6


17-8


17-10


17-15


18-3

18-13

ie-6

Un-
tie*
15


15


15


15


11

11

11

ie-:o 11
1

19-6

19-5

19-7

19-9

20-6

2C-7

20-9

20-K

21-6

.21-5

21-4

21-8


21

21

21

21

21

21

21

21

IB

18

18

18


M-
|10>
Ho.
4


4


4


4


4

4

4

4

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2


DM*
TJ/74
«/8


4/8


4/8


4/8


3/5

3/5

3/6

3/6 .

5/30

5/30

5/30

5/30

5/29

5/29

5/29

5/29

5/2

5/2

5/2

5/2


•01 IV
Me.
32-13


32-13


32-13


32-13


1

1

J

1

2

2

TM«
dt»-
JS-,
2


2


2


2


2

2

2
rw-
MC«
tn»
KT


WT


•unor
*H~
Under
Fed
Stoker
Under
Fed
Stoker
WT junder
Fed
'Stoker
WT |under
Fed
jstoker
KT
	
77

WT
Spread

Spread

TMt
ru.1
TWt
*»•
Coal i Ease-


Coal
line

Ki
Lead

Coal


Coal


Coal

Coal

Spread Coal
1
2

2

2

2 2

2

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3


2

2

2

2

2
WT

Spread


Lew
Load

Low
Air

Base-
line
Low
Load
Low
Air
Coal |'li
(Load
WT Spread Coal Base-
; line
WT

Spread
Coal :;ii
Load
WT Spread

vr

WT

WT


Spread
Coal Low
toad
Coal :Low
|Air
Spread Coal 3ase-

Epread
lir.e
Coal !Hi
! [Load
WT (Spread Coal jLow

KT

3 WT

3

3

3




Spread

•Load
Cool |tow
Air
St,ean «6 Oil JBase-

WT Steam

WT Steam

WT



Steam



C6 Oil

#6 Oil

*5 Oil

lir.e
Hi
Load
Low
C«l»clty
t/hr
(*«/»»)
27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

27.2
(60)

61.3
(135)
61.3
t..t
U>M
t/Jir
(kf/Iir)
20.9
(46)

27.2
(60)

14.5
(32)

20.9
(45)

49.9
(110)
Bu«*«
<%iry>
9.8


7.1


10.5


7.0


7.0

•Ox
BotLlM
«/Nc.l
no
Hot Lia*
«/Mul
(pp.1
•0
ColdUM
9/»c«l
.50-1 .543 .377
(224) (218) (229)

.627
(249)

.499
(193)

.506

.610
(242)

.489

.63<
(252)

.516
(194) i (205)
i
.491 .605
(201) (1S5) (240)

.932
(370)
22.7 ! 11.6 1.207
(135) (50)
61.3 51.76 4.9
(135)
61.3
(135)
22.7
•(50)
22.7
(50)
22.7
(50)
22.7
(50)
34.1
(75)
34.1
(75)
34.1
(75)
34.1
(75)
47.7
(105)
47.7
(105)
47.7
!,oad (105)
Low 4 7 . 7
Air

(105)
(114)
5?.0
(130)

7.2

.914
(363)

1.555
(479) (450) 1
.844 .811 }
(335) ; (322) [
1.071 | 1.035

(425) (411)
18.2 8.0 1.171 1.154 1.118
(40)
23.2
(51!
14.5
(32)
16.6
(41!
7.4
(455) (458! (444)
1.189
(472)
1.174
(46? )
1.134
(450)

10.4


12.3


8.2


12.0


12.0

9.0

13.5

12.2

10.6

11.4

CO
f/Nol
0
(0)

0
(0)

0
(0)

.640
nc
t/H°*l

_ .

_
fc

_
_

_
(320)

.056
(28)
0
(0)
.219
(126)
.C57
(281)
.054
(25)
.092
(40)
9.0 1.171 ! 1.151 ' 1.C78 9.8 .058

5.8

28.6 7.8
(63)
34.5
(7G)
20.0
(44)
28.6
(63)
3C.3
(CO)
45
(99)
16.8
(37)
36.2
(20)

5.9

9.9

5.9

6.3

5.0

8.7

6.1


(465.) j (457)
.831 .814
(333) (323)
1.171 1.154
(405) (4SS!
1.023 1.023
(412) ' !4C6)
(42S)
.C06
(320)
1.116
(443)
.957
(380)
1.242 i 1.199 1.141
(493) i (476! (453)
.975
(337)
.947 .902
(376) (358)
-S7B i .571 .571
(251) (248) (246)
.618 .569 .571
(266)
.530
(230)
.512
(222)
(247)
.521
(2J6)
(248)
.523
(227)
.512 .530
(22?) (234)


12.6

10.7

12.6

8.9

12.6

11,2

12.0

9.7

11.3

(25)
.037
(20)
.191
(90)
.204
(110)
.154
(61)
.111
(60)
0
(0)
.208
(130)
0
(0)
0
(0)

.024
(21)
_
_
.007
(7)

_
.013
(11)
.COS
(4)
.012
(9)
.021
(20)
.013
(11)
.014
(13)
.023
(16)
.013
(18)
_
-
-
-
-


_
Ka
1/Mul
«°J
t/K«l
«M«1
Mrtlc.
9/Hc.l
M1U
rutic.
1/»cm\
2.383 1 2.367


_
_

_
_

_
_

6.46
(1.324) [1.315)

_
_

_
_


_

6.4
(1048) (1830)
_
_
_
_
_


_
_



6.54 6.29
(1617) (1799)

-
-
_
_
_
_
5.94
(1698)
_
_
-
-
.
_
1.62
(505)
-
-
-
_
_
-
_
_
_
5.82
(1665)
_
-
_
-

_
_

_
_


_

5.166
(2.87)

_
_
_
.
„
1.505
(.8369)
-
-
_
_
.9364
(.548)
.4289
(.239)
_
_
-
-
.430
_
(.239)
1.55 -1154


_

_
_


_

5.094
(2,83)

_
_
_
..
_
1.444
(.8020
-
-
_
.
.9028
(.545)
.3447
(.1915)
_
_
_
-
.363
(.204)
.1040
(4S5) (.0641) (.0581)
-
-
-
-
_
_ . _

-
-
.
_
_

-
-
_
-
.
_

Ktllu
Cffl-
c^-c,
72


74


68


75


82

81

82

80

81

79

79

82

76

77

75

79

63

84

85

85

•taeh
BmoHm






_


_


_

.

,.

.

_

_

_

„

_

_

-



.

-

_

.

I
to
                                                                                                      6001-43

-------
                                                  Table A-l.  Continued

1Mt
•B


toa-
21-20 IB

22-1

22-4

22-9

32-16

23-1

23-2

23-6

23-10

24-3

24-2

24-4

24-7

25-3

2S-4

25-6

25-9

26-1

26-7

'6-9



lS

18

18

18

8

8

a

e

9

9

9

9

6

6

6

f>

12

12

12



f^^
lion
2

2

2

2

2

9

9

9

9

6

6

6

6

9

9

9

9

4

4

4




D«t*
73/74
V3

5/6

5/6

5/6

5/8

1/14

1/14

1/14

1/14

2/20

2/20

2/20

2/21

12/20

12/20

12/20

12/10

3/19

3/19

3/19




•aU«r
3

4

4

4

4

10

10

10

10

BC-6

BC-6

BC-6
'
BC-6

3

3

3

3

24

24

24



TMt
C«t«-
3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3 .

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3

3



rvr-
MC«
rw
HT

WT

WT

KT

WT

WT

WT

»T

»T

kT

WT

n

HT

«T

*T

ulv-
>rizer
?ulv-
crizer
Pulv-
erizer



T»«t
riwi
»6 Oil

#6 Oil

#6 Oil

*6 Oil

«6 Oil

•soil
S RG
»50il
£ RG
MSOil
S KG
HSOil
& KG
SIC

NG


6.6

6.8

8.2

6.0

10.5

8.0

7.3

1.35

4.7

3.8

3.45

4.0

2.6

12.0

11.5

14.0

11.0

5.3

5.3

5.8



notuM
«rtfc«i
.512
(222)
.553
(240)
.737
(320)
.532
(231)
.463
(201)
.396
(172)
.382
(166)
.4i7
(194)
.412
(179)
.817
(374)
.882
(404)
'.775
(355)
.808
(370)
.629
(288)
.799
(366)
.240
(110)
.563
(258)
.952
(378)
1.108
(440)
1.015
(403)

HO
Hot tin*
9/HC«l
, tPP-l
.505
(219)
.537
(233)
.733
(318)
.518
(225)
.452
(196)
.387
(168)
.382
(166)
.417
(131)
.412
(179)

-
_
-
-
*
.
-
.629
(288)
.775
(355)
.240
(110)
.563
(258)
.907
(360)
1.078
(428)
.997

ColdLljw
I/HOI
_ ."*?.'_
.502
(218)
.541
(235)
.705
(306)
.521
(226)
.510
(221)
.376
(163)
.364
(158)
.401
(174)
.396
(172)
.777
(356)
.841
(385)
.738
(338)
.769
(352)
.526
(241)
.600
(275)
.170
(78)
.463
(212)

_—
	
—
	
(396) ! 	



%tfrr
11.0

11.0

9.6

11.5

9.0

9.3

9.7

5.0

11.2

9.8

10.0

9.8

10.6

4.6

4.8

-.8

5.2

13.6

13.6

13.2



CO

-------
                                                    Table A-l.  Continued

Hun
*>.
25-2
26-14
27-1
27-1C

27-8

27-4

28-2
2s-ii

13-7

2E-6


25-15
29-5
29-'
22-5
29-8
29-1
20-14
30-11
30-13
:o-is

loca-
tion
17
12
14
14

14

14

14
14

14

14


14
13
13
13
13
13
9
9
3
9

,ion
No.
4
4
4
4

4

4

4
4

4

4


4
4
4
:
4
6
6
6
6

Data
73/74
3/19
3/19
4/15
4/15

4/15

4/15

4/17
4/17

4/17

4/17


4/17
3/25
3/25
3/25
3/25
3/25
2/19
'""
2/19
2/19

Boiler
Do.
24
24
1
1

j_

1

4
4

4

4


4
2
2
2
2
VA-1
VA-1
VA-1
VA-1
Tart
C»ta-
gory
1
3
3
3

3

3

3
3

3

3


^
4
4
4
4
;
Fur-
n«c«
TyP*
vrr
WT
WT
NT

KT

WT

WT
WT

K-

WT


WT
„
WT
WT
WT
WT
KT
KT
"
,

Burner
Typ«
Pulv-
erizer
Pulv-
erizer
Spread
Soread

Spread

Spread

Spread
Spread



Sort-ad


Sprecd
Stear,
Stean
S tea.ii
Steam
Steam
Ping
Rir.g
Ring
Fling

T«t
Fuel
Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal

Coal

Coal

Coal
Coal



Coal


Ccal
#6
*6
*6
#6
*6
\^*
MG
KG
NG

Taal
Typa

Regi-
ster
3asc-
line
Ki
Load
Low
Load

Air
Ease-
line
Hi
LC3CJ





Low
:;0x
Ease-
lire
Hi
Load
Lew
Lead
Low
Air
Fuel
Base-
line
Ki
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Capacity
t/hr
(k«/hr)
102
(2:51
1C2
1225)
68.1
(150)
68.1
(150

(150)
63.1
(1*0)
1C4
(230)
1C4
(230;
10'.
(23°)
104
'230)
.^Jjj
1C4
(230)
227
(500)
227
(500)
227
(SCO)
227
(500)
227
(5SO)
135
COO)
13.',
(300!
13C
(300)
130
(300)
T.st
t/hr
(k«Ar)
03 i
;.?:)
61. 7
(1BC)
54.5
(120)
68 '
(150)

(50)
55 B
(123)
73.5
(162)
"0 1
(2"0^
3'i 1
( 7i'
OS 1


65.0
(145)
132
(400)
2 36
(520)
132
(4CO)
182
(400)
"J
193
(425)
116
(250)
127
U"0)
W.9
(143)
110
(259)
Kxc«*«
(% dry!

5.1
10.2
9 0

158

8 9

10.8
1 0 ^



3 Q


12.6
9.5
6.2
8.5
7.6
9.0
3.1
4.0
2.6
2.3
HOx
«/«<:• 1
(DP«)

1360)
-927
( 3r 3)
1.393
(553)
T 42r-
' 567)

(63G)

(471)
1.37G
(5^7)
1 ^ "* *,


(017N
n-'1"1


. 902
.(394)
.CIS
(267)
.415
(1KO)
.615
(267)
.4:4
(211)
.622
(270)
.^34
(iro)
..::o
COG)
.370
(173)
.413
(ieo)

5/HCll
(PP.!

(J'i-1)
.912
1 • 3°3
(553)
( ^4 j)
l- J'
(610;
i i 25
(4471
1.277
1507)
1 ^^''



PC '

(-4-i)
(3GO)
.604
(262)
.401
(174)
.604
(262)
.470
(204)
.5S5
(254)
.417
(I?!)
.378
(173)
.•'.28
(Iff)
.
9/"c«l
(PC")

	
1.350
(536)


(60s;


1.282
(500)






.917
(364)
	
.413
(13°;
.428
(196)
.356
(104)
.393
(110)

"i
%dr.

13.4
9.8

5 0



9.6
9 8






8.3
9.2
11.2
9.2
10.6
10-0
10.4
9.8
10.4
10. e

3/Mc.l
(ponl

	
0
(0)


(0)


(0)






0
(0)
coo
(0)
0
(0)
c
(0)
o
1C)
.036
(28)

g/Mc*l
(DTH)

(5)
.006






	






.005
(4)
.004
(4)
.005
(4)
.007
(7)
.016
(13)
.002
(3)
0
(0)
.031
(2)
.001
(1)

«/MC«l
loc.)

_„
4.6?9
!1?44)





3.273
(936)






2.P57
(317)
4.814
(1532)
	
*°i
g/Hcai
(DD«)

— _
4.552
(1302)





3.255
(931)






2.BC4
(802)
4.801
(1493)
|
Total
9/*c«l
(•/MBto)

	
4.167
(2.315)





.8566
(.475?)






.5201
(.3445)
.6743
(.3749)
.0149
(.0083)
soil a
9/He«l
(f/MBtu)

—
3.629
(2.016)


	


.6102
(.3390)






. 5939
C.3310)
.6473
(.3596)
.0049
(.0027)
Bollar
CT"

85
81





80






6C
78
79
78
80
84
S3
85
64
Bach-
Smoka
Spot No.

-
-





-






-
-
to
4^
00
                                                                                                         6001-43

-------
Table A-l.  Continued
TM*
•0.
30-30

30*26

31-1
32-4
"2-2


32-3

32-5

33-3
33-6
33-10
34-11
W-8

34-10
35-1

55-3



)6-2




Loc«
tin
9

9

20
20


20

?n

3
3
3
23
23

23
26

26



IS




«•-
lien
So.
6

6

4
2
2


2

2

9
9
9
3
3
3
3
5










D.M
71/14
2/19

2/19

3/28
5/22
5/22


5/22

5/22

12/6
12/6
12/6
6/11
6/7
ft/7
6/26










•oilu
Ho.
VA-1

VA-1

2
42
42


42

42

2
2
2
1
1
j
1
2










*Mt
ut«-
»°H.
4

4

4
4
4


4

4

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5










Pur.
IMC*
»yp«


dT

XT
:VT




T

FT
FT
FT
FT
FT

FT
FT










•urnvr
Typ«

ng
Ri

Pulv-
erizer
Cyc-
lone

.one


O'c-
lO"C
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air
Air










T»«t
Fvxl


KG

Coal
Coal






„
;,
• 2
1(6
*6
#6
*6
#5
1










TMt
Typ«

-*1"
B#3

Base-
line
3osc-
iine






BuEG"
line fi
ii Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Ba^e-
1 ine fi
Ki Load
Low

Air
low
Fuel
Ttirp.
3ase-
lir.e &
ii Load


J-O.




Lead


Capccitj
t/hr
(k«/hr)


136

227
(500)
is;
(100)






4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
3.18
(7)
3.18

>•!
3.18
(7)
4.99
(11)







117)


• t..t
^n>rt
t/hr
(M/hr)
HO

91 7

182
(400)
143
C320)






3.18
(7)
1.36
(3)
2.27
(5)
3. 04
(6.7)
1.14

(6.7)
3.04
(6.7)
5-40
(11.9)







(2;)


BW*M
(%*ry




9.8
3.4






7.2
7.0
3.6
5.4
10.3
1 0
3.9
5.6
4.1










MB
Hot Lin.
9/Hc«l
> (cm)




1.461
(580)
2. CIS
(SCO)






.330
(169)
.350
(152)
.343
(145)
.687
(293)
.781

(2^9)
.728
(316)
.4Z2
(183)







(214)


Hot Lin.
1/Nc.l
(pp»
!



1.375
(540
2.003
(795)






.346
(150)
.327
(142)
.675
(293)
.781

(247)
.71-1
1310)
.410
(178)







!211V


NO
Cold tin*
9/r*C*l
(POM)




1.985
(788)






.270
(117)
.306
(133)
.620
(269)
.763

(244)
.600
(295)
.369
(160)







(215)


*"'
%dr*
I



10.0
15.0






9.5
10.0
12.3
11.8
8.0

11.8
12.8







i


CO
l/Ncal





(0)
0
(0)






0
(0)
0
(0)
.030
(18)
.024

(25)
.C30
(13)
0
(0)







(20)


HC
9/MC.I
(ml
1



.006
(4)






.078
(75)
.031
(30)
.022
(26)
.006
(7)
.022

(11)
.007
(7)







	


•Ox
*/HC*l
(cm)




5.605
(1603)
3.369
(1135)






.235
(89)
3.615
(1128)

2.633
(623)







	


».
1/Hcal
locm)




5.466
(1569)
3.923
(1122)






.282
(88)
3.577
(1116)

2.609
(814)







	


tartie.
,/Mc.l
[|/MBtjl




18.49
(10.27)
2.207
(1.226)






.0736
(.0409)
.680
(.489)

.1141
(.0634)







---


Partic.
1/IK>1





IS. 41
(10.23)
2.147
(1.193)






.0369
(.0205)
.373
(.207)

.0922
(.0511)







	


Effi-
Ci^


84

81
as
87


88

88

84
84
66
88

87


87



75



•e.eh
SMok.
Soot No.




-






-
2.3
1.0
4 0
1.0










                                                   6001-43

-------
Table A-l.  Continued
*«t
•»
W.
37-8

J7-4

37-2

37-6

28-2
_
38-1

38-4

39-8

39-1


33-3

39-4

•sc-l


40-6

40-2

41-6


41-1

41-5

41-10

42-1

43-1


UX*
tloo
5

5

5

5

4

4

4

4

26


26

26

23


23

23

3


3

3

3

22

22


*•-
- .ion
NO.
9

9

9

9

9

9

9

9

5


5

5

3


3

3

9


9

9

9

3

3


0»W
73/74
12/17

12/17

12/17

12/17

12/7

12/7

12/7

12/7

6/2 <


6/24

6/24

6/10


6/10

6/10

12/5


12/5

12/5

12/5

6/3

6/4


«oH.r
No.
243-3

248-3

248-3

248-3

4

4

4

4

2


2

2

1


1

1

2


2

2

2

1

2


TWt
Cat*
JSS.
5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

5


5

5

5


5

S

5


5

5

5

5

S


For-
- BaC.
iyp«
FT

FT

FT

FT

FT

FT

n

FT

FT


FT

FT

rr


FT

FT

FT


FT

FT

FT

FT

FT

	 ;
•wMr
Tn»
Rir.g

Rir.g

Ring

Ring

Rir.g

Ring

Ring

Ring

Ring


Ring

Ring

Ring


Ring

Ring

Ring


Ring

Ring

Ring

UFS

VFS


T*tt
ml
S3

SG

KG

NG

1*G

KG

KG

NG

KG


NG

NG

NG


NG

NG

NG

	
NG

KG

NG

Coal

Coal


TMt
Typ«
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base- .
Line
Hi
Load
IX>W
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line f.
-:i Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
Li.ie &
id Load
LOW
Load
Hi
Air
Ba:;e-
Lino

Hi
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
B.ise-
line
Base-
line

Capacity
t/hr
(*«/hr>
4.54
(10)
4.E4
(10)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
9.C8
(2C)
9.08
(20)
9.08
(20)
9.03
(20)
4.93
(11)

4.99
(11)
4.99
(11)
3.18
(7)

3.18
(7)
3.13
(7)
4.54
(10

4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(10)

»«at
iMt
t/hr

3. 63
(8)
4.54
CO)
1.3v.
(3)
3.63
(8)
6.36
(14)
8.1"
(18)
2.27
(5)
6.36
(14)
4.72
(10.4)

.127
(2.8)
4.72
(10.4)
2.77
(6.1)

.91
(2.0)
2.77
(6.1)
3.18
(7)

4.54
(10)
1.36
(3)
2.27
(5)
3,63
(8)
3.63
(8)

Exeat*

	 ^
	
.103
(47)
.145
(67)
.066
(30)
. 177
(61)
iSl
(63)
.192
(S3)
,144
-(66)
.1A4
(75)

.162
(74)
.172
(79)
\ ' s i
.142
(05)

.127
(58)
.142
(65)
.183
(84)

.183
(64)
.223
(102)
.172
(79)
.070
(206)
.756
(300)

«!
%=r.
3.4

9.1

4.8

10.2

7.6


7 . 7
4.8

10.9

10.1


7.1

10.6

8.6


5.0

7.8

7.4


7.6

5.2

3.6

4.8

2.0


CO
9/MC.1
(pp-)
0
CO
0
(0)
0
(0)
>2.54
<>2000)
0
-CO)

___
0
(0)
.637
C700)
.203
(150)

Q
(0)
. 563
f420)
^t *. \j i
.273
(180)

.742
(260)
.070
(40)
.230
n 21)
1 1 ± j i
.090
(52)
0
(0)
0
CO)
.505
(110)
1.68
(180)

HC
,/Hc.l
(PPB)
.010
di!
.013
(17)
.023
(16;
.2E6
<4CO)
.046
(48)

(52)
.071
<4S)
.036
(54)







.043
(DO)

.121
(75)
.015
(15)
.210
/ 5^0^
1 AL. \J ]
.1£5
(20C3
.109
(80)
,126
(160)

— _
	 	
	

SOX
9/Hc*l

— __
___
	
f 	
	
	
	
. 	
	


	
—
	
	 	







	 	
	

— -—
—
	
...
...


	
-__
	
— -.*.
	
-_-
_-_
— — —
...
	

"°a
g^te.l

	
	
	
^ —
	
	
	
. 	
>„_


	
- —
	
	







	 	
	

	 ,_
__-
	
— —
...


	
...
	
_ —
	
- —
_ —
..»
- —
	

Total
F*rtie.
9/Hc»l
(t/MBtj)
.0113
(,3CC3)
	
	
— — -
	 	
	 	
— 	
.0347
(.0193)


	
—
...
	







— --
. 	

___
— __
	 	
— — -
...


	
.«-
	
«...
—
	
1.102
C.6122)
2.219
(1.232)

(olid
PutlC.
9/nc*l

.0061
(.0034)

	
— -—
	
— __
^__
-C214
(.011?)


	
...
...





— ..


Ill
	 	

	
	
»_
	
...

— _

4- —
— -
	
— -
— --
1.062
(.5899)
1.052
(.5644)

Boiler
Effl-
"%'


„_

_.

._

SO



__

..

Q T
OJ

Q *»
o J
Q ^
e J
..


__

	

82


81

78

84

__

__


teeh-
• rach
Smoku
Spot Ktt.


—

.

_

_



_

.








0.0


0,0

0.0

.




_

.

_

.


                                                   6001-43

-------
                                                    Table A-l.  Continued
PS-
44-4
44-1

44-3



45-7






46-7
46-3

<6-5
47-1
47-5
47-7
48-4
43-1
46-3
48-6
•i9-l
49-:
Loc*
tlom
26
26

26



26






24
24

24
24
24
26
26
26
26
2S
25
ito*
- lio.
Ho.
s
5

5



5






3
3

3
3
3
S
5
5
5
5
5
Dtt.
7J/74
6/24
6/24

6/24



6/24






6/14
6/14

6/13
6/13
6/13
6/24
6/24
6/24
6/24
6/20
6/10
•ollv
•0.
1





1






TV
TV

TV
TV
TV
1
1
1
1
1 i
1
TM»
Cat«-
«ory
6





6





t
6
6

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Tmr-
M0»
Typ.
FT





FT





FT
FT
FT

FT
FT
FT
rr
FT
FT
FT
FT
•vnwr
»»•
Xir





Steam






Air
Air

Ring
Ring
King
Ring
Ring
Rir.g
Ring
Ring
T*«t
ru«i
t5





#5




#5

*s
#5

KG
NG
NG
NO
NG
NG
KG
NG
TMt
»»•
Base-
line





Base-
line




Lent

Air
Base-
line
Low
Load

Mr
Base-
line f.
Hi Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
line s.
Hi Loac
Low
Lead
Capacity
t/hr
tm/tir)
8.17
(18)

(18)



(IS)
8.17
(IS)



(18)
8.17
(18)
US)
5.90
(13)
5.90
(13)

(13)
5.90
(13)
5.90
(13)
5.90
(13)
8.17
(18)
8.17
(18)
8.17
(16)
8.17
(13)
(20)
9.08
(20)
Teat
Load
t/hr
Ckt/hr)
7.99
(17.6)

(22)



(17.6)
7.G5
(17.3)



(22.0)
3.22
(7.1)
(17.0)
4.95
(10.9)
1.04
(2.3)

(10.9)
5.63
(12.4)
.953
(2.1)
5.03
(12.4)
7.81
(17.2)
9.90
(21.8)
3.50
(7.7)
7.81
(17.2)
(12.5)
1.91
(4.2)
<%«ry)
7.3





6.7




6.7

3.2
7.3

i.,
4.1
7.8
3.1
7.2
4.3
8.6
2.7
3.3
•CM
BML1»
«/Mcal
.4CB
(177)

(188)



.371
(161)




. 355
(154)
(152)
.417
(181)
.507
(220)

.394
(171)
.131
(57)
.181
(79)
.133
'(33)
.129
:(56)
.155
(£8)
.120
(53)
.162
:(70)
'(79)
.153
(67)
ID
BMUaa
t/Mcal
.403
(175)

(165)



.371
(161)




.346
(ISO)
(151)
.412
(179)
.505
(219)

.394
(171)
.131
(57)
.179
(78)
.133
(58)
.122
(54)
.151
(Co)
.120
(53)
.157
(69)
(79)
.148
(65)
•o
014 LIB*
9/»eal
.371
(161)





.357
(155)






(139)
.392
(170)
.479
(208)

(154)
.116
(S3)
.153
(70)
.116
(53)
.103
(47)
.129
(59)
.1C5
(48)
.144
(C6)
(71)
.133
(61)
*Jr
10.4





10.9






13.2
10.0

9.6
7.0
?.8
7.7
9.6
7.1
10.4
9.7
OB
•/>K»l
0
(0





.013
(10)






C20)
0
(0)
0
(0)

(120)
0
(0)
0
(0)
.027
(20)
.018
(10)
.029
(20)
.020
(10)
-OSO
(6C>
(110)
.014
(10)
«c
9/Hcil
lixm\
4.-..





	






.004
(S)
.003
(3,

.019
(23)
.005
(5)
.004
(5)
.020
(20)
.029
(35)
.039
(35)
.CIS
(23)
(575)
.251
(325)
f/Nul
2.513
(784)





2.590
(808)






2.518
(798)
""

	
	
	
«>>
*/M°«l
2.4S7
(776)





2.567
(801)






(790)

...
	
	
Total
Vartic.
9/Meal
.1175
(.0653)





.1402
(.0779)






.1544
(.0853)

_..
— -
	
•olid
rutic.
9/xeal
(l/ratul
.CEC6
(.0448





.iiae
(.0660






.1537
(.0854

...
	
	
Boll.r
tffi-
cljocy
IBS
38

88



66

67



87
85

82
82
33
84
83
es
taeb-
•r«efc
^ok«
Spot I)*.
0 0





1.0






0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
K)
Ul
                                                                                                        6001-43

-------
                                                    Table A-l.   Continued
»•
_Ci_
49-6
51-1
52-5
52-2
53-1
	 -
53-6
53-2
54-5
54-2
55-1


56-1


S7-1
58-2
58-1
58-5


53-6
59-5
59-8
59-4

IOM
tion
is
23
19
19
19

19
19
19
19
26


26


6
5
5
5


4
4
4
4

»•-
- flo.
Ho.
5
3
2
2
2

2
2
2
2
5


5


5
9
9
9


9
9
9
9

MU
?VT4
6/20
6/10
5/16
5/16
5/15

5/15
5/15
5/17
5/17
6/26


6/25


6/25
12/17
12/17
12/17


12/10
12/10
12/10
12/10

•ollu
Ho.
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
2


^


1
248-1
248-1
248-1


4
4
4
4

at*
JSi.
6
5
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
5





6
5
5
5


6
6
6
6

Tor
n*ci
-LE
FT
FT
WT
wr
KT

wr
WT
WT
wr
FT





FT
FT
FT
FT


FT
FT
FT
FT

kuriMr
»yp«
Ring
Air
Steam
Steam
Air

Air
Air
Hech
Mech
Air





Steam
Ring
Ring
Ring


Ring
Air
Air
Air
Air

TMt
n»i
KG
*5
»2
#2
*2

*2
*2
#2
•2
42





«2
NG
NG
NG


NG
»2
»2
ff2
*2

Tut
Hi
Air
Base-
line s
Hi Load
Base-
line
Low
Air
Base-
line
Hi
Air
Low
Air
Base-
line
Low '
Air
Base-
line &
liLoed


line
Base-
line
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load

Air
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
LOW
Air
t
Opacity
t/br
(k«/hrl
9.08
(20)
3.18
(7)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(175)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
(17.5)
7.95
U75)
7.95
(175)
7.95
(17.5)
4.99
(11)


8.17
(18)
B.17
(18)
3.63
IB)
3.63
(8)
3.G3
(8)

3.63
(8)
9.08
(20)
9.08
(20)
9.08
(20)
9.08
(20)

Lome
t/hr
5.68
(12.5)
3.04
(6.7)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
6.36
(14)
5.36
(14)
5.45
(12)
5.45
(12)
5.13
(11.3)


7.22
(15.9)
7.13
(15.7)
2.91
(6.4)
3.63
(8)
.726
(1.6)

2.91
16.4)
7.26
(16)
8.17
(18)
2.04
(4.5)
6. 36
(14)

*°J
4.2
6.3
3.6
2.6
3.0

4.3
1.6
4.3
3.7
4.7



8.0

8.0
11.0
10.2
15.0


3.2
5.8
6.2
6.3
2.7

•OtLlM
e/Mc.1
.1P3
(30)
.634
(275)
.150
(65)
.145
(63)
.224
(97)
.235
(102)
.193
(86)
.184
(80)
.184
(M)
.295
(128)


.267
(116)
.272
(118)
.153
(70)
.172
(79)
.120
(55)

.098
(45)
.445
(103)
.429
(136)
.382
(166)
.325
(143)

totuiw
«/Hc«l
(PO)
.177
(77)
.627.
(270)
.147
(64)
.143
(62)
.224
(97)
.230
(100)
.196
(85)
.184
(80)
.ISO '
(73)
.290
(126)


.263
(114)
.270
(117)
.148
(63)
.170
(78)
.046
(21)

.081
(37)
.415
(ICO)
.403
(175)
.3C4
(158)
.304
(132)

coUUw
«/Mc*l
(PC-)
.162
(74)
.599
(260)
.147
(64)
.145
(63)
.212
(92)
.194
(84)
.184
(80)
.182
(79)
.272
P18)


.240
(104)
.242
(105)
.122
(56)
	 	


(35)
.403
(175)
.408
(177)
.373
(162)
.309
(134)

*"'
*2.88
>2
.199
(62)

	
.221
(69)
___
	






	



.487
(152)
	

"»
«/Hc«l
.173
(54)

	
.199
(62)
-_- .
	






	



.474
(148)
	

tMal
Mnlc.
«/MC«l
.0680
(.0378)

	
.0295
(.0164)
.0349
(.0194)
	






.0079
(.0044)



	
.0506
(.0281)
—

tell*
Futlc.
f/xetl
.0610
(.0339)

— — \
.0293
(.0163)
.0272
(.0151)
	






.0043
(.0024)



.0261
(.0145)
	
-
k»il*i
Ufl-
^
81
85
85


84
86
85
86
68









85
«

»«Cll
•rack
2.0


-
-

—



0.0

1.5



-
-

to
t/1
NJ
                                                                                                         6001-43

-------
Table A-l.  Continued
TMt
Run
Ho.
60-1
C2-1
63-6
63-11
63-15
63-9
63-2C
64-1
6;-l
65-2
Loo
tlOO
4
1
2
2
2
23
6
6
65-4 6
C-6-i 1
£•£-4 1
66-5 i
£7-6 1
67-2
67-7
63-2 |
69-3 !
63-5
1
2
2
2
M-
- qtol
No.
9
9
9
9
9
9
3
3
9
9
9
9
9
c
9
9
c
9 i
9
9
Data
73/74
12/12
11/1
11/26
11/26
! 11/26
11/26
11/26
6/10
1/3
1/3
1/3
11/1
11/1
11/1
11/7
11/7 i
1
:.i/7
11/20
11/20
11/20
•ollar
•0.
a
i
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
TMt
Cata-
a«*r
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2 ;
2
2
r»r-
naco
Typa
FT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
FT
'VT
WT
WT
''"
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
j
•urnar
TW»
Ring
Stean
Steam
Steam
Stean;
Stean
Steam
Air
Steam
Stear.
Stean
Steam
Steam
Steam
Ring
Ri.-.g
Rir.g
Steam
Steoir.
Stl —T.
T..t
nwi
KG
#2
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
t2
*2
»2
#2
#2
.2
#2
KG
1 	
TMt
TH>«
50*
Max
Low
Load
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
B
9.03
(20)
13.2
(29)
26.3
(59)
26.8
(59)
26.8
(59)
26.8
(59)
2C..8
159)
3.18
(7)
71.7
(158)
71.7
(158)
71.7
:i58)
15.0
(33)
15.0
(38)
15.0
(33)
115.0
1(33)
15.0
'(33)
lis.o
;(33)
23.5
(65!
29.5
(Of,)
29.5
(65)
t»t
Load
t/ta
Ikt/hr)
4.54
(10)
4.54
(1C)
20.9
146)
24.1
(53)
12.7
(28)
21.3
(47)
21.3
(47)
3.04
(6.7)
52.5
(115)
63.6
(140)
36.3
(80)
10.4
(23)
10.9
(24)
10.3
(24)
10.9
(24)
13.6
(30)
10.9
(24)
22.7
(50)
24.5
(54)
15.4
(34)
EMC***
(% dry)
1.5
9.0
2.9
4.9
10.8
2.3
5.5
6.8
5.2
4.8
6.4
5.9
4.8
2.8
4.5
3.8
2.7
5.8
3.8
11.2
KB
BotLilM
1/Nc«l
(pp.)
.223.
(131)
.237
(1C3)
1.426
(613)
1.421
(T47!
1.424
(616)
1.194
(518)
1.189
(516)
.:?3
(127)
C51)
.608
(264)
.276
(120)
.J-3j
C23)
.274
(US)
.240
(104)
.197
(90)
.131
(£3)
.177
(81)
1.074
(4bG!
1.044
(4S3)
1.242
(539)
Hot Lin*
9/Ncil
2000)
.111
(52)
.050
(35)
0
(0)
.070
(28)
.323
(236)
0
(0)
0
(C)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0

0
(0)
0
(0)
(17)
o
(05
Q
(0)
0
(0)
CO)
0
(0)
(C)
•c
,/Hc.l
(Pf«>
.020
(28)

.056
(70)
.054
(6C)
.OS2
(37)
.064
03)
.046
(50)
	
.CC8
.048
(54)
.047
C-.S)
K»
9/Mcal
IPC-)
_._

1.782
(556)
1.526
(476)

.301
(94)
.336
111)



~~


.013
(4.4)




	







1.554
(485)




•°J
9/Meal
IPO)
	

1.728
(539)
1.484
(463)

.276
(86)
.333
(104)
Fartic.
1/Mcal
(l/MBtj)
	

.0711
(.0395)
.1213
(.0674)

.0522
(.0290)
.0704
(.0391)



.012
(4.0)

.0101
(.0056)




1.522
(475)





...




•olid
•ftrtlc.
•/Heal
lt/HBtu>
' .0556
(.0310
ifli-
Cia-c,
77
82
79
75
::: i "
.106? 79
(.0590)
1
•0157I 84
(.OC873
	 85
.0443
(.0246!
	
84
ei
81
63
78
78
79
78
80
74
Bach-
araeh
SBoka
spot No.
-
1.0
-
-
                                                   6001-43

-------
Table A-l.  Continued
tlaat
• IMI
•0.
68-3
68-14
S3-21
69-1
63-3
70-2
;o-3
70-6
7c-e
7C-10
71-3
71-1
72-4
72-3
73-1
74-1
74-4
75-7
75-5
75-2
loca-
tion
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
20
20
20
20
24
8
8
12
12
12
•a-
«U»
no.
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Q
9
9
2
2
2
2
3
9
9
4
4
4
tat*
73/74
11/20
11/20
11/20
11/27
11/27
11/15
11/15
11/15
11/15
11/15
5/23
5/23
5/23
5/23
6/14
1/15
1/15
3/15
3/15
3/15
•ollar
MO.
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
6
6
42
42
42
42
TV
10
10
24
24
24
***t
cate-
gory
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
6
3
3
3
3
3
Fur-
llaca
Typa
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
FT
WT
WT
WT
WT
WT
Burnar
Typ.
Steam
Steam
Stean
Ring
Ring
Steam
Steanv
Steajn
Steajn
Steam
Cyc-
lone
Cyc-
lone
Cyc-
lone
Cyc-
lone
Air
Steain
Steam
Nozzle
Nozzle
Nozzle
THt
Ftnl
PS 300
?S 300
PS 300
NG
HG
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
PS 300
50\C
501C
SO'IC
50-JO
30-kC
701C
301O
70*C
»2
S5S
RG
#5s
RG
NG
NG
NG
TMt
T»pa
Low
Air
E»4
OOS
BS4
OOS
tegistc
Base-
line
Low
Air
Base-
line
Ki
Load
Low
Load
Low
Air
Regis-
ter
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Base-
line
Hi
Load
Base—
line
Base-
line &
HiLoad
Low
Lead
Base—
line
Hi
LOid
Low
Load
Capacity
tAr
(HAD
29.5
(65)
29.5
(45)
29.5
(65)
29.5
(65)
29.5
(65)
56.8
(125)
56.8
(125)-
56.8
(125)
50.8
(125)
56.8
(125)
182
(400)
132
(400)
182
!<00)
182
(400)
5.90
(13)
49.9
(110)
49.9
(110)
102
(225)
102
(225)
102
(225)
si-
U«Ar>[ (vodry)
23.6
(52)
23.6
(52)
23.2
(51)
24.1
(53)
24.1
(53)
45.4
(loo)'
45.4
(100)
17.3
(38)
45.9
(101)
45.4
(100)
145
(320)
182
uoo)
145
(320)
185
(408)
4.99
(11)
40.9
(90)
19.5
(43)
81.7
(ISO)
102
(225)
59.0
(130)
3.4
5.0
5.6
3.8
3.0
6.4
5.1
7.2
4.6
6.6
3.5
3.7
3.4
3.6
3.1
6.5
11.3
G.O
5.3
5.8
-5ST-1
•MUM
9/Hc«l
._!EEl>J
. 9^1
(-131)
1.CQ7
(437}
1.C05
(436)
.214
C93)
.163
(86)
.776
(337) '
.753
(327)
.309
(351)
.742
(322)
.933
(405)
1.721
(716)
1.916
(797)
1.707
(710)
2.067
(660)
.194
(84)
.495
(215)
.486
(211)
.',63
(2i:>
.469
(215)
.408
(167)
"0
BotUn.
«/»c.l
. '«"" .
	
	
NO
CBUUu
S/!fc«l
_!ee"
.3^3
(368)
.892
(3S7)
. ?31
(404)
.207
(95)
(82)
.740
(321)
.717
(311)
(334)

1.678
(698)
1.892
(787)
1.675
(G97)
2. 014
(838)
.169
(82)
.507
(220)
.486
(211)
.439
(201)
.445
(204)
.393
(180)
(307)
.889
(386)
1.553
(646)
l.BOO
(749)
1 . &2 5
(676]
1.930
(803)
.177
(77)
.509
(221)
.590
(256)
*1
12.9
11.4
11.2
9.4
9.4
10.4
11. S

10.4
14.1
14.0
14.4
14.4
12.7
9.2
6.6
9.0
9.4
9.9
CO
l/HUl
Iffml
0
(01
.013
(S)
0
(0)
.131
(S3)
. 960
(675)
	








0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
•c
»/"c«l

.065
(70)

	

	



90>
9/Hc«l
fpp«)
—

	
•°1
9/Mcal


	

1.513
(472)











	
	
	
.012
(12)
0
(0)
.006
(7)
.008
(9)
.004
(5)








—
	
	
1.484
(463)











— —
	
	
	
TSUI 1 13114
Partic. 1 Partlc.
9/Ne«l 1/W1


	

.0776
(.0431)











.8170
(.4539)
	
	
.0103
(.0057)

	
.0673
(.0374)
.7720
(.4239)
.0083
(.0046)
Boil«r
Effi-
ciency
%
S!
80
7$
"*7
"
78
75
—
75
72
84
04
85
••ch-
arach
Skoka
-
-
-
-
                                                    6001-43

-------
                                                     Table A-l.   Continued
    T3
    70
    s

Mm
No.
7S-9

75-16

77-11
77-10

77-5

77-13

70-1
78-9

73-4

— n — 7



30-11

£0-13

SC-9

60-19



Loca-
tion
12

12

12
12

12
1 	 .
12

12
12

12

1?



10

!0

in

10



,W«|
NO.
4

4

«*
4

4

4

4
4

4

<



6

6

6

6



Date
75/74
V15

3/15

3/12
3/12

3/12

3/12

3/13
3/13

3/13

3/13



2/26

2/26

2/26

2/26



•oll.r
•e.
, 24

24

20
20

20

20

20
20

20

20



5

5

5

5



c*t«-
.£:£.
3

3

4
4

4

4

4
4

4

4



^

2

2

2



££
K7

WT

WT
WT

WT

WT

KT
WT

WT

KT



WT

W*

WT

WT



Burner
Typ.
Nozzle

Nozzle

Nozzle
Nozale

Nozzle

Nozzle

Pulv-
eriser
Pulv-
erizer
Pulv-
erizer
Pulv-

erizer

Ring

Ring

Sing

Ring



Tnt
ru.1
UG

KG

NG
KG

NG

KG

Coal
Coal

Coal

Coal



KG

NG

KG

KG



TMt
T»»
lx?w
Air
Regi-
ster
Base-
line
Hi
Lead
Low
Load

Air
Base—
line
Hi
Load
Low
Load


Air

Base-
line


Low
Load
Low
Air


t/hr
(k»/hr)
102
(225)
102
(225)
145
(320
145
(320)
145
(320)
145
(320)
K5
(320)
145
(320)
145
(320)
145

(320)

49.9
(110)
49 9
(110)
49.9
(no;
49.9
(110)

t*mt \
Load
t/hr
(k«/hr)
£< 0
(135)
84.0
(185)
118
(260)
136
(300)
90.3
(200)
llfi
(260)
118 "
(2CO)
123
(2701

(130)
I1 0

/2A1 >

33.6
(85)

(108)
13 6
(30)
40 4
(8°)


(%dry
4 4

6.:^

4.5
3.9

4.9

3 5

5.8
5.6



4 8



8.1



7 }

2 0


MCK
Hot Mo*
g/Mc.l
32"
ci-:7)
.257
(108)
.609
(320)
.727
(333)
.502
(23C)

U76)
1.219
«8<)
1.2-44


(592)




.205
(94)



(107)



•0
Hot Lin*
9/Mc«l


	
	
	 	
C
(0)
0
(0)
0
:o)

(0)
0
(01


(0)




0
(C)








HC
8/HC.1
(PF«)

C6)
.012
£143
.004
(5)
.002
(3)

	

(6)
.003
(B)
.007


(3)




...
— .








•Ox
9/Mc«l
»PP«)


	
.— .
	
:::
_. 	
—
—

	
6.378
(1824)







...
...








*>,
«/HMl



	
«._
	
	

	
	

—
C.343
(1814)







--_
»—








P«rtic.
9/Hc.l
(l/XBtj)

	
—
	
.0191
(.0106)
-—
	
	

	
2.948
(1.638)


	




.0104
(.0056)








rartic.
»/*c«l

	 .
	
— .
	
	
-_-
—
	

--.
2.369
(1.316)


	




.ooei
(-0245:








Effl-
cigncy

-••
S4

85
84

85


85
E6
65




86


70









«rach
teoka

~





^


"




—









~



to
Ln
LH
                                                                                                           6001-43

-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                          {Mease read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 1. REPORT NO.
 EPA- 600/2 -76-086a
                                                      3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Field Testing: Application of Combustion Modifications
 To Control Pollutant Emissions from Industrial
 Boilers--Phase II
            5. REPORT DATE
            April 1976
            6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
 G.A.Cato, L.J.Muzio, and D.E.Shore
                                                      8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
              6001-43
0. PERFORMING OR8ANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 KVB Engineering, Inc.
 17332 Irvine Boulevard
 Tustin,  California  92680
            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
            1AB014; ROAP 21BCC-046
            11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

            68-02-1074
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 EPA, Office of Research and Development
 Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park,.NC 27711
            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
            Phase Final:  7/74-9/75
            14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
             EPA-ORD
is.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Project officer for this report is R. E.Hall, Mail Drop 65, Ext
2477.  EPA-650/2-74-078a was the first report in this series.
1$.ABSTRACTTne report gives results of testing 19 coal, oil,  and gas-fired industrial
boilers to determine their normal emissions and the effectiveness of combustion
modifications in reducing NOx emissions without increasing the emission of parti-
culates and other pollutants. Combustion modifications investigated were: reducing
excess air, recirculating flue gas, staging combustion air, adjusting burner swirl
registers, reducing combustion air temperature, tuning the burner,  changing atomi-
Bation pressure, and changing oil temperature.  Emissions  were found to be not sig-
nificantly dependent on boiler size, but very  dependent on the fuel.  Generally, the
normal NOx emissions were below EPA Standards for New  Stationary Sources.   Par-
ticulate emissions  from oil and gas were below 43 ng/J (0.1 Ib/million Btu);  from
coal, they are above by a factor of 5.  NOx reductions of as much as 50% were ob-
tained with several combustion modifications.  In most instances  the boiler heat-loss
 fficiency was not degraded.  Although particulate emissions usually increased, the
increase could be limited by fine-tuning the boiler.   There  was  no significant effect
on any other pollutant emission.
7.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution;  Combustion; Boilers
Burners;   Nitrogen Oxides;  Smoke
Fossil Fuels;  Particle Size;  Flue Gases
Circulation;  Atomizing
Coal; Fuel Oil; Natural Gas
 Air Pollution Control
 Stationary Sources
 Combustion Modification
 Industrial Boilers
 Particulate; Excess Air
 Staged Combustion
 Burner Tune-Up
13B  21B   13A
     07B
21D  14B
     13H,07A
 8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
    269
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
Unclassified
                         22. PRICE
       1ZO-1 (»-73)
                                      256

-------