s.
SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EPA-600/7-80-085d
April 1980
Thirty-day Field Tests
of Industrial Boilers:
Site 4 Coal-fired
Spreader Stoker
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-80-085d
Thirty-day Field Tests
of Industrial Boilers:
Site 4 Coal-fired Spreader Stoker
by
W.A Carter and J.R Hart
*KVB. Inc
PO Box 19518
Irvine, California 92714
Contract No 68-02-2645
Task No 4
Program Element No EHE624
EPA Project Officer Robert E Hall
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Environmental Engineering and Technology
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for
U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
This is a final report on a test program to evaluate the long-term
effectiveness of combustion modifications on industrial boilers. During
previous programs short-term tests have been performed on industrial boilers
to determine the effect of combustion modifications on air pollutant emis-
sions such as NOx, SOx, CO, HC, and particulate. The objective of this pro-
gram was to determine whether the combustion modification techniques which
were effective for short-duration tests are feasible for a longer period.
This report presents results of a 30-day field test of a 38.1 MW output
(130,000 Ib steam/hr) coal-fired spreader stoker. The NOx control technology
employed on this unit was low excess air and staged combustion air. The
results indicate that low excess air firing is an effective long-term NO
A
control technique for spreader stokers, while the use of staged combustion
air by overfire air adjustment is not. The as-found concentration of NO
was 240 ng/J (409 ppm at 3% O_, dry) with the boiler load at 80% of design
capacity. Firing in the low excess air modes resulted in a reduction of
approximately 19% from the as-found condition. Low excess air firing also
resulted in an increase in efficiency of approximately 1.2%, and also a
decrease in particulates of about 22%.
ii KVB11-6015-1225
-------
CONTENTS
Section Pa9e
ABSTRACT i-i
1.0 SUMMARY 1
1.1 Objective and Scope 1
1.2 Results 2
1.3 Conclusions 3
2.0 INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES 7
2.1 Emissions Measurement Instrumentation 1
2.2 Boiler Description and Characteristics 16
3.0 TEST RESULTS 21
3.1 Continuous Monitor Certification Tests 21
3.2 Coal-Fired Stoker 24
4.0 REFERENCES 51
APPENDIX A 52
APPENDIX B 59
APPENDIX C 77
APPENDIX D 92
APPENDIX E 108
APPENDIX F 135
iii KVB11-6015-1225
-------
FIGURES
Section Page
1-1 NO Emissions Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader-Stoker 5
2-1 Photograph of KVB continuous monitor for measuring 8
gaseous emissions.
2-2 Schematic of continuous monitor sampling and 10
conditioning system.
2-3 Mark III adsorbent sampling system. 15
2-4 Site 4 Boiler. 17
3-1 NO Emissions as a Function of Excess O2> Site 4 28
3-2 NO Emissions as a Function of Boiler Load 29
3-3 Solid particulate laoding as a function of NO emissions. 30
3-4 NO Emissions, Site 4. 31
3-5 Solid Particulate Loading as a function of excess O^. 34
3-6 Solid Particulate Loading as a Function of Boiler Load 35
3-7 Unit Efficiency as a Function of Excess O^. 41
3-8 Format of Hourly Emissions Data 43
3-9 Summary of 24-Hour Data 44
3-10 NO Emissions Site 4 46
3-11 24-Hour Average NO Emissions as a Function of 48
Days from Start of Testing.
3-12 24-Hour Average NO Excess Oxygen as a Function of Days 49
from Start of Testing.
iv KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLES
Section Page
1-1 24-Hour Averages of Gaseous Emissions 4
2-1 Analytical Instrumentation 9
2-2 Schedule of Daily Events - Site 4 20
3-1 Schedule of Certification Test Events Site 4 22
3-2 Instrument Specifications and Performance 23
3-3 Summary of Observations and Gaseous and Particulate 27
Emissions at Site 4
3-4 Particulate Data Summary Site 4 33
3-5 Summary of POM Analyses Site 4 37
3-6 Summary of Coal and Ash Analyses for Site 4 39
3-7 Summary of Boiler Efficiency Calculations for Site 4 40
3-8 Frequency Distribution of NO Emissions at Site 4 45
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SECTION 1. 0
SUMMARY
1.1 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
The objective of this field test was to determine whether combustion
modification techniques which demonstrated reductions on air pollutant emis-
sion during short-term tests are feasible for longer periods. In addition,
boiler performance and reliability were monitored. The combustion modifica-
tions have previously been shown to be effective on industrial boilers
(Refs. 1, 2, 3).
The program scope provides for 30-day field tests of a total of seven
industrial boilers with design capacities ranging from 14.65 to 73.25 MW
output (50,000 to 250,000 Ib steam/hr). Fuels to be burned include natural
gas, light oil, residual oil, and coal. This final report is for a 38.1 MW
output (130,000 Ib steam/hr) coal fired stoker using low excess air (LEA) and
staged combustion air (SCA) by means of overfire air adjustments as the emission
control technology.
During the test period, continuous monitor certification tests were
performed concurrently with low NOx testing. Emissions measured were
particulate, NO, CO , and 0 . Boiler efficiency was measured several times
during the program to determine the effect of combustion modification on
boiler efficiency.
This is a final report on the 30-day test which documents the test
equipment, summarizes the test data, and discusses the data in relation to
the control technology employed for this type of boiler.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
1.2 RESULTS
A coal stoker using LEA as the control technology was selected for
this field test. A survey of previous tests on coal-fired boilers was con-
ducted to determine if a boiler was available which would provide low-NO
x
operation using the desired NO control technology. Included in the survey
X
were boilers tested under previous EPA programs (Refs. 1, 2, and 3) as well
as current programs. It was desirable to select a unit which had been tested
previously in order to know its capability for low-NO operation, minimize
set-up time, and eliminate the need for extensive modification testing.
The boiler tested at Site 4 was selected on the basis that previous
testing had been performed by KVB and the unit had shown a capability of
operating under low-NO conditions. Although the boiler selected for testing
was built in 1960 it is representative of the majority of coal-fired industrial
boilers sold today. During a previous EPA-sponsored program (Ref. 1) a boiler
survey and analysis was performed to determine the population and distribution
of coal-fired industrial sized boilers. This study showed that spreader
stokers account nationally for about 50% of the units sold during the nine-year
period from 1965 to 1964, followed by 20% for other types of coal firing, 13%
for overfed stokers, 9% for pulverized, and 7% for underfed stokers.
After selection of the test site, a continuous monitor was shipped to
the site and installed. The next task was to perform the certification tests
as outlined in Performance Specification 2 and 3, 40 CFR60, Appendix B
(Appendix D of this document).
Following the monitor certification, the 30-day field test was con-
ducted. The test was performed according to "Plan for Performing Source
Evaluation Tests in Support of NSPS for Industrial Boilers." Emissions of NO,
CO , and O were monitored continuously. Particulate measurements were made
in triplicate at the start and conclusion of the test period. In addition,
triplicate particulate measurements were made in the as-found condition.
Measurements of polycyclic organic matter were made in both the modified and
unmodified conditions.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
The results of the 30-day test are discussed in detail in Section 3.0.
A summary of the 24-hour averages of gaseous emissions is presented in Table
1-1. The data presented in this table were recorded by a technician on an
hourly basis each day and are In addition to the continuous strip chart
recordings. An analysis of the field test data was prepared. A log-probability
plot of 24-hour averages is presented in Figure 1-1. The mean value for the
NO is 211 ng/J with a geometric dispersion of 1.06. The NO emissions were
less than 245 ng/J 99% of the time.
1.3 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of this 30-day field test, several important
conclusions can be drawn:
1. LEA is an effective NO control technology for coal-fired spreader
stokers. The LEA condition was maintained for 30 days with an average
NO emission level of 211 ng/J (360 ppm @ 3% 02, dry) with the boiler
load at 22.3 MW thermal output (76,000 Ib steam/hour). At the same
load the baseline NO emissions are 229 ng/J (390 ppm). At a boiler
load of 27.5 MW output (94,000 Ib steam/hr) the NO emissions were
240 ng/J (409 ppm @ 3% 0 , dry) in the LEA condition.
2. Staged combustion air had virtually no effect on NO emissions in this
coal-fired spreader stoker. Extensive variant overfire air biasing
modes were implemented but produced little change in the NO emissions.
3. Boiler operation in the LEA mode presented no reliability of func-
tional problems. The LEA mode can be maintained for extended periods
provided adequate instrumentation and display are provided. An
indoctrination and training period for operators is recommeded.
4. Operation of the boiler in the LEA mode resulted in 22% lower particu-
late emissions than for normal operation. Normal operation produced
626 ng/J (1.46 lb/10 Btu) of particulate emissions. Operation in the
LEA mode resulted in average particulate emissions of 491 ng/J (1.14
lb/10 Btu). Additional testing would be required to optimize the
boiler for both NO and particulate emissions and efficiency.
-> KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 1-1. 24-HOUR AVERAGES OF GASEOUS EMISSIONS
******** ft****************»«**»»»**»***«»
* 2u HOUR DATA *
** DRt ST*C* GAS CONCENTRATION *
**
* 02 CU2 NO NO NO **
** U'AD VLILX VOLX PP"V PPHV NG/J *
* DATE TIMt
» b/ll/79
8/12/79
* B/ll/79
8/1M/79
* 6/15/79
fl/16/79
8/17/79
8/18/79
* 6/19/79
6/20/79
6/21/79
b/22/79
* 6/23/79
« 8/2U/79
U/25/79
*/26/79
8/27/79
* 8/28/79
6/29/79
8/30/79
8/31/79
9/ 1/79
«* 9/ 2/79
9/ 3/79
* <»/ li/79
9/ 5/79
«« 9/ e/79
« 9/ 7/79
t* 9/ 8/79
« 9/ 9/79
*« 9/U/79
9/U/79
* 9/12/79
I'll
21.7
21.4
2U7
23.0
22.0
I*4. 3
24.5
24.0
?3.5
21.7
21.5
19,5
jb.d
22,9
24. 1
25.9
24.0
26.8
22'. 7
I*!. 5
J9.J
27«2
2*5.7
23. a
22.2
|9,(l
j9,y
23.8
22.8
.0
**
1U.B
10.0
10.2
10.5
9.9
.9.5
9.9
10. H
9.U
9.2
9.5
10. u
9.9
10.5
10.6
9.9
9.3
9.1
9.4
tt.7
9.7
10.5
10.3
a. a
9.1
9.7
9.7
10.1
1U.2
9.4
a. B
10.3
*
10.1
a. 6
.6
.5
.2
.6
.7
.«
B.3
9.B
10.0
9.8
H.9
9.8
9.1
8. 7
V,6
9.9
10,4
10,1
10.7
.*>
.1
.5
i .a
l .«
.9
.7
.1
.1
lu. 1
10.4
b.5
****<
g]9.
225.
204.
224.
221.
230.
227.
222.
241.
220.
235.
200.
221.
20H.
|95,
231.
225.
245.
235.
25'.
217.
207.
198.
2)8.
239.
2^3.
224.
231.
244.
241.
257.
214.
*«*«*1
389J
371.
341.
3«4,
3oO.
3o2.
309.
393.
374,
338.
3o8.
3bO,
358,
356.
340,
37«,
348.
372.
Joe.
350,
34«.
355.
333.
353.
363.
355.
358.
3«5.
407.
37«.
382.
359.
!*** t*l
229.
229.
216.
200.
225.
211.
212.
217.
231.
219.
198.
210.
206.
210.
209.
199.
220.
204.
218.
216.
206.
204.
2U8.
)96.
207.
213.
206.
210.
22bt
239.
220.
224.
211.
*
*
*
*
*
**
**
*
**
*
*
*
*
»
**
«
*
*
*
«
«
*
«*
I**************.*********.***.*..****.*«**.««t*«*«tt..****«**
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
I
a\
o
t->
ui
N)
to
en
300
200
100
n i i
i I M i I I I r
TI r
1 I I I I II I
i i i i i i
SITE 4 - COAL FIRED
STOKER
x = 211 ng/0
g = 1.06
1 1 I
I I I
0.01 0.05 0.10.5 12 5 10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
PERCENT LESS THAN
90 95 98 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
Figure 1-1. NO Emissions Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader-Stoker.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
5. The continuous monitor system utilizing an extractive sample system
provided accurate, reliabile data for the entire 30-day test period.
Daily calibration of instruments is necessary as is maintenance on
the sample system. Probe plugging is a problem which requires
periodic inspection and maintenance with coal-fired units.
6. It is extremely unusual for an industrial boiler to operate at a
constant load condition. Any effective control technology must be
capable of operation over fairly large load changes.
7. Stokers may decrease both NO and particulate emissions at the same
time while also increasing boiler efficiency by operating with low
excess air.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SECTION 2.0
INSTRUMENTATION AMD PROCEDURES
This section presents a description of the instrumentation used to
measure the gaseous and particulate emissions, the test procedures, and
techniques for certifying the continuous monitor and a. description of the
boiler tested.
2.1 EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTATION
The emissions measurements were made using a continuous monitor
fabricated by KVB for this program. The analytical instrumentation and
sample handling equipment are contained in a cabinet 1.2 m wide x 0.76 m deep
x 183 m high (48"W x 30"D x 72"H). A photograph of the continuous monitor is
shown in Figure 2-1. Gaseous emission measurements were made with the
analytical instruments listed in Table 2-1.
Total particulate measurements were made using an EPA Method 5
sampling train manufactured by Western Precipitation Division of Joy
Manufacturing Company. Samples for measurement of polycyclic organic matter
(POM) were obtained using an XAD-2 module supplied by Battelle Columbus
Laboratories. These modules were returned to Battelle for analysis following
the test.
2.1.1 Gaseous Emissions
The continuous monitor is equipped with analytical instruments to
measure concentrations of NO, CO, CO , and 0 . The sample gas is delivered to
the analyzers at the proper condition and flow rate through the sampling and
conditioning system shown schematically in Figure 2-2. A probe with a
0.7-micrometer sintered stainless steel filter was installed in the stack to
7 KVBll-6015-1225
-------
0
NOx
Two-pen
chart
recorders
Figure 2-1. Photograph of KVB continuous monitor for measuring
gaseous emissions.
8
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 2-1. ANALYTICAL INSTRUMENTATION
Emission Species
Manufacturer
Measurement
Method
Model No.
Nitrogen Oxides
Oxygen
Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Monoxide
Opacity
Thermo Electron
Beckman Instrument
Horiba Instrument
Horiba Instrument
Dynatron
Chemiluminescent
Polarograpluc
NDIR
NDIR
Transmissometer
10A
742
PIR-2000
PIR-2000
1100
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Probe
Ul
I
10
N>
in
|
r
Dr op-Out
Flask
^
1 1 tci
o
Sample
Pump
Drier
(Refrigeration
Condenser)
Instrument
°2
CO
co2
110
Operating
Ranqc
0-10*
0-1000 ppm
0-20%
0-2SO ppm
Calibration
Gases
S%/9.27»
500 ppm/900 ppn
101/17.3%
12O.S ppm/234 ppm
r.eroM
I
TE
i
f.pan Zero
! 0-6 SCFH
y
f
°2
1
Dump
P^~~ valve
O Pre"
^^ Gauge
tori Relief
*** Valve
^)Span ZeroAjSpan 7.erom] Span
3 0-6 SCFH li| 0-6 SCFHlrlO-6 SCFM
TTT Inlet
Til Alr
CO
Q-
C02 NO
f^
1 i 1 ^*
1 I | Vacuum
' " Pump
Vent
Vent
Vent
Vent
Figure 2-2. Schematic of continuous monitor sampling and conditioning system.
-------
sample the flue gas. The following paragraphs describe the analytical
instrumentation.
A.1 Nitrogen Oxides
The oxides of nitrogen monitoring instrument used was a Thermo Elec-
tron chemiluminescent nitric oxide analyzer. The operational basis of the
instrument is the chemiluminescent reaction of NO and 0 to form NO in an
excited state. Light emission results when excited NO molecules revert to
their ground state. The resulting chemiluminescence is monitored through an
optical filter by a high sensitivity photomultiplier tube, the output of
which is electronically processed so it is linearly proportional to the NO
concentration.
Air for the ozonator is drawn from ambient through an air dryer and a
10-micrometer filter element. Flow control for the instrument is accomplished
by means of a small bellows pump mounted on the vent of the instrument down-
stream of a separator which insures that no water collects in the pump.
The basic analyzer is sensitive only to NO molecules. To measure NO
(i.e., NO + NO ), the NO is first converted to NO. This is accomplished by
a converter which is included with the analyzer. The conversion occurs as the
gas passes through a thermally insulated, resistance heated, stainless steel
coil. With the application of heat, NO molecules in the sample gas are
reduced to NO molecules, and the analyzer then reads NO . NO is obtained by
the difference in readings obtained with and without the converter in
operation.
Specifications
Accuracy: 1% of full scale
Span drift: ± 1% of full scale in 24 hours
Zero drift: ± 1 ppm in 24 hours
Power Requirements: 115 ± 10V, 60 Hz, 1000 watts
Response: 90% of F.S. in 1 sec (NO mode); 0.7 sec (NO mode)
Output: 4-20 ma
Sensitivity: 0.5 ppm
11 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Linearity: ± 1% of full scale
Vacuum detector operation
Range: 2.5, 10,25, 100, 250, 1000, 2500, 20,000 ppm F.S.
Only the NO concentration was measured during this program. Because
of the added complexity of heated sample lines and controllers necessary for
measuring NO and the small percentage of N02 in the flue gas, based on pre-
vious tests (Ref. 1, 2 and 3) EPA decided that only NO measurement was
necessary. Therefore, an unheated sample line was installed, and the
moisture was removed from the sample gas by a dropout flask and a refrigerated
condenser.
B. Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide
Carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations were
measured by Horiba Instruments'PTI-2000 short-path-length nondispersive
infrared analyzers. These instruments measure the differential in infrared
energy absorbed from energy beams passed through a reference cell (containing
a gas selected to have minimal absorption of infrared energy in the wave
length absorbed by the gas component of interest) and a sample cell through
which the sample gas flows continuously. The differential absorption appears
as a reading on a scale of zero to 100% and is then related to the concentra-
tion of the species of interest by calibration curves supplied with the
instrument. A linearizer was supplied with the CO analyzer to provide a
linear output over the range of interest. The operating ranges for the CO
analyzer are zero to 500, zero to 1000, and zero to 2000 ppm, and the ranges
for the CO analyzer are zero to 5, zero to 10, and zero to 20%.
Specifications
Accuracy: 1% of full scale
Repeatability: ± 0.5% of full scale
Zero drift: ± L% of full scale in 24 hours
Span drift: ± 1% of full scale in 24 hours
Response time: selectable - 90% of full scale in 0.5, 1.2, 3, or
5 seconds
12 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Power Requirements: 115 VAC ± 10%, 60 Hz
Warm up time: 30 minutes
Output: 0-10 MV
C. Oxygen
A Beckman Model 742 oxygen analyzer was used to continuously deter-
mine the oxygen content of the flue gas sample. The oxygen measuring element
contains a silver anode and gold cathode that are protected from the sample
by a thin membrane of Teflon. An aqueous KCL solution is retained in the
sensor by the membrane and serves as an electrolytic agent. As Teflon is
permeable to gasses,oxygen will diffuse from the sample to the cathode in the
following oxidation-reduction reaction:
Cathode reaction: 0 + 2H 0 + 4e -» 40H
Anode reaction: 4Ag + 4C1 * 4AgCl + 4e
With an applied potential between the cathode and anode, oxygen will
be reduced at the cathode causing a current to flow. The magnitude of this
current is proportional to the partial pressure of oxygen present in the
sample. The instrument has operating ranges of zero to 1%, zero to 10%, and
zero to 25% oxygen.
Speci fi cations
Accuracy: ± 1% of full scale or ± 0.05% 0 whichever is greater
Sensor stability: ± 1% of full scale per 24 hours
Response time: 90% in 20 seconds
Output: 0-10 MV
Power requirement: 120 1 10 VAC, 60 Hz
2.1.2 Particulate Emissions
Particulate samples were taken from two ports on the side of the duct
located 90° from the gaseous emission sample port. The samples were taken
using a Joy Manufacturing Company portable effluent sampler. This system,
which meets the EPA design specifications for Test Method 5 (Determination of
Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources, Federal Register, Volume 42,
No. 160, page 41754, August 18, 1977) is used to perform both the initial
velocity traverse and the particulate sample collection. Dry particulates
KVB11-6015-1225
13
-------
are collected in a heated case that contains, first, a cyclone to separate
particles larger than 5 micrometers and, second, a 100-mm glass-fiber filter
for retention of particles down to 0.3 micrometers. Condensible particulates
are collected in a train of four Greenburg-Smith impingers in a chilled water
bath.
2.1.3 Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) Emissions
Particulate and gaseous samples for analysis of polycyclic organic
matter were taken at the sample port used for Method 5 particulate tests. The
sampling system is a modified Method 5 sampling train developed by Battelle
Columbus Laboratories. A combination of conventional filtration with collec-
tion of organic vapors by means of a high surface area polymeric adsorbent
(XAD-2) proved highly efficient for collection of all but the more volatile
organic species. The modified sampling system consists of the standard EPA
train with the adsorbent sampler (Figure 2-3} located between the filter' and
the impingers. With this system filterable particulate can be determined from
the filter catch and the probe wash according to Method 5, whereas the organic
materials present can be determined from the analysis of the filterable
particulate and the adsorbent sampler catch. The impingers are only used to
cool the stream and protect the dry-gas meter, and their contents are
discarded.
2.1.4 Opacity Measurement
Stack opacity was measured with a Dynatron Model 1100 Opacity
Monitoring System. The Model 1100 opacity monitor is a double pass trans-
missometer which measures the light transmittance through a flue gas. The
transceiver unit contains the light source, the detector, and electronic
circuitry. A reflector is mounted in the end of a slotted probe which is
attached to the transceiver and is inserted into a stack or duct through a
conventional stack sampling port. The probe causes negligible flow disturb-
ance, and an air purge keeps the optical window and reflector clean. The
transceiver output is transmitted to & portable control unit which displays
either opacity or optical density automatically correlated from differences
between the path length of the transmissometer and the mean diameter of the
stack out.
14 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
GLASS WATER
JACKET
8-MM GLASS
COOLING COIL
ADSORBENT
28/12 BALL JOINT
FLOW DIRECTION
GLASS FRITTED
DISC
GLASS WOOL PLUG
RETAINING SPRING
Figure 2-3. Mark III adsorbent sampling system.
15
FRITTED STAINLESS STEEL DISC
*^ ^%* ^ I',
£&5-:-a^-*- 15-MM SOLV-SEAL JOINT
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Specifications
Peak spectral response: 500-600 nm
Mean spectral response: 500-600 ran
Relative response: < 10%
Angle of view: < 4°
Angle of projection: < 2°
Calibration error: < 2%
Response time: 1 second
Zero drift: < 1% (24 hrs)
Calibration drift: < 1% (24 hrs)
Operational test period: 168 hours
Output: 0-1 VDC
Power requirements: 115 VAC/50 Hz
Temperature range: 40° F to 125" F
Weight: 27 Ibs (approx.)
The transceiver lenses are cleaned daily, and an air purge is used to
keep the lenses free of dirt while inserted in the stack.
2.2 BOILER DESCRIPTION AND CHARACTERISTICS
2.2.1 Boiler Description
The boiler is of the two-drum Stirling type built by Babcock and
Wilcox in 1960. The boiler nameplate rating is 20.2 kg/s (160,000 Ib/hr)
steam flow. The unit is fired by six spreader stoker feeders supplied by the
Detroit Stoker Company (described in paragraph 2.2.2). The stoker is
equipped with a front-end discharge traveling grate. Figure 2-4 shows the
boiler layout and elevation.
The boiler is balanced draft; combustion air is supplied from under-
neath the grate by a forced-draft fan. The undergrate air plenum is divided
into two sections which are adjustable with an air damper. Grate combustion
air can be biased left to right across the stoker. The negative draft of the
furnace is supplied by an induced-draft fan located between the air preheater
and smoke stack.
16 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
L_L_/
12.6 m
4.88 m
(16'0")
(19'9")
Figure 2-4. Site 4 boiler
(23'OT
17
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
The boiler has an economizer and a pendant-type superheater. Combus-
tion air is preheated by a tubular-type air preheater located between the
induced-draft fan and the dust collector. The air preheater was previously
found to be defective during testing by KVB (Ref. 1). The defect caused a
fraction of the incoming air to be short circuited through the air heater and
out the stack.
Fly ash is removed with a Western Precipitator Multiclone dust
collector. This mechanical type cyclone dust collector is located between the
economizer and the air heater. The steam produced is superheated and used
both for electrical power generation and for direct heating. The following
data apply to this unit:
Based on 27.9 MJ/kg (12,000 Btu/lb) southern Illinois coal (April,
1961):
. Maximum continuous steam output, 20.2 kg/s (160,000 Ib/hr)
Efficiency (thermal), 87.78%
Based on 19.2 MJ/kg (8,240 Btu/lb) Montana coal December, 1972):
Maximum continuous steam output, 16.4 kg/s (130,000 Ib/hr)
. Efficiency (thermal), 32.63%
Steam conditions at superheater outlet:
. T = 672K (750° F)
out
. P = 2.9 MPa (425 psig)
. Design pressure =6.8 MPa (1000 psig)
Heating surfaces:
32 2
. Boiler heat transfer area = 1.316 x 10 m (14,168 ft. )
. Water wall = 2.0 x 102m2 (2,158 ft.2)
22 2
. Superheater, primary = 3.5 x 10 m (3,778 ft. )
22 2
Superheater, secondary = 1.61 x 10 m (1,731 ft. )
. Economizer = 3.95 x 10 m (4,250 ft. )
. Air heater = 1.21 x 103m2 (13,030 ft.2)
18 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
2.2.2 Stoker Description
The Site 4 boiler is fired by a Detroit Stoker Company Rotograte
spreader stoker. Figure 2-4 includes a side view of the stoker. This stoker
is fired by six individual feeders. Raw coal leaves the bunker and is
weighed by two coal scales as the coal is divided into left and right feed
streams. After the coal scales, the coal enters the left and right coal
distributors. Each distributor supplies raw coal to three feeders.
Each feeder can be independently adjusted to distribute coal on the
grate. Three mechanisms give this control. The first is a spill plate
adjustment which regulates the point at which coal is dropped onto the
rotating paddle wheel. Second, the length of stroke of the feed plate which
pushes the coal over the spill plate may be adjusted. The last mechanism is
the rotor speed. Additionally, the fuel bed thickness may be controlled by
the speed of the traveling grate.
2.2.3 Daily Test Activity
This section describes the daily test activity at Site 4 following
the monitor certification tests. The schedule of monitor certification test
events is presented in paragraph 3.1. A schedule of daily events is
presented in Table 2-2.
The data from the gaseous analyzers (NO, CO, CO , and Q^) were con-
tinuously recorded on strip chart recorders. Boiler control room data (steam
flow, pressure, etc.) were recorded eight times daily by the KVB technician.
Plant operating personnel recorded the data on an hourly basis. The gaseous
emissions data were recorded only during an eight-hour shift, but the strip
chart recorders recorded the data 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, along
with an automatic data-logger. No control room data were recorded during the
week-ends; however, the technician calibrated the instruments during the
week-ends.
Daily tasks consisted of (1) calibration and recording data, (2) con-
sultation with operators to assure operation in the low-NO mode, (3) peri-
odic maintenance of instruments and sample system, (4) visual inspection and
troubleshooting of the sampling system and instrumentation console, and (5)
procuring supplies and equipment for the particulate and Method 7 tests.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 2-2. SCHEDULE OF DAILY EVENTS - SITE 4
Time Event
0800 Calibrate (zero and span) gaseous
analyzers (NO, C0_, CO, and 0_).
Record gaseous emissions data. Record
boiler control room data. Consult with
operators concerning boiler operation.
0845 Calibrate opacity monitor.
0900 Perform daily systems checkout.
1000 Calibrate and record gaseous emissions
data.
1200 Calibrate and record gaseous emissions
data. Record control room data.
1400 Calibrate and record gaseous emissions
data.
1600 Calibrate and record gaseous emissions
data. Record control room data.
1700 Calibrate analyzers prior to departing
plant. Perform visual check of sampling
systems and boiler operation. Leave
instructions with operators.
20
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SECTION 3.0
TEST RESULTS
This section summarizes the emission and efficiency data collected on
the coal-fired spreader stoker boiler. The boiler was tested in the as-found
condition initially and for 30 days in the low-NO condition. The tests were
X
conducted with western coal as the fuel. The results presented herein
summarize the gaseous and particulate emissions data, efficiency, and
conclusions for the boiler operating under low NO^ conditions for extended
duration.
3.1 CONTINUOUS MONITOR CERTIFICATION TESTS
The continuous monitor described in the previous section was used to
measure the boiler gaseous emissions. Following shipment to the test site,
the monitoring system was installed and certification tests performed in
accordance with Performance Specifications 2 (PS2) and 3 (PS3), 40 CFR 60.
Appendix B (Appendix D in this document) establishes minimum performance
specifications that the NO monitoring system must meet in terms of eight
parameters: accuracy, calibration, error, two- and 24-hour zero drifts, two-
and 24-hour calibration drifts, response time, and operational period.
The continuous monitor system was installed and instruments were
initially calibrated on August 8, 1979. The following day the monitor
performance certification began. A daily event schedule for the certification
tests is presented in Table 3-1.
The performance of the continuous monitor is summarized in Table 3-2.
Also shown in the table are the monitor specifications extracted from PS2 and
PS3. Tables C-l through C-18, Appendix C, show the performance of each of
the analyzers for the certification tests.
21 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 3-1. SCHEDULE OF CERTIFICATION TEST EVENTS
SITE 4, COAL-FIRED SPREADER STOKER
Date
8/8/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/9/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/10/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
8/12/79
8/8/79
8/13/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
B/ll/79
8/11/79
B/ll/79
B/ll/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
8/14/79
8/15/79
8/16/79
Tune
1500
0900
1100
1300
1500
1700
1900
2100
2300
0900
1100
1300
1500
1700
1900
2100
2300
0900
1100
0900
0900
1100
0900
1130
1230
1330
1430
1530
1630
1730
1830
1930
0900
0900
0900
Event
Calibration error determination
Initial 24-hour zero and span reading
Initial 2-hour zero and span reading
1st 2-hour zero and span drift point
2nd 2-hour zero and span drift point
3rd 2-hour zero and span drift point
4th 2-hour zero and span drift point
5th 2-hour zero and span drift point
6th 2-hour zero and span drift point
7th 2-hour zero and span drift point
1st 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point. Initial 2-hour zero and calibration
reading.
8th 2-hour zero and span drift point
9th 2-hour zero and span drift point
10th 2-hour zero and span drift point
llth 2-hour zero and span drift point
12th 2-hour zero and span drift point
13th 2-hour zero and span drift point
14th 2-hour zero and span drift point
15th 2-hour zero and span drift point
16th 2-hour zero and span drift point
2nd 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point
3rd 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point
Instrument response tune tests
4th 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point
1st set of relative accuracy samples taken
2nd set of relative accuracy samples taken
3rd set of relative accuracy samples taken
4th set of relative accuracy samples taken
5th set of relative accuracy samples taken
6th set of relative accuracy samples taken
7th set of relative accuracy samples taken
8th set of relative accuracy samples taken
9th set of relative accuracy samples taken
5th 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point
6th 24-hour zero and calibration drift
point
7th and final 24-hour zero and calibration
drift point
22
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 3-2. INSTRUMENT SPECIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE
Parameter
Specifications*
Performance
A. Thermo Electron Series 10 NOx Analyzer
1. Accuracy
2. Calibration error mid
high
3. Zero drift (2-hour)
4. Zero drift (24-hour)
5. Calibration drift (2-hour)
6. Calibration drift (24-hour)
7. Response time
8. Operational period
B. Horiba Instruments PIR 2000 C02
1. Zero drift (2-hour)
2. Zero drift (24-hour)
3. Calibration drift (2-hour)
4. Calibration drift (24-hour)
5. Response time
6. Operational period
C. Beckman Instruments Model 742 O
1. Zero drift (2-hour)**
2. Zero drift (24-hour)**
3. Calibration drift (2-hour)
4. Calibration drift (24-hour)
5. Response time
6. Operational period
f 20% of mean ref. value
5 5% cal gas value
5 5% of cal gas value
2% of span
2% of span
2% of span
2.5% of span
15- minute maximum
168- hour minimum
Analyzer
< 0.4 pet C02
< 0.5 pet C02
S 0.4 pet C02
S 0.5 pet O>2
10 minutes
168- hour minimum
Analyzer
< 0.4 pet 02
S 0.5 pet 02
£ 0.4 pet O2
S 0.5 pet 02
10 minutes
168- hour minimum
7.77%, 9.17%
1.13%
0.55%
0.20%
0.19%
0.35%
0.52%
82 sec
727 hr
.063%
.09%
.155%
.257%
97 sec
727 hr
DNA*
DNA*
0.11%
.595%
73 sec
727 hr
* Instrument has no zero adjustment.
KVB11-6015-1225
23
-------
The data presented in Table 3-2 show that analyzers in the continuous
monitor bettered the performance specification values for each parameter for
each instrument.
Certified calibration gases were obtained from Scott Environmental
Technology Inc. The calibration gases included 50% and 90% span gases for
the NO, C02, CO, AND 02 analyzers, and a zero gas. In addition to the certi-
fied analysis supplied by the vendor, sample flasks were taken for each cali-
bration gas and sent to an independent laboratory for analysis.
Relative accuracy tests for the NO analyzer were performed as outlined
in PS2 using EPA Reference Method 7 (phenoldisulfonic acid [PDS] colorimetric)
as the standard. Nine sets of three PDS flasks were collected at one-hour
intervals at the beginning and end of the 30-day test period. All sample
flasks were returned to an independent laboratory for analysis. The results
of the relative accuracy determination are shown on pages C-14 and C-15 for
the start and end of the 30-day tests. Both tests showed that the NO instru-
ment greatly exceeded the accuracy requirements of PS2. The relative accuracy
of the Thermo Electron NO analyzer was about 8% based on the first test series
and about 9% based on the final test series. The relative accuracy require-
ment published in PS2 is < 20% of mean reference value.
3.2 COAL-FIRED STOKER BOILER TESTS
The continuous monitor system was installed by KVB personnel on
August 7, 1979 in the control room at Site 4, a coal-fired spreader stoker
boiler. A single unheated 9.5mm (3/8") nylon sample line was strung from the
duct downstream of the induced draft fan to the continuous monitor. A single
stainless steel probe with a sintered stainless steel filter was installed in
one of the center sampling ports of the duct. Particulate samples were taken
from the side of the duct according to EPA Method 5.
The boiler was initially tested in the baseline or as-found condition
on August 11. The boiler load for these two tests was approximately 27.7 MW
and 28.1 MW (94500 and 96000 Ib steam/hr). Triplicate PDS flask samples were
collected at hourly intervals for the monitor relative accuracy determination.
The average NO emission level was 279 ng/J (474 ppm @ 3% 02, dry) for the
nine-hour test.
24 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Two days later the boiler was adjusted to the low NO operating
condition. The NO control technology used at this facility was low excess
air (staged combustion showed no effect). The excess air in this stoker is
limited by smoke, ash clinkering, and burnout.
Clinkers are a fused mass of slag globules. The formation of clinkers
involves ash fusion, flow, and solidification. The viscosity of coal ash
slag is important in clinker formation. If the slag globules have low vis-
cosity at the temperture to which they are exposed, they will flow downward
toward the grate where they encounter entering air and are cod led. If this
causes them to stop flowing, they will solidify in fragments and will not
coalesce to form a larger clinker.
when coal burns on a grate, trouble with clinkers can be avoided by
burning a thin fuel bed. When there are no clinkers, the flow of air through
the fuel bed is uniform over the entire grate, and the desired rate of com-
bustion is maintained. Once clinkers have started, they form at an increasing
rate because the restriction to air flow by the clinker slows the combustion
and causes the fuel to accumulate into a thicker fuel bed. Restricted air
flow and thick fuel beds cause reducing conditions which favor clinker for-
mation. This causes unburned fuel to drop into the ash pit.
Excess oxygen was lowered to approximately 9%, which is a level
operating personnel felt was the lowest practical limit based on the above
criteria. The operating personnel were quite apprehensive about lowering the
excess 02 by any amount. The excess 02 could have easily been maintained at
least a half a percent lower. This apprehension is apparent when looking
at the hourly data (found in Appendix F). These data show that the operators
kept the O lower when our personnel were in the plant, and used their
standard 0 levels at other times (all shifts of operators were informed
which excess 0 level to use).
Triplicate Method 5 particulate tests were conducted after the boiler
operating conditions were stabilized in the low NOx condition. Triplicate
Method 5 measurements were again made at the end of the test period with the
boiler still in the low NOx condition. One of these three tests included
25 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
collecting a sample for POM analysis as described in Section 2.1.3. Particu-
late tests including POM were then conducted in the baseline condition.
Coal, bottom ash, and fly ash samples were collected as shown in
Table 3-6. A summary of all emissions data is presented in Table 3-3.
3.2.1 Gaseous Emissions
During a previous program (Ref. 1), the effect of excess oxygen on
NO emissions was evaluated for this boiler. As seen by Figures E-4 and E-5
in Appendix E, NO emissions were higher for eastern coal than for western
coal by approximately 100 ppm in the 02 range examined in these particulate
tests.
In the same fashion as most boilers, this unit exibited a sharp
decrease in NO emissions with decreasing 02. Figure 3-1 shows a decrease
of approximately 300 ppm NO per percent 0 . This figure represents data
from the particulate tests only as an average case. Figure 3-1 also shows
that the baseline condition produces points with higher NO emissions than
in the low excess air condition. From the particulate tests alone a
reduction of 19% from baseline was achieved for NO emissions in the low
excess air mode.
Additionally, this unit shows a sharp decrease in NO emissions with
decreasing steam load as seen in Figure 3-2 and the data presented in
Appendix E. These data represent short duration tests however any may not
be statistically significant.
An interesting trend was also found in Figure 3-3. Because of
entrainment of fine coal particles a reduction of undergrate air also reduces
particulate loading along with NO emissions. This is a bonus that could be
found in many older coal-fired units.
An examination of Figure 3-4 will show the statistical spread of NO
emissions for the test period. The geometric mean is 211 ng/J (360 ppm) with
a geometric dispersion of 1.06. This figure also shows that 99% of the time
the NO emissions will be less than 245 ng/J.
26 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
to
-j
TABLE 3-3. SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS AND GASEOUS AND ^ARTICULATE EMISSIONS
AT SITE 4 (COAL-FIRED SPREADER STOKER)
24 HOUR
Load
Date
B/ll/79
8/12/79
B/13/79
B/14/79
8/15/79
8/16/79
8/17/79
8/18/79
B/ 19/79
B/20/79
B/21/79
9/22/79
8/23/79
8/24/79
B/25/79
B/26/79
B/27/79
8/28/79
8/29/79
8/30/79
B/ 3 1/79
9/01/79
9/02/79
9/03/79
9/04/79
9/05/79
9/06/79
9/07/79
9/08/79
9/09/79
9/10/79
9/11/79
9/12/79
MW
24.6
19.1
21.7
21.4
21.2
21.7
23.0
22.0
IB. 3
24.5
24.0
23.5
21.7
21.5
IS. 5
1G.4
22.9
24.1
25.9
24. B
26.6
22.7
18.5
19.1
27.2
25.7
23.4
22.2
19.6
19.1
23. B
22.6
1Q3 lb-
10 hr.
B4
65
74
73
72
74
78
75
62
84
82
60
74
73
67
63
78
82
88
as
91
77
63
65
93
ea
BO
76
60
65
ei
78
' °2
%
9.3
10.8
10.0
10.2
10.5
9.9
9.5
9.9
10.8
9.4
9.2
9.5
10.4
9.9
1O.S
10.6
9.9
9.3
9.1
9.4
B.7
9.7
10.5
10.3
a. a
9.1
9.7
9.7
10.1
10.2
9.4
8.8
10.3
DATA
u)2-
%
10.1
8.6
9.6
9.5
9.2
9.6
9.7
9.4
B.3
9.8
10.0
9.8
8.9
9.8
9.1
8.7
9.6
9.9
10.4
10.1
10.7
9.9
9.1
9.5
10. B
10.4
9.9
9.7
9.1
9.1
10.1
10.4
B.5
NO
ppn 3»
02, dry
390
389
371
341
384
360
362
369
393
374
338
368
350
358
356
340
374
348
372
368
350
348
335
333
353
363
355
358
385
407
374
382
349
PAHTICULATE DATA
Load ParticulaLes
3 lb. 2 2 lb. Opacity
ag/J MW hr. t * nq/J MMBTU »
229 27.7 94.5 8.9 10.4 667 1.55 35
28. 1 96.0 9.5 10.4 612 1.42 35
229
218 27.4 93.5 8.5 11.3 4SO 1.05 25
200 27.5 94.0 8.45 11.2 543 1.26 25
225
211
212
217
231
219
198
216
206
210
209
199
220
204
210
216
2O6
204
208
196
207
213
208 27.8 95 8.82 10.95 424 0.99 25
210 28.0. 95.5 8.7 10.95 451 1.05 25
226 25.8 88 8.82 10.74 500 1.16 25
239
220 27. 5 94 8.5 11.04 575 1.34 30
224 27.8 95 6.96 10.31 600 1.40 25
211
Stack T
Efficiency
» K °F Commence
84.47 430 315 Baseline - High load
84.58 430 315 Baseline
High EA
85.45 432 317.5 LEA
85.78 426 307.5 LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
nigh o
LEA
USA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
LEA
1.KA
LEA
84.81 439 330 LEA
85.19 435 323 LEA
85.48 430 314 LEA
High 0
84.68 436 326 LEA, POM
85.33 430 314 Baseline, POM
TERMINATED MONITORING
Corrected to 31
dry
-------
500
450
C
1
04
»
CN
0
<*i 400
1
350
300
0
1 1 1
4-2
04-1
04-9
O
4-7
5
Q 4-8 W
O 4-6
^^vJ 9 Baseline
Q Low Excess Air
-
rA i i i i i i
1 y
8.40 8.60 8.80 9.0 9.20 9.40 9
o2, %
Figure 3-1. NO Emissions as a Function of Excess
Site 4 - Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker.
28
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
500
450
CN
0 400
g 350
300
O4-'
Baseline
Low Excess Air
4-2
4-1
, 4-9
Oo«
4-8 4-6
4-4
4-3
25.0 26.0 27.0
LOAD, MW
28.0 29.0
Figure 3-2. NO Emissions as a Function of Boiler Load
Site 4 - Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker.
29
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
2.0
3 1.5
4J
CO
O
H
a
i.o
3
O
H
P
H
i
0.50
0.0
4-5
Baseline
Low Excess Air
4-1
4-9
4-2
O
4-4
O O 4-7
4-3 4^5
I
300 350 400
NO (dry, @ 3% O ), ppm
450
500
Figure 3-3. Solid Particulate Loading as a Function of NO
Emissions. Site 4, Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker.
30
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
I
a*
o
300
200
O
z
100
i i i i MIiiii i i i iiii n n r
SITE 4 - COAL FIRED
STOKER
i
x = 211 ng/J
g = 1.06
I I I I I I I II II II I
0.01 0.05 0.10.5 12 5 10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
PERCENT LESS THAN
90 95 98 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
Kl
K>
Figure 3-4. NO Emissions Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader-Stoker.
-------
3.2.2 Particulate Emissions
The results of the particulate tests are presented in Table 3-4 for
low excess air tests and baseline tests. Two of the tests (NO.'s 4-8 S 4-9)
were also used for collecting samples for analysis of polycyclic organic
matter (POM) by modifying the Method 5 sampling train as described in Section
2.1.3. The average particulate loading for the unmodified operation was
found to be 626 ng/J (1.46 lb/106 Btu) while the average particulate loading
in the LEA mode of operation was 491 ng/J (1.14"lb/106 Btu). This is a
decrease of 22% in particulate loading for low NOx operation.
Figure 3-5 shows that the amount of particulates {Figure 3-3) decreases
as excess 02 is decreased. This indicates that entrainment is a major factor
in particulate loading for this specific boiler. Although not many different
boiler load settings were used, Figure 3-6 shows that particulate loading
does not seem to be a function of load. Figure 3-3 is unique in that it
indicates the low excess air condition reduced solid particulates in addition
to reducing the NO emissions. This clearly indicates that entrainment was
indeed the major cause of particulate loading. The reason for this entrain-
ment was of course too many fines for the given air flow. The operators at
this test site were previously using a harder eastern coal with less fines.
However, they were still running their boiler on western coal with the same
techniques they used with eastern coal.
3.2.3 POM Emissions
Samples were collected for analysis of polycyclic organic matter
using a Method 5 sampling train with XAD-2, a POM absorber, inserted. Sample
time was extended to two hours to provide a large enough sample for Battelle
to analyze. Following the sampling period, the organic resin module was
sealed and returned to Battelle Columbus Laboratories for analysis. The
sampling probe and glassware were washed with a 50-50 mixture of methylene
chloride and methanol per Battelle instructions. The filter and wash were
also sent to Battelle following weighing.
These samples were analyzed by capillary-El GC-MS utilizing a 30M
SE-52 column with hydrogen as a carrier gas. All data were collected by single
ion monitoring (SIM) to improve selectivity and sensitivity.
KVB11-6015-1225
32
-------
TABLE 3-4. PARTICU1ATE DATA SUMMARY SITE 4, COAL-FIRED SPREADER-STOKER
Test Date Load 02 Participates
No. 1979 MW 10J]b/hc % ng/J Ib/MMBlu
4-1 8-11 27.7 94.5 8.9 667 1.55
4-2 8-11 28.1 96 9.5 612 1.42
4-3 8-13 27.4 93.5 0.5 450 1.05
4-4 8-14 27.5 94 8.45 543 1.26
4-5 9-6 27.8 95 8.82 424 0.99
4-6 9-7 28.0 95.5 0.71 451 1.05
4-7 9-fl 25.8 61) 0.82 500 1.16
LJ 4-8 9-10 27.5 94 0.5 575 1.14
10
4-9 9-11 27.8 95 8.96 600 1.40
Opacity Test
% Description
35 Baseline
35, Baseline
25 I.EA
25 LEA
25 LEA
25 LEA
25 I.EA
3O tEA, VOM
25 Baseline. POM
Cfl
!-
ffi
O
l/i
fsj
to
Ul
-------
2.0
3
4J 1 I
n x"
s
Q
H
S -5°
0.0
O4"
-A-
Baseline
Low Excess Air
j i
4-1
o«--
1
8.40
8.60
8.80
9.0
9.20 9.40
9.60
EXCESS O , (%)
Figure 3-5. Solid Particulate Loading as a Function of Excess 02-
Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker.
34
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
5
a
o
H
(X
Q
H
J
2.0
1.0
-50
O 4-
.0 L^.
Baseline
Low Excess Air
1
25.0
26.0
'4-8
(4-4
O-3-O-6
1
27.0
28.0
29.0
LOAD, MW
Figure 3-6. Solid Particulate Loading as a Function of Boiler Load
Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker.
35
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
The results of the analyses are presented in ug per total sample.
The quantitative detection limit was 0.5 ug; thus samples with POM's present
at levels lower than this are reported as <0.5 ug (the standard deviation
at lower levels was prohibitively high for accurate quantitation). Samples
reporting POM values of ND (none detected) are at a level of less than 0.1 yg
(the approximate qualitative detection limit). The standard deviation on
points around 0.5 ug averaged around j^20%, at levels around 5 ug it averaged
around HH 15%, and at levels above 12 yg the standard deviation averaged
around + 10%.
The results of the Battelle analyses are presented in Table 3-5 for
the low NOx and baseline operating conditions. The POM analyses for the low
NOx condition are presented in the first column under test 4-8 while the data
for the baseline condition are presented in the last column. For each test
the extracts from all four test components (adsorbent trap, filter, cyclone,
and probe wash) were combined for analysis as one sample. Only a small
difference between the two conditions is evident in only three sets of species:
phenanthrene, methyl anthracenes/phenanthrenes, and dibenzanthracenes. It is
therefore concluded that the low NO condition has not affected POM emissions.
36 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 3-5. SUMMARY OF POM ANALYSES SITE 4,
COAL-FIRED SPREADER STOKER
POM
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Methyl Anthracenes/Phenanthrenes
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Methyl Pyrene/Fluoranthene
Benzo(c)phenanthrene
Benz (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Methyl Chrysene s
Dimethylbenzanthracenes
Benzof luoranthenes
Benz (e) pyrene
Benz (a)pyrene
Perylene
Indeno- pyrene
Benzo (ghi)perylene
Methylcholanthrenes
Dibenzanthracenes
Dibenzpyrenes
Coronene
Total Sample Volume
standard m
Load
Excess 0 , %
Particulates
lig/
1.5
ND
0.6
<0.5
<0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
ND
<0.5
Test 4-8
LEA
yg/m .
0.739
ND
0.296
<0.246
<0.246
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.246
<0.246
<0.246
<0.246
ND
<0.246
2.029 m3
27.5 MW
8.5
575 ng/J
Test 4-9
Baseline
yg ug/m
2.0 0.
ND
0.9 0.
<0.5 <0.
<0.5 <0.
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
<0.5 <0.
<0.5 <0.
0.5 <0.
ND
ND
<0.5 <0.
2.340 m3
27.8 MW
9.0
600 ng/J
855
ND
385
214
214
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
214
214
214
ND
ND
214
37
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
3.2.4 Boiler Efficiency
Boiler efficiency calculations were made for as-found and low NOx
operating conditions. The ASME Abbreviated Sfficiency Test method was used
to determine the boiler efficiency. This test method is described in
Appendix A.
Coal, fly ash, and bottom ash samples were collected during each sec
of particulate tests. Coal samples were submitted to an independent laboratory
for ultimate and heating value analyses. Fly and bottom ash samples were
analyzed for carbon content and heating value. The results of these analyses
are tabulated in Table 3-6. These data indicate that the carbon and moisture
content vary the most within these coals.
Combustible losses were calculated using the ash content of the fuel,
the particulate loading, and the ash heating value. The fly ash was deter-
mined from the flue gas particulate loading, an assumed multiclone collection
efficiency of 70% and fuel flow rate. The total ash was determined from
the fuel analysis and the fuel flow rate. Bottom ash was the difference
between total ash and fly ash. A mass weighted heating value of dry refuse
was then calculated and used for determining the combustible losses. Table 3-7
lists a summary of the boiler efficiencies. It is apparent from the data
presented in this table that LEA operation results in an efficiency increase
of about 1.2% with a primary contribution due to dry gas losses. Another
contribution was improper burnout of the fuel bed. It was observed that some
hot coals dropped into the ash pit. Thus, while the ash had no heating value
(as seen in Table 3-6} when it was analyzed some additional heat was lost
through the ash pit. Some of this heat is of course transferred back up
through the boiler
Figure 3-7 shows unit efficiency as a function of excess oxygen for
the boiler. This figure clearly illustrates the effect that LEA firing has on
boiler efficiency. This curve shows that efficiency increases approximately
1% for each 1.5% decrease in excess oxygen.
38 KVB11-5015-1225
-------
TABLE 3-6. SUMMARY OF COAL AND ASH ANALYSES FOR SITE 4
(Coal-Fired Spreader Stoker)
CJ
IO
CJ
£
o
Ul
1
f 1
ro
to
Ln
Test
Date
Ultimate Analysis:
Coal
(in percent by weight)
Moisture
Carbon
Hydrogen
Nitrogen
SulCur
Ash
Oxygon (by difference )
Meat of Combustion.
Gross Btu/]b.
Net Blu/ib.
Ash
rly Abl\:
Carbon I
Gross btu/lb.
Dot torn Ash:
Co rbon I
Cross Dtu/lb.
4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9
8/11/79 8/11/79 0/13/79 8/14/79 9/6/79 9/7/79 9/0/79 9/10/79 9/11/79
24.83 24.83 23 38 22.77 22.20 22.54 22.54 22.00 21 10
46.69 46.69 40.20 49.39 40.75 49.17 49.17 48.36 49.95
3-35 3.35 3.56 3.53 3.47 3.64 3.64 3.46 3.55
0-76 0.76 0.79 0.80 0.77 O.UO 0.80 0.79 o.OO
0.82 0.02 0.57 0.50 0.64 0.74 0.74 1.07 0.65
10-24 10.24 0.91 8 15 9.21 9 J4 9.34 9.54 9.44
1J.31 13.31 14.51 14.66 14.00 13 77 13.77 13. 9O 14.51
8270 ll?70 0040 0008 0740 0925 0925 0529 8904
7960 79HO 0510 0561 11410 0580 0500 8200 8655
5-30 5 30 5.30 5.30 11.59 11 59 11.59 11.59 11.59
0000000 00
4-43 4.43 4 4J 4.43 1.38 1.30 1.38 I 3fl 1 J8
OOOOOOOOO
-------
TABLE 3-7. SUMMARY OF BOILER EFFICIENCY CALCULATIONS FOR SITE 4
COAL FIRED SPREADER STOKER BOILER
o
2
§
0>
o
in
1
t .
to
10
Ul
Test No.
Date
Test Load
10 Ib. stcam/hr.
MW
% of Capacity
Test Conditions
Stack 02, %
Stack C02> »
Stack T (K/'F)
FD Fan T (K/°F)
Boiler Heat Losses (in \)
Dry Gas
Moisture in Fuel
Moisture from II
Combustibles
Radiation
Total Losses
UoiJer Efficiency, %
4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4/6 4-7 4-8 4-9
8/11/79 8/11/79 8/13/79 8/14/79 9/6/79 9/7/79 9/8/79 9/1O/79 9/11/79
94.5 96 93.5 94 95 95.5 08 94 95
27.7 2R.1 27.4 27.5 27.8 28.0 25.8 27.5 27.8
73 74 72 72 73 73 68 72 73
8.9 9.5 8.5 8.45 0.82 8.71 8.82 8.5 8.96
10.4 10.4 11.3 11.2 10.95 10.95 10.74 11.04 10.31
430/315 430/315 432/317.5 426/307.5 439/330 435/323 430/314 436/326 430/314
309/96.5 310/98 306/90.5 306/91.5 305/90 308/94 309/97 305/H0.5 307/93
7.22 7.12 6.63 6.48 7 . 4O 6.98 6.73 7.30 7.19
3.41 3.41 3.02 2.92 2.93 2.89 2.87 3.00 2.68
4.15 4.15 4.14 4.07 4.11 4.20 4.17 4.19 4.05
00-0000000
.75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75 .75
15.53 15.42 14.55 14.22 15.19 14.81 14.52 _ 15.32 14.67
84.47 84.58 85.45 85.78 84.81 85.19 85. 4H 84.08 85.33
-------
U
c
-------
3.2.5 Data Reduction
The gaseous emissions data measured by the analyzers were recorded on
strip chart recorders as described earlier. Additionally, an automatic data
logger was also used for this 30-day test. The data logger produces printed
hourly averages which are synthesized from approximately 900 spot readings.
These hourly averages were then keypunched for computer data input.
Strip chart records were collected from the recorders along with
copies of the appropriate control room data logs. The recorder charts were
reviewed to detect any possible data gaps. In addition, the strip chart
records were verified by comparison with measurements recorded by a technician
on an hourly basis.
A tabulation of hourly averages was compiled for the entire test
period. After the data were compiled, they were spot checked and edited to
detect obvious errors and anomalies. The data were then keypunched on cards
for input to the computer. Figure 3-8 shows an example of the list of hourly
averages. The entire list of hourly averages is presented in Appendix F.
After data editing was completed, 24-hour averages were calculated by
the use of a computer program. Figure 3-9 shows a summary of the 24-hour
averages for Site 4. Although these 24-hour and hourly averages are statisti-
cally sound, they inherently tend to conceal the transient emissions of the
boiler.
A statistical summary was prepared to determine the following para-
meters for the 24-hour averages: mean, standard deviation, maximum, minimum,
range, and average deviation. These parameters were calculated assuming the
data were normally distributed. When the data were plotted on normal
probability paper it was apparent that they were not normally distributed.
Further analysis indicated that the data were log-normally distributed. The
graph shown in Figure 3-10 illustrates the performance of the coal-fired
spreader stoker based on the 24-hour averages. The data points that are
plotted are found in Table 3-8. The mean NO emission rate is 211 ng/J
with a geometric dispersion of 1.06. The data show that 99 percent of the
time the NO emissions were less than 245 ng/J.
42
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
t*
**
*
*
*
* DATE
TIME
**********
« O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
» O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
*« O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
** O/ 0/79
** O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
« O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
8/11/79
* 8/11/79
8/1 1/79
« 8/11/79
* 8/11/79
* 8/11/79
8/11/79
» 8/11/79
*« 6/11/79
8/11/79
» 8/11/79
8/11/79
«* 8/11/79
*******
0
U
u
0
0
0
U
u
0
0
0
120U
1300
14QO
1500
160U
1700
moo
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
t ***** t
***************
HUURLY DATA
DRY STACK &A!> CONCENTRATION
LUAD
M«TH
02
VOLX
f£AS
C02
VOLX
MEAS
NO
PPMV
MEAS
NO
PPnv
jJOf
V W 1
NU
NC/J
* »
**
**
«*
**
*
**
a*********************************************
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
23.4
27.2
28.4
26.4
28.4
28.1
27.8
20.1
28.4
19.0
17.9
17.0
17."
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
. .0
.0
8.5
9.0
8.9
8.9
9.3
9.1
9.5
9.6
8.0
9.2
9,o
10.5
1U.6
**********
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
13.4
10.2
10.4
10.3
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.8
8.9
9.0
8.3
8.3
********
o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
191.
284.
281.
28o.
291.
273.
291.
302.
2*2.
190.
199.
201.
203.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
276.
427.
419.
427.
449.
414.
457.
478.
410.
291.
315.
346.
353.
**************
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
162.
251.
246.
250.
264.
243.
268.
281.
24 1 ,
171.
185.
203.
207.
*
*
**
*
**
**
**
**
«
»*
**
**
**
**
*»
**
**
**
**
**
*
*
t*
*******
Figure 3-8. Format of hourly emissions data, Site 4
Coal-Fired Soreader Stoker.
KVB11-6015-1225
43
-------
**t>*******<*«***«<»«»»**«*******
02
vuu
HEAS
ft ft ft ft ft ft ft '
v.3
10.8
10.0
10.2
10.5
9.9
0.5
9.9
10. B
9.11
9.2
9.5
10.4
9.9
10.5
10.6
9.9
9.3
9.1
9.4
8.7
9.7
10.5
10.3
6.0
9.1
9.7
9.7
10*1
1U.2
9.4
6.8
10.3
*******
C02
von
MEAS
ft ft ft ft ft * ft1
10,1
e.b
9,b
9.5
9.2
9.6
9.7
9. a
6.3
9.8
10.0
9.8
6.9
9.8
9,1
8.7
«».&
9,9
10.4
10,1
10.7
9,9
9.1
9,5
10.8
10.4
9,9
9,7
9,1
9.1
10.1
10.4
8.5
NO
PPMV
MEAS
t ft ft* * t ft 1
21'!
225.
204.
224.
221.
230.
227.
222.
241.
220.
235.
206.
221.
20H,
195,
231.
225,
245.
235.
239.
217.
207.
198.
236.
239.
223.
224.
231.
244.
241.
257.
214.
NO
PPMV
3*0«
t * ft ft ft ft
390.
389,
371.
341.
580.
360.
362.
369.
393.
374.
338.
366,
3bO.
358.
356.
340.
374.
348.
372.
366.
350.
346.
355.
333.
353.
36],
355.
358.
385.
407.
374.
382.
359.
*«*****
NO
NG/J
ft ft ft ft ft * *1
229.
229.
216.
200.
225.
211.
212.
217.
231.
219,
198.
216.
206.
210.
209,
199,
220.
204.
216.
216,
206.
204,
206.
J96.
207.
213.
206.
210.
226.
239.
220.
224.
211.
*
*
*
*
*
*
i* **
*
ft*
**
*
*
ft*
ft*
**
»«
*a
*
**
*
**
**
**
»
*
*
a*
**
a
»
**
**
*«
t
*
*
****
Figure 3-9. Summary of 24-hour Data, Site 4
44
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE 3-8. FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF NO EMISSIONS AT SITE 4
Cell
(ng/J)
195-200
201-205
206-210
211-215
216-220
221-225
226-230
231-235
236-240
Frequency
4
2
8
4
8
2
3
1
1
Cum.Freq.
4
6
14
18
26
28
31
32
33
%
12
18
41
53
76
82
91
94
97
n = 33
% = (cum.freq.)(100)/(n+l)
X (geometric mean) = 211 ng/J
.geometric _ 3
dispersion
1.06
45
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ffl
I
o»
o
l/l
I
300
200
o>
i
100
I I 1 I III 1 1 \I I I I II 1 1
"Tl T
SITE 4 - CX)AL FIRED
STOKER
L I 1 I I I I 1 I
x = 211 ng/J
g = 1.06
1 I I I I I 11 II II 1
0.01 0.05 0.10.5 1 2
5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 00
PERCENT LESS THAN
90 95 90 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
Figure 3-10. NO Emissions Site 4 Coal-Fired Spreader-Stoker.
-------
The data were also separated into three constant load and excess 0 ranges
in which the data appeared to fall. However, the NO emissions showed an
increase in geometric dispersion with both these methods of categorization.
A plot of the 24-average NO emission as a function of days from
start of testing is shown in Figure 3-11. This plot'shows the range of
the NO measurements to be between 196 and 239 ng/J with most of the data
between 200 and 220 ng/J. Excess oxygen was also plotted as a function of
days from start of testing and is presented in Figure 3-12.
Observation of the hourly average data shows that during periods when
KVB personnel were present, the excess oxygen was generally lower than other
periods.
Operating personnel were requested to maintain the excess 0 level as
low as possible without smoking or clinkering. However, the 0 levels tend
to be somewhat higher when KVB personnel are not present. The overall 0
level is lower than normal for the entire test period. The average excess
0 level for 33 days was 9.8%.
Emission factors for the coal-fired stoker were calculated using the
procedure set forth in 40CFR60, Subpart D. The NO emission factor (dry
basis) was calculated using the following equation:
" "a ^d 20.9 - % 02d
Where E = Pollutant emission rate, ng/J (Ib/million Btu)
CQ-= NO concentration, ng/scn (Ib/scf)
Fd= Stoichiometric conversion factor, 2.63 x 10~7
dscm/J (9,780 dscf/million Btu), for bituminous coal
02= Oxygen concentration, percent by volume, dry
47 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
240
220
200
180
160
140
CP
= 120
O
2 100
80
60
40
20
0
i
CO
J L
i
in
oo
en
r-
o
fM
I
CO
J l i i
I
m
CN
CO
a-.
i
o
i
00
01
r^
i
T
10 12 14 16 18 20 22
DAYS FROM START OF TEST
_J I I I L
24 26 28 30 32
Figure 3-11.
24-Hour Average NO Emissions as a Function of Days from
Start of Testing.
48
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
11
10
o
ui
ta
o
u
x
I I
I
I
1 I
I
10 12 14 16 18 20 22
DAYS FROM START OF TEST
24 26 28 30
32
Figure 3-12. 24-Hour Average of Excess Oxygen as a Function of Days
from Start of Testing.
49
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
The conversion of measured NO values (ppmv) to ng/scm is made by multiplying
by 1.912xl06. To convert from ppm to Ib/scf, multiply by 1.19x10" . However,
it should be pointed our that the stoichiometric conversion factor (F ) is
a generalized number which is based on a wide variety of bituminous coals.
NO emissions were measured as MO dry and the NO emission rates
x x
reported herein are calculated based on the molecular weight of NO .
50 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SECTION 4.0
REFERENCES
1. Maloney, K. L., et ai., "Systems Evaluation of the Use of Low-Sulfur
Western Coal in Existing Small and Intermediate-Sized Boilers," EPA
Contract No. 68-02-1863, EPA 600/7-78-153a.
2. Cato, G. A., et al., "Field Testing: Application of Combustion
Modifications to Control Pollutant Emissions from Industrial
Boilers - Phase I," EPA 650/2-74-078a, NTIS No. PB 238 920,
June 1975.
3. Cato, G. A., et al., "Field Testing: Application of Combustion
Modifications to Control Emissions from Industrial Boilers - Phase
II," EPA 600/2-76-086a, NTIS No. PB 253 500, April 1976.
51 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APPENDIX A
EFFICIENCY MEASUREMENTS
52 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
EFFICIENCY
Unit efficiencies for boilers are calculated and reported according
to the ASME Power Test Codes for Steam Generation Units, PTC 4.1-1965. These
codes present instructions for two acceptable methods of determining thermal
efficiency. One method is the direct measurement of input and output and
requires the accurate measurement of the quantity and high-heating value of
the fuel, heat credits, and the heat absorbed by the working fluids. The
second method involves the direct measurements of heat losses and is re-
ferred to as the heat loss method. This method requires the determination
of losses, heat credits, and ultimate analysis and high-heat value of the
fuel. Some of the major heat losses include losses due to heat in dry flue
gas, losses due to fuel moisture content, losses due to combustible material
in refuse and flue gas, and radiatiort losses. Heat credits are defined as
those amounts added to the process in forms other than the chemical heat
in the fuel "as fired." These include quantities such as sensible heat in
the f.uel, heat in the combustion air, and heat from power conversion in a
pulverizer or fan. The relationships between input, output, credits, and
losses for a steam generator are illustrated in Figure A-l.
KVB's experience has shown the heat-loss efficiency determination
method to be the most reliable when working with industrial boilers. Ac-
curate fuel input measurements are rarely possible on industrial boilers due
to the lack of adequate instrumentation, thus making the input-output method
undesirable. The accuracy of the efficiency based on the heat loss method
is determined primarily by the accuracy of the flue gas temperature measure-
ment immediately following the last heat removal station, the stack gas
excess O2 level, the fuel analysis, the ambient temperature, and proper
identification of the combustion device external surfaces (for radiation
losses). Determination of the radiation and other associated losses may
appear to be a rather imposing calculation, but in practice it can be ac-
complished by utilizing standard efficiency calculation procedures. Inac-
curacies in determining efficiency occasionally occur even with the heat
53 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
HEAT IN FUEL (H,) (CHEMICAL)
mmmm*
NvllOPE.
PA HEAT IN ENTERING AIR
BZ HEAT IN ATCUIZING STEAM
B| SEMU3LE HEAT IN FUEL
BI PULVERIZER OR CRUSHER POWER
B« BOILER CIRCULATING PUMP POWER
BI PRIMARY AIR FAN POWER
BI RECIRCULATING GAS FAN POWER
B.A HEAT SUPPLIED BY MOISTURE
IN ENTERING AIP
B. HEAT IN COOLING HATER
LOSSES (L)
CREDITS (BJ
c ^
L !
f
I /-
HEAT IN PRIMARY STEAM
HEAT IN OESUPERHEATER WATER AND CIRCULATING PUMP INJECTION WATER
HEAT IN FEEDWATER
HEAT IN SLOWDOWN AND CIRCULATING PUMP LEAK.OFF WATER
HEAT IN STEAM FOR MISCELLANEOUS USES
HEAT IN REHEAT STEAM OUT
HEAT INOESUPERHEATER WATER
I HEAT IN REHEAT STEAM IN
LUC UNBURNED CARBON IN REFUSE
LS HEAT IN DRY GAS
L.i MOISTURE IN FUEL
«*
L.A
I-I
Lco
MOISTURE FROM BURNING HYDROGEN
MOISTURE IN AIR
HEAT IN ATOMIZING STEAM
CARBON MONOXIDE
UUH UNBURNEO HYDROGEN
LUMC
UNBURNED HYDROCARBONS
L3 RADIATION AND CONVECTION
L, RADIATION TO ASH PIT. SENSIBLt HEAT IN
SLA3 1 LATENT HEAT OF FUSION OF SLAG
L4 SENSIBLE HEAT IN FLUE DUST
L, MEAT IN PULVERIZER REJECTS
L.
HEAT IN COOLING WATER
L. SOOT BLOVING
OUTPUT = INPUT - LOSSES
DEFINITION- EFFICIENCY (PERCENT) = (*) = ° lo°
* '°0
HEAT BALANCE. H,-t-B = OUTPUT + L OR
100
Figure A-l. Heat balance of steam generator.
54
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
loss method primarily because of out-of-calibration unit instrumentation
such as the stack gas exit temperature. However, this problem has been re-
solved by KVB test engineers through the use of portable instrumentation
and separate temperature readings.
The abbreviated efficiency test procedure which considers only the
major losses and the chemical heat in the fuel as input will be followed.
Tables A-l and A-2 are the ASME Test Forms for Abbreviated Efficiency Tests
on steam generators which exemplify the type of forms to be used for re-
cording the necessary data and performing the required calculations.
KVB has developed a program for the HP-67 calculator which will pro-
vide the heat loss efficiency from the stack data. Figure A-2 shows the HP-
67 keyed calculation sheet for calculating efficiency by the ASME Heat Loss
Method.
55 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SUMMARY SHEET
FOR
TABLE A-l
A.SME TEST FORM
ABBREVIATED EFFICIENCY
TEST
PTC 4. l.o (1964'
TEST NO. BOILER NO.
DATE
O*'NER OF PLANT LOCATION
TEST CONDUCTED BY OBJECTIVE OF TEST
DURATION
BOILER MAKE* TYPE HATED CAPACITY
STOKER TYPE & SIZE
PULVERIZER. TYPE & SIZE BURNER. TYPE
FUEL I£ED MINE COUNTY STATE
& SIZE
SIZE AS FIRED
PRESSURES & TEMPERATURES FUEL DATA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
U
STEAM PRESSURE IN BOILER DRUM
STEAM PRESSURE AT S. H OUTLET
STEAM PRESSURE AT R H. INLET
STEAM PRESSURE AT R. H OUTLET
STEAM TEMPERATURE AT S H OUTLET
STEAM TEMPERATURE AT R H INLET
STEAM TEMPERATURE AT R.H OUTLET
WATER TEMP. ENTERING IECON KBOILER)
STEAM QUALITY '.MOISTURE OR P.P M.
AIR TEMP AROUND BOILER (AMBIENT)
TEMP AIR FOR COMBUSTION
TEMPERATURE OF FUEL
CAS TEMP LEAVING (Bo.l.r) (Econ.) (An Hir.)
GAS TEMP. ENTERING AH (If conditions to b«
ptio
ptio
piio
p»o
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
UNIT QUANTITIES
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
::
23
24
25
ENTHALPY OF SAT.LIQUiD (TOTAL HEAT)
ENTHALPY OF (SATURATED) (SUPERHEATED)
STM
ENTHALPY OF SAT. FEED TO (BOILER)
(ECON.)
ENTHALPY OF REHEATED STEAM R.H. INLET
ENTHALPY OF REHEATED STEAM R. H.
OUTLET
HEAT ABS/LB OF STEAM (ITEM 16-ITEM 17)
HEAT ABS.'LB R.H. STEAM (ITEM 19. ITEM 18)
DRY REFUSE (ASH PIT * FLY ASH) PER LB
AS FIRED FUEL
Biu PER LB IN REFUSE (WEIGHTED AVERAGE)
CARBON BURNED PER LB AS FIRED FUEL
DRY GAS PER LB AS FIRED FUEL BURNED
Btu/lb
Btu/lb
Btu/lb
Btu/lb
Biu/lb
Biu'lb
Btu/lb
Ib/lb
Btu/lb
Ib/lb
Ib/lb
HOURLY QUANTITIES
26
27
28
29
30
31
ACTUAL WATER EVAPORATED
REHEAT STEAM FLOW
RATE OF FUEL FIRING IAS FIRED «o
TOTAL HEAT INPUT I1."1"..??.. *.!'? *')
HEAT OUTPUT IN BLOW.BOWN WATER
JpJ*L(ll«m26.ll»M20)«(ll«m27'lttm21)»H»t"30
OUTPUT 1000
Ib/hr
Ifc/hf
Ib/hr
kB/nr
kB/tir
kBA.
FLUE CAS ANAL. (80ILERHECON) (AIR HTR) OUTLET
32
33
34
35
36
CO,
o,
CO
N, (BY DIFFERENCE)
EXCESS AIR
V. VOL
% VOL
X VOL
* VOL
%
COAL AS FIRED
PROX. ANALYSIS
37
38
39
40
MOISTURE
VOL MATTER
FIXED CARBON
ASH
TOTAL
41
42
Btupor Ib AS FIRED
ASH SOFT TEMP.'
ASTM METHOD
*«t
COAL OR OIL AS FIRED
ULTIMATE ANALYSIS
43
44
4S
46
47
40
37
CARBON
HYDROGEN
OXYGEN
NITROGEN
SULPHUR
ASH
MOISTURE
TOTAL
COAL PULVERIZATION
48
49
SO
64
GRINDABILITY
INDEX*
FINENESS ftTHRU
SOM*
FINENESS %THRU
200 M*
INPUT-OUTPUT
EFFICIENCY OF UNITS
SI
52
S3
44
41
OIL
FLASH
Sp. Grov
POINT f
.ty O.a. API-
VISCOSITY AT SSU'
BURNER SSF
TOTAL
7, *t
Btu p>r
HYDROGEN
Ib
CAS
54
ss
56
57
SB
59
60
61
CO
CH. METHANE
C,H, ACETYLENE
C,H. ETHYLENE
C,H» ETHANE
H,S
CO,
H,
HYDROGEN
TOTAL
62
63
41
TOTAL
% .t
HYDROGEN
T.VOL
t
DENSITY 68 F
ATM. PRESS.
Btu PER CU FT
Btu PER LB
ITEM 31
100
ITEM 29
HEAT LOSS EFFICIENCY
65
66
67
AR
69
70
71
72
HEAT LOSS DUE TO DRY GAS
HEAT LOSS DUE TO MOISTURE IN FUEL
HEAT LOSS DUE TO H,0 FROM COMB OF H,
HEAT LOSS DUE TO COMBUST. IN REFUSE
HEAT LOSS DUE TO RADIATION
UNMEASURED LOSSES
Blu/lb
A. F. FUEL
TOTAL
EFFICIENCY « (100 - Item 71)
'Not Required for Efficiency Totting
% of A.
FUEL
*
t For Point of Mooiutoffient Soo Pat. 7.2.8. l.PTC 4.1.1964
56
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
CALCULATION SHEET
TABLE A-2
ASME TEST FORM
FOR ABBREVIATED EFFICIENCY TEST
PTC4.1-b (1964)
Revised September, 1965
OWNER OF PLANT
30
24
25
36
65
66
67
6B
69
70
71
72
HEAT OUTPUT IN BOILER BLOW.DOWN
If impractical to weigh refuse, this
item con be estimated os follows
DRY REFUSE PER LB OF AS FIRED FUE
ITEM 43
CARBON BURNED
PER LB AS FIRED = -
FUEL 10°
TEST NO. BOILER NO. DATE
" ITEM IS ITEM 17
1000
% ASH IN AS FIRED COAL '"
100. - * COMB. IN REFUSE SAMPLE p|T REFUiE
,_ IN COMBUST
ITEM 22 (TEM 23 SHOULD BE
x SEPARATEL
[ .4.500 J COMPUTATI
DRY CAS PER LB 11CO, » BO, « 7(N, « CO)
BURNED 3 * = - , ,
1 .2682 (ITEM 35) - (ITEM 33 - ITEM 3t )
2
HEAT LOSS EFFICIENCY
HEAT LOSS DUE LB DRY CAS ITEM 25 (ITEM I3)-{ITEM 11)
TO DRY CAS « PERLBAS xC » 1'l.j - Ap»»i>di« f.2 - PTC 4.1-1964
If lottoi or* net ncatumd. « ABM A Standoid Radiailon Lou Oiori. Fig. S, PTC 4.1-1964
UnmootMftd lo§««» liitod in PTC 4.1 ku< «o< tobwUtod afeov* nay by provided for by tiffiifia a Mutually
a>o«d upon «aluo fe» (ton 70.
57
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
FIGURE A-2
HP-67 KEYED CALCULATION SHEW
ASMX ABBREVIATED EFFICIENCY CALCULATION - HEAT LOSS HETHOD
Test No.
Date
Location
Unit No.
Fuel
(Turn Calculator Off and Then On. Load Program Card.)
A. FROM FUEL ANALYSIS:
Wt. % in as-fired fuel: C
». Moisture
Al: (STO 0)
High heating value of fuel as-fired
\. H
%. S
AS:(STO 4)
A2:(ST01) A3:(STO 2) A4:(ST03)
Btu/lb
B. FROM FLUE CAS ANALYSIS;
Volume I in flue gas of: 0,
81:(STO S)
%, CO,
\. CO
B2:(STO 6) B3:(STO 7)
C. FROM REFUSE (FLY ASH AND ASH PIT) ANALYSIS:
Cl. Fraction of dry refuse in fuel
Ibs dry refuse/lb as-fired fuel
(STO B)
C2. Heating value of dry refuse (weighted average) Btu/lb dry refuse
C3. Wt. % of combustibles in refuse
(STO 9)
(f P $ SHSTO 4)(f P \ 5)
D. MEASURED TEMPERATURES
Dl. Gas temp, leaving boiler, econ. or air heater
D2. Comb, air tenp.
C. FROM STEAM TABLES:
Cl. Enthalpy: HjOfg) at temp. 01 t 1 psia
£2. Enthalpy: K 0(1) at conb. air temp.
(STO A)
(STO B)
(STO C)
Btv/lb
(STO D)
Btu/lb
F. FROM AB-'IA STANDARD RADIATION LOSS CHART (UNLESS MEASURED)!
Fl. Heat loss due to radiation \ of gross heat input
(STO E)
C. FROX tr.:iT SPECIFICATIONS (if available, otherwise enter 0):
Cl. Unmeasured losses % of gross heat input
(f P '< SHSTOOHf P $ S)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Excess Air * - -J-°° (2B1 " B3)
^ 0.5364(100 - Bl - B2) - (2B1 - B3)
(Optional) Pounds dry gas per pound of fuel
Bl * 4B2 4 700 Al Cl x C2 3A4
3(B2 » B3) * 100 14500 / C3 \ ' 800
\ " 100 / J
Heat Lasses
24 x ED. 2 > (01 - D2)
A2 x (El. E2)
Due to moisture in fuel xs ^^
Total Losses SUB of calculated losses + Fl + Cl
Efficiency - 100 - Total Losses
(R/S)
% of
Heat
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(f a)
(f b)
r&i %
Cross (Optional)
Input Btu/lb as-fired fuel*
(R/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
Calculated as percent of gross heat input' x AS + 100
58
KVB11-6015-1225
KVB 6015-21 (Rev 1)
11/7/78
-------
APPENDIX B
DATA RECORDING FORMATS
59 KVBll-6015-1225
-------
DOCUMENTATION OF RESULTS
Field Measurements
During testing, two sets of measurements are recorded: 1) control
room data which indicate the operating condition of the device and 2) emis-
sions data that are the readouts of the individual analyzers.
The concentration of nitric oxide (NO), carbon dioxide (CO ), carbon
monoxide (CO), and oxygen (0 ) are measured and recorded. The concentration
of these species are measured and displayed continuously by analyzers and
strip chart recorders mounted in a console. The strip chart recordings are
retained for future reference. Opacity, particulate loading, and POM concen-
tration are measured at the sampling port and the measurements recorded on
data sheets.
A number of data sheets have been developed for use in field measure-
ments. These data sheets are listed below together with their purpose.
An example of each sheet follows.
Figure No.
Title
Purpose
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
Thirty-Day Field Test Data Sheets
Gaseous Emissions Data
Nozzle £ize, Q^ and AH Calculations
Response Time for Continuous
Instruments
Zero and Calibration Drift (24 hr)
Zero and Calibration Drift (2 hr)
Accuracy Determination (NOx)
Calibration Error Determination
Record control room data
Record Gaseous Emissions
Analyzer data
Calculate nozzle size,
flow rate, and AH for
Method 5 Test
Continuous monitor certi-
fication
Continuous monitor certi-
fication
Continuous monitor certi-
fication
Continuous monitor certi-
fication
Continuous monitor certi-
fication
60
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure No.
Title
Purpose
B-9
B-10
B-ll
B-12
B-13
B-14
Analysis of Calibration Gas Mixture Continuous monitor certi-
fication
Particulate Calculation Sheet
Stack Data
Particulate Emission Caculations
Velocity Traverse
Liquid or Solid Fuel Calculation
Calculate weight of solid
particulate catch
Record volumes,* tempera-
tures, pressures of Method
5 control unit.
Calculate particulate em-
mision factors
Record temperature and
velocity profile of stack
Calculate stoichiometric
properties of fuel
61
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-l.
KVB, Inc.
THIRTY DAY FIELD TEST DATA SHEET
Site
Fuel
Test No.
Date
Time -
Load
Test Description
Windbox, in. HJD
Furnace, in. H.,0
Overfire air, in. H,0
Boiler exit, in. H.O
Economizer exit, in. HO
ID fan inlet, in. H,0
Steam flow, kpph
Time/
Integrated steam flow k Ibs
Air flow indie.
Superheater outlet temp. °F
Flue gas temp,
economizer inlet, °F
Flue gas temp,
economizer outlet, °F
Temp F.W. economizer
outlet, °F
Feed Hater Control, %
Temp F.W. heater, °F
F.W. economizer inlet, °F
Steam pressure, psig
Fuel feed
Overfire air damper
F.D. fan
F.D. fan damper
I.D. fan
I.D. fan damper
62
(continued)
Data Sheet 6017-26
12/12/78
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-l. (Continued)
THIRTY DAY FIELD TEST DATA SHEET
Page 2
Test No.
Smoke Indicator Chart
Rotary speed
Spill plate setting
Grate speed
Over fire air damper,
% open
Fuel flow, Time/lbs
Flame observations
Bed thickness
General furnace
appearance
Clinkers
Ambient air temp, °F
& F.D. fan inlet temp.
Comments:
63
Data Sheet 6017-26
12/12/78
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-2.
KVB, INC.
GASEOUS EMISSIONS DATA
Date_
Engr.
Low NO Control Method_
Unit No.
Fuel
Unit Type
Location_
Capacity
Burner Type
1. Test No.
2. Tine
3. Load
4. Process Rate
5. Flue Diam. or
Size, ft
6. Probe Position
7. Oxygen (%)
8. NOX (hot)
read/3% 0., {ppm)
9. NO (hot)
read/3% 0, (ppm)
10. NO (hot)
read/3% 0.. (ppm)
11. Carbon Dioxide
(%)
12. Carbon Monoxide
(ppm) uncor/cor
13. Opacity
14. Atmos. Temp.
(«F/°C)
15. Dew Point Temp.
(«F/°C)
16. Atmos. Pressure
(in. Hq)
17. Relative
Humidity (%)
64
Data Sheet
6015-23
9/29/78
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-3.
KF-67 Keyed Calculation Sheet
NOZZLE SIZE, Q_ and AH CALCULATIOHS
Test No.
Unit Ho.
Crew: Zngr.
Date
Fuel
location
Sampling Method
Techs.
DATA
Constants
Pitot Factor i Fs
Or i lice Factor. J
Orifice Dian. , 0 (in.)
Ideal Meter Flow? Q (ACFM)
n
NOTE: TO RECALCULATE IDEAL
RESTORE DATA IN REGISTERS 4
STACK AND RC-EOTER « HJ3, *
Key
(STO 1)
(STO 2)
(STO 3)
(STO 4)
NOZZLE SIZE.
THRU B. CLEAR
O , and t CO
Actual Conditions
Meter Temperature, TPCF)
Baron. Press. , PBlir (in. Hg)
Static Press. Dixf., APS (iwg)
Nozzle Te-p., Tn CD
Stack Vel. Press., Ap (iwg)
Caseous Stack Composition
% HjO (%]
« 0, dry (%)
% co, dry (»)
Key
(STO 5)
(STO 6)
(STO 7)
(STO 6)
(STO <3)
ENTER
ENTER
IDEAL NOZZLE CALCULATION
(A) Ideal Nozzle Sice, D
nijaeaj«
inches
KETER FLOW RATE AND ORIFICE PRESS. PITT. CALCULATIONS
Actual Nozzle Size, Dn(Act_al) ____
«C> Actual Meter Flow Rate, °fc(Ju.tU4l, ____
(RCL 7) Orifice Press. Diff., AH to obtain 0
NOTE: To Deteraine Cm and ^ £or Other Actual Nozzle Sue, Key in D-, .--.. Press C for 0 . then RCL ^
_ for AH. _ ______ __ " _ _» _
For one Dn t Actual) vlth Changing Stack velocity Pressure (Ap) and Nozzle Temperature (T )
(It is not necessary to restore data in registers 4-B for these calculations) "
inches
ACrK (on »*«)
iwg
Ap (EKTER)
<«F)
(E) 0,,
(ACFK)
(R/S) AH*
(iwg)
EgUATIOHS
(l)«_-V»iM.eoJ.,ojJ.» (i_/u..i.i (2) ".'"af
I* IjOl tut/Ik _>!)
_. at «t»
lap
*
,
|1 - C« B,e/lOOI|(T. . 4M) ^
4MI - TM
«"
' (?) (Uc-.n ' tV.
a «»oi ui.
UOHI
i I.B tan rater or luiatleu to abtiln A»i (AH, . - M )
B.C. i*l |
"l-l
< e.ooi
\9) "4
* ' *
WM7S lV»* Cf
of -tar)
65
KVB11-6015-1225
KVB 601S-25 (Rev. 1)
12/13/78
-------
Figure B-4.
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
RESPONSE TIME FOR CONTINUOUS INSTRUMENTS
Date of Test
Span Gas Concentration
Analyzer Span Setting
1
Upscale 2
3
Average
1
Downscale 2
3
Average
System average response time
% deviation from slower lav<
system average response 1
___ppm
ppm
seconds
seconds
seconds
upscale response seconds
seconds
seconds
seconds
downscale response seconds.
(slower time) = seconds.
srage upscale minus average down scale] ,^.
slower tune I
Data Sheet 6017-35
66 40CFR60/APP. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-5.
KVB
Engineer_
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (24-HOUR)
Date Zero Span Calibration
and Zero Drift Reading Drift
Time Reading (AZero) (After Zero Adjustment) (ASpan)
Zero Drift = [Mean Zero Drift* + C.I. (Zero)
T [Instrument Span] x 100 = .
Calibration Drift [Mean Span Drift* + C.I. (Span)
* [Instrument Span] x 100 B .
Absolute Value
Data Sheet 6017-34
40CFR60/App'. B
7/1/77
67 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
oo
i
o»
o
M
Cn
M
KJ
K)
Ul
Data
Set
No.
10
11
12
13
14
15
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (2 HOUR)
Engineer
fl
H-
8
Time
Begin End
Date
Zero
Reading
Zero
Drift
(AZero)
Span
Reading
Span
Drift
(ASpan)
Calibration
Drift
(Span-Zero)
Zero Drift - (Mean Zero Drift*
Calibration Drift = [Mean Span Drift*
'Absolute Value.
CI (Zero)
r (Span] x 100
+ CI (Span)
(Span) x 100
CD
Data Sheet 6017-33
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
-------
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ACCURACY DETERMINATION (NO )
x
Engineer
H-
iQ
c
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
Date
and
Time
Reference Method Samples
NO
X
Sample 1
(ppm)
NO
X
Sample 2
I ppm)
Mean refei
test value
95% Confidence intervals = + ppm
Accurac
* Expl,
j Mean of the differences + 95%
N0x
Sample 3
(ppm)
NO Sample
Average
(ppm)
ence method
> (NO )
X
Ul
Data Sheet 6017-32
4OCFRfiO/App. n
7/1/77
-------
Figure B-8.
KVB
Engineer_
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
CALIBRATION ERROR DETERMINATION
Calibration Gas Mixture Data
Mid (501) ppm High (90%) ppm
Calibration Gas Measurement System ^
Hun # Concentration, ppm Reading, ppm Differences, ppm
10
11
12
13
14
15
Mid High
Mean difference
Confidence interval
Mean Difference + C.I.
Calibration error = Average Calibration Gas Concentration x 10°
Calibration gas concentration - measurement system reading
Absolute value
70
Data Sheet 6017-31
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-9.
KVB
Engineer^
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ANALYSIS OF CALIBRATION GAS MIXTURES
Date: Reference Method Used:
Mid-Range Calibration Gas Mixture
Sample 1 ppm
Sample 2 ppm
Sample 3 ppm
Average ppm
High-Range (span) Calibration Gas Mixture
Sample 1 ppm
Sample 2 ppm
Sample 3 ppm
Average ppm
Data Sheet 6017-30
71 40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-10.
PARTICULATE CALCULATION SHEET
Test Crew
Test No._
Box No.
Date
Location
Sample Probe Position
Test Description
Dry Gas Meter Vol. (
Final
Initial
Total
Beaker No.
Date
Weighed
Tare 1
Wt. 2
3
4
5
6
Avo
Bottle No.
Impinger
Content (Water)
Rinse (ml)
Date Weighed
or 250 Bake
Final 1
Wt. 250 2
3
4
5
6
Avg
Residue wt
Final 250-Tare
Date Weighed
or 650 Bake
Final 1
Wt. 650 2
3
4
5
6
Avg
Residue Wt
Final 650-Tare
ft")
Probe
(Acetone)
Final
Initial
A Vol
Probe
(Water)
Impinger
1 2
Cyclone
(Acetone)
.
Water Vc
3
Flask
(Dry)
>1 (ml)
S. Gel :
Filter
No.
Potal
Blank
NO.
Comments:
Data Sheet 6002-3
72
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-ll.
TJate
Load
Location
KVB. INC.
STACK DATA
Unit No.
Test No.
Engr.
Fuel
Sample Box No.
K#/hr or MBtu/hr
Meter Box No.
Filter No.
Probe No,
Filter -Heater Setting
Probe Heater Setting
Stack Moisture
Ambient Temperature
Nozzle Diameter
Atmospheric Pressure
Weather
oF
in.
diam.
Stack Gas Pressure, Ps
Abs. Stack Press., AP=P +407
Stack Gas Sp. Gravity, Gs
Stack Area, As
I
iwga
n.d.
_Probe Length
Remarks
Final Meter:
Initial Meter:
Time
Total
Avg .
Vm
Meter
Volume
Beading
(CF)
Vacuum
Gage
Reading
(iwg)
AP
Pitot
Tube
Pressur
{iwg)
H
Orfice
Pressure
> Diff
(°F)
Stack
Temp.
(°F)
°F
°F
H- 460
Imp ing er
Temperature
Out
(°F)
In
(°F)
Filter
Box
Temp.
<°F)
Meter
Temp.
(°F)
R
73
KVB11-6015-1225
13
11/20/75
-------
Figure B-12.
Test No. Date_
nit. No. Fuel
HP-67 KEYED CALCULATION SHEET*
PARTICULATE EMISSION CALCULATIONS
Location
Engr.
Sampling Train and Method
Pitot Factor, Fs -83
Barometric Pressure, P
bar-
(STO 0)
Tot. Liquid Collected, V ml Total Particulate, M
ic(STO IJ n'
n. Hg
m gm
Velocity Head, AP_
15TO J)
_iwg Stack Temp. , Ts
(STO
(STC^Z)
F stack Area, As
ft
ISTO 5)
Sample Volume, Vm
(STO 6)
Orifice Press. Diff., H
ft Stack Press., Psg
(STO 7)
iwg Excess O , XO %
Sample Tine, 6_
(STO B)
(STO
min Nozzle Dia., Dn
_iwg,(Flue Gas Density/Air Density) @ T_, Gs
(STO 8)
n.d.
(STO C)
in. Meter Temp. , T
(STO A)
ni-
ts TO o)
Select Fe
SC Feet/104 Btu
Oil (A)
92.2
Gas (B)
87.4
Coal (C)
98.2
Other :
(-)
Press (E) if meter is not temperature compensated.
1. Sample Gas Volume Vm ... = 0.0334 Vm(P. + H/13.6)
sta bar
2. Water Vapor
Vw
0.0474 V,
std ic
3. Moisture Content Bwo = Eq. 2/(Eq. 1 + Eq. 2)
4. Concentration a. C = 0.0154 Mn/Vm
i
-6
std
b. C = 2.205 x 10 " Mn/Vm
c. C = Eq. 4b x 16.018 x 10
std
3
5. Abs. Stack Press. Ps = P x 13.6 + Psg
6. Stack Gas Speed Vs = 174 Fs /APTs /~ x -^
e V Ps G
.00
Gs
7. Stack Gas Flow a. Qsw = Eq. 6 x As x ;r-^ x
Rate @ 70°F Ts 407
b. Qsd = Eq. 7a x (1. - Eq. 3)
8. Material Flow Ms = Eq. 7b x Eq. 4b x 60
9. XO factor
10. Emission
. % Isokinetic
X02f « 2090/(20.9 - X02%)
a. E = Eq. 4b x Fe x Eq. 9
b. E = Eq. 4c x Fm x Eq. 9 x 1000
14077 x Ts(Vm
. .
sta
Vw
fc.
std
9 x Vs x Ps x Dn
If calculating by hand:
1) Convert Ts and Tm to "R
2} Multiply EQ 1 by 530/Tm(°R) if meter not temperature compensated.
3) Fm = 2.684 x 10"5 x Fe 74
SCF
SCF
N.D.
grains/DSCF
Ib/DSCF
grams/DSCM
in. w abs.
ft/min
WSCF/min
DSCF/min
lb/hr
N.D.
Ib/MMBtu
ng/joule
Data Sheet 6002-4
Revised 9/27/78
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figure B-13.
' -»ject:_
Late:
XVB, Inc.
VELOCITY TRAVERSE
Test Description:
Location:_
Unit:
Test:
Fuel:
Stack Cross Section
Personnel:
Barometric Press, (in. Hg):
Absolute Static Press, in Stack (in. Hg):_
Pitot Tube Coefficient:
(Cp)
V = 85.48 C
1/2
«
Time
«
Traverse Point
Port Depth
Velocity
Head
(in. H.,0)
AP
Gas Temp.
(°F)
.
Gas Temp.
(°R)
TS
Molecular
Wt.
MS
Velocity
(ft/sec)
VS
02
Cone.
(% Dry)
75
Data Sheet KVB 6002-13 KVB11-6015-122
-------
Figure B-14.
KVB
Test No..
Fuel
Date
location
Unit No.
Fuel Sample lie.
Fuel Sample Point
LIQUID OR SOLID FUEL CALCULATIONS
IfUCL REG), If) tPiS). tfMCL REG), Lead data card, then PGRJi card (both
Input HHV (Btu/lb)
Input wt % C
Input wt * H
Input wt » S
Input wt % O
Input wt t K
(Al
(R/S)
(R/S!
(R/S)
tK/S]
(R/S) - decimal point blinks after
pressing; item 11 displayed
1.
Dry stoichiometric moles flue gas/lb fuel
(One may proceed to items *, 17, or 18 by pressing (II(A), (E), or
entering KW and pressing (B), respectively.)
(C)
IR/S1
(R/S)
(R/S1
(R/S)
(R/S)
(VS)
(f) (A)
2.
3.
4.
S.
6.
7.
B.
9.
Input wt 1 HjO in fuel (0 if none)
Moles H20 in flue gas/lb fuel
Total nole* of Clue gas (teicMemetnc)/
Dry volume/wet volume
Volute t HjO in flue gas
Volume % COj, dry in flue gas
SOj (ppm by vol.), dry at stoiehiemetnc
NO (ppm by vol.), dry at stoichiometric
Stoichiometric air/fuel xatio lib air/lb
'lb fuel
fuel)
(R/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
IR/S)
(R/S)
(R/S)
(Before items 10-16 nay be determined, items 1-9 must be completed.)
(D) - 20. »S displayed
10.
11.
12.
14.
15.
16.
Input measured vol. t Oj for
Cas moles at * O; m 10.95
Gas moles. Stoic. 20.95 -10
Dry moles flue gas/lb fuel at I
Vol. I COj. dry at t O.,
SOj (ppm by vol.) dry at t Oj
NO (ppm by vol.) dry at t Oj
Vol. % HjO at I Oj
Percent Excess Air
correction
(decimal pt. blinks)
(RCL) (2) (E) 17. Converts item 1 to SCT dry flue gai at stoich/100 Btu
Item 18.
b.
Input MW, (B) , program calculates X (lb/10 Btu
(MW - 46 for NOx, CO 28, HC 16, SOx 64]
ppm/K)
1.
2.
3.
'Input measured ppm at 3»
dry,
(R/S), program calculates lb/10
(Optional) No input, (R/S), program converts lb/10 Btu ng/3
Repeat steps (1) and (2) as necesiary.
Btu.
Enter next value of MW. complete step (a) followed by seeps (1), (2), and
(3). Repeat for all species desired.
HOx
CO
HC
SOx
MH
46
28
It
64
K for lb/10* Btu
Indicates Input it required
Data Sheet S01S-1J
Revised 7/6/78
76
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APPENDIX C
CONTINUOUS MONITOR CERTIFICATION DATfl SHEETS
77 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
CALIBRATION ERROR DETERMINATION
Calibration Gas Mixture Data
Mid (50%) /,0/<,2fr ' /IS** J*r,*S /<7
Calibration Gas Measurement System
Run ft Concentration, ppm Reading, ppm
1 ff a 0
2 * /20 /?/
3 0
^ ppm
Differences, ppm
0
4,
O
4 # /tp/
* /
* 0 0 & ^
Q M^J
0 a V
11 // ^34 233
15 ^*
*7 J2& /£ t
0
. ,
f /
T ^ A/ *
14 >7
iq 0 0 O &
15 M c*3*/ &
78
Data Sheet 6017-31
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
CALIBRATION ERROR DETERMINATION
Run §
Calibration Gas Mixture Data
%
Mid (50%) £0 ppa High (90%)
Calibration Gas
Concentration, ppm
Measurement System
Reading, ppm
Differences, ppm
2 //
6 #
7 ff
43
5,0
9 ff
£7
-L
11
12
13.
&/
14
Mean difference
Confidence interval
Calibration error -
Mid High
.Ob ,Jt
+ .01,4 +.»5fr
Average Calibration Gas Concentration s**
Mean Difference + C.I.
Calibration gas concentration - measurement system reading
Absolute value
79
Data Sheet 6017-31
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
CALIBRATION ERROR DETERMINATION
.,
/£
Calibration Gas Mixture Data
Mid (50%) /£>,& *pta High (90%)
Run #
Calibration Gas
Concentration, ppm
Measurement System
Reading, ppm
Differences, ppm
0
4 if
szs
fl
/7,g
7 H
/o
0
10
S7.8
fff
«
/Zg
0
Mean difference
Confidence interval
Calibration error -
Mean Difference + C.I.
Mid
o
High
O
+ r>
Average Calibration Gas Concentration
x 100
0 %
Calibration gas concentration - measurement system reading
Absolute value
Data Sheet 6017-31
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (2 HOUR)
r
8-/0-H
>
r
-8-«-T\
4.
Zero
Reading
lOOpOMV
I
1 03
10+
107
lot
no
\ot>
lt>±
\to
tofi
in(
101
Ini
(00
/«!
loo
100
100
Zero
Drift
(Azero)
3
1
3
2.
1
-
I
0
o
-i
/
~i
o
Zero Drift = [Mean Zero Drift* /,33 + CI (Zero) 0,615 1
Span
Reading
2.3^-00^
2.42"
2-»//
Z47
2.^$?
2'f.
Calibration Drift = (Mean Span Drift* 2-1^7 + CI (Span) /x2-*f 1 * [Span] x 100 = O-3S"j£.
* Absolute Value.
S'pOK * l°00
00
I
o>
o
»-
Ul
M
to
to
Ul
Data Sheet 6017-33
40CFR60/App. B
3/26/79 (Rev. 1)
-------
--7003
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (2
SHEET
HOUR)
/u
Data
Set
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Time
Begin
<\f>0
lion
1500
JSto
noo
/4dA
0-100
23n/s
Ito
llOfi
l*>00
/6~CO
/Too
i0to
Q,iO
^.tA-
1.1O
9,/<^
f.flfr
J./o
^Z-7
9'f*
^8
,o
O
,oz&
,0'2''S
,/5T
s/0
,
0
Calibration
Drift
(Span-Zero)
fWAWiAa-^y
\
" (
/
T [Span] x 100 =
O?>b 1 + [Span] x 100 = 0t$ % .
3p
-------
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (2 HOUR)
iM
Data
Set
No.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Time
Begin
^00
He>r>
IB06
iSoo
1700
1^00
2-1 CO
2.360
^DO
1100
\3f>0
l5&
1700
WfX>
2JDO
7-300
4m
Hon
End
Date
U-1-71
>
3- 10-71
A
t
^-u-7^
>!/
Zero
Reading
O.lfl \ia\ %
0.00
0,
0
Zero Drift = (Mean Zero Drift* *0\~l + CI (zero) .0*t6 ]
Span
Reading
I7.1vcl°k
/«
11
11
11
n
{7,4
17,1
17.t
/7fo
11' 1
{7.
-------
KVB
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (24-HOUR)
NO reCO «3eri« /D
**
ran
Date Zero Span Calibration
and Zero Drift Reading Drift
Time Reading (AZero) (After Zero Adjustment) (ASpan)
»"i~7i <}AM I00.-»oi».l/ X.3T oojuV
5MI-14
1-I2--M
%-tt-74
*»--M
*-/£-1 1
i
M I'
loo r> 2.t)'i~
^^
y
IDO O tt3 O
loo O 2-35" /
Io2, 2- 13to
2.
loo O 233 f
)02- 2. Z3T
3
y
Zero Drift - [Mean Zero Drift* O^to + C.I. (Zero) OrtQ ]
* [Instrument Span] x 100 « 0./«?^p.
Calibration Drift - [Mean Span Drift* 2*71 + C.I. (Span) Z.4*l ]
T [Instrument Span] x 100 B 0. 5*2. CJ .
Absolute Value Spa**. = woo
84
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (24-HOUR)
- 7*03
M
0'
Date Zero Span Calibration
and Zero Drift Reading Drift
Time Reading (AZero) (After Zero Adjustment) (ASpan)
i-*.i* 1^ ^iMA.^ &*.4ftu.
-------
KVB
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ZERO AND CALIBRATION DRIFT (24-HOUR)
Date Zero Span
and Zero Drift Reading
Time Reading (AZero) (After Zero Adjustment)
Calibration
Drift
(ASpan)
*q-7« I1, /f. /
,IZ- /7fl
rot- m
,3
^5
-yZ,
.1
,3
0
r?
Zero Drift = [Mean
i
Zero Drift* /05" + C.I. (Zero) /^^Z-
[Instrument Span] x 100 = O,^^ .
Calibration Drift [Mean Span Drift* 'iltf + C.I. (Span)
Absolute Value
[Instrument Span] x 100 = ^ZfS^-.
S^=«
1
86
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
Engineer
PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
RESPONSE TIME FOR CONTINUOUS INSTRUMENTS
Date of Test 0-0- 74
Span Gas Concentration
Analyzer Span Setting
ppm
ppm
Upscale
1 7 7
2 7/
3
seconds
seconds
seconds
Average upscale response
seconds
.3 seconds
Downscale
2 ff3 seconds
3 8fy seconds
Average down scale response 82.3 seconds.
System average response time (slower tine)
8
-------
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
RESPONSE TIME FOR CONTINUOUS INSTRUMENTS
Date of Test 0 -3 -
Span Gas Concentration
Analyzer Span Setting
/£>
seconds
Upscale
2 70 seconds
3 7V seconds
Average upscale response 6$. 7 seconds
seconds
Dovnscale
1
2 7V seconds
3 71? seconds
Average downscale response 73.3 seconds.
System average response time (slower time) « 73. 3 seconds.
% deviation from slower [average upscale minus average downscale
system average response I slower time
-
100%
88
Data Sheet 6017-35
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
KVB
Engineer
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
RESPONSE TIME FOR CONTINUOUS INSTRUMENTS
Date of Test 8-8 -
%
Span Gas Concentration S7,8 ppur
*
Analyzer Span Setting g^ spar
seconds
Upscale 2 ff^ seconds
3 ?3 seconds
Average upscale response ffjl 7 seconds
1 ^ 7 seconds
Downscale 2 ^"^ seconds
3 ^8 seconds
Average downscale response ^^. 7 seconds.
System average response time (slower time) = f&. 7 seconds.
% deviation from slower o faverage upscale minus average downscalel 1QQ% a , «/
system average response I slower time J '' '*
Data Sheet 6017-35
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ACCURACY DETERMINATION (NO )
Engineer -J,
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Date
and
Time
M ~ "7^
II3Q
1-//-71
*~w
*'l*4*
4-H-71
*/*£
*'n»
'Via?
1130
Reference Method Samples
NO
Sample 1
K3
415
Ms
*V/lJ
*Xs"7
/I Q f
£T t QL
W
*n*>
NO
X
Sample 2
^
y/^2
Tr o ^
f^
4! ^T^f
t/,7
yyr
s-//
VsV
Mean refei
test value
95% Confidence Intervals » + /^. l£ ppm
Accura
Expl
. Mean of the differences + 95%
M0x
Sample 3
-&JHt>*..V*Y
V4?*?
W
^f6?
W^
4*Z.
5X3
-/7d
NO Sample
Average
&XOr* o*-s t>ty
41-L*
*/%(£
ii.'Ji}
tlLi
\
£04
AcLft
Tie
4&rfo
rence method _ .
, IMH I >/7V
(N0x)
confidence interval _ ,., .
s Mean reference method value
ain and report method used to determine integrated averages
Analyzer 1-Hour
Average (ppm)
<593
7%7
V^
4A1^
^90
1M
M
513
53o
Difference
(ppm)
***^$
2-1
1.S
I
Z-
11
3
2q
/s-
^
Mean of
flU> dtf for<>ncf>!i Zi-
7.77
% (NO^)
CD
Data Sheet 6017-32
40CFR60/npp. B
7/1/77
-------
MONITOR PERFORMANCE TEST DATA SHEET
ACCURACY DETERMINATION (NO )
Engineer
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Date
and
Time
1-tO.iq
t»
f-/*-7?
1*
t-n-VI
/e>3o
9-*-*
//So
9-W-71
/*30
4-»-M
/3>0
+ «>--»
'V3o
f-^-7?
isya
*-'0-TJ
»t»
Reference Method Samples
N0x
Sample 1
e*%&.
431
M
<&?
AirJiuik.
3+2.
3«/
3 ^"S^-.fey
^S"
370
vVs
33t
3^3
3^7
3fe7
?%k
3?/
NO Sample
Average
fltff?JtD**
"h,^
3W
V/J
S31
3STZ-
3^«
3gV
S?3
₯n.
rence method
» (MO I J#S"
(N0x)
confidence Interval _ , _
*"" Mean reference method value " """*
lin and report method used to determine integrated averages
Analyzer 1-Hour
Average (ppm)*
M0x
e?3-a, *v
y^
J^3
4oo
^75
33^
35-f
.=?7^
^
.?7tf
Difference
(ppm)
N0x
^j'JK? . £«y
II,
&,
/3
£/
zo
^
9
2-^
jy
Mean of
the differences 2-"2"
^./7 * (HO )
CD
Data Sheet 6017-32
40CFR60/App. B
7/1/77
-------
APPENDIX D
CONTINUOUS MONITOR PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS
92 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App.B
PmroiHKNCt EpnnncJTtox 2P
" epiciWlfloMS IJ-o iKicincATTOK TTBT rto-
CZDCUS rot MONTTOU or BO« m» KOs
noi* srinoNisT eomcxa
I. Principle uid Applicability.
11 Principle Tbe concentration of tulfur
dlotid» or oxides of nitrogen pollute ate IB
stack emissions li measured by a continu-
ously operating emission measurement §71-
lem. Concurrent with operation of the con-
tinuous monitoring irttca. the polluuat
concentrations are also measured with refer-
ence method! (Appendix A). AD average of
the continuous monitoring system data U
computed for each reference method testiag
period tod compared to determine the rela-
tive accuracy of the eentlnuoua monitoring
ij-item Otber tests of tbe continuous mon-
itoring sTKem are alw performed to deter-
mine calibration error, drift, aad response-
characteristics of the system.
IS Applicability. This performance spec-
ification It applicable to evaluation of con-
tinuous monitoring systems for measurement
of nitrogen oxides or sulfur dJozide pollu-
tants. These specification* contain test pro-
cedures. InRallatloa requirements, and data
eompuuttoo procedures for evaluating the
acceptability of tie conUnuoui monitoring
systems.
9. Apparatus.
3.1 CallbrseoD Ou Mixtures. Ulxturea of
known concentrations of pollutant gu la a
diluent gu shall be prepared. The pollutant
pa thai! be tulfur dioxide or tbe appropriate
oxlde(i) of nitrogen tpeelfled by paragraph
6 and within subparta. For sulfur dioxide gu
minurei. tbe diluent gas may be air or nltro-
pn. For Bltrle oxide |KO) gma mlrturci. the
diluent g»» aball be oijgen-free «10 ppm)
nitrogen, and for nitrogen dioxide (NO,) gu
mmurei the diluent gai ihall be air. Concen-
trations of approrlmauly BO percent aad 90
percent of tpan an required The BO percent
ft, mixture li used to let and to cheek the
span and Is referred to u the span gu.
72 Zero Oaf. A gu certified bj the manu-
facturer to contain less ttian ) ppm of the
pollutant gu or ambient atr may ha uasd.
iS Equipment for measurement of the pal-
lutact gu concentration using the reference
method epeeiaed U the applicable standard.
94 Data Recorder. Analog chart recorder
or other suitable derice with Input YOlttge
range compatible with analyrzr t7«tem out-
put. The resolution ef the recorder's data
output shall he rufflctant to allow completion
of the tett procedures within this cpeeU.
eatton. ^^
34 Continuous monitoring system for SO.
or NO, poiiutaati u applicable.
S. Definitions.
«.I Continuous Monltortag System, The
total equipment required for the determina-
tion of a pollutant gms concentration la a
source effluent. Continuous monitoring r»s-
terns conilit of major iub«yrt«ms u followi-
1.1.1 Sampling Interface That ponton of
an extract]re continuous monitoring fyttem
that performs one or more of the fallowing
Title 40Protection of Environment
operation*: Acquisition transportation, and
conditioning of a simple of the source efflu-
ent or tbat portion of An In-tltu continuous
monitoring ijstem tbat protects (he analyzer
from tbe effluent.
9.13 Analyzer. Tbat portion of the con-
tinuous monitoring system wbleh senses the
pollutant gas and generates a signal output
that 13 a function of tbe poUutant concen-
tration.
3.1.3 Data Recorder. That portion of the
continuous monitoring system tbat provides
a permanent record of the output signal la
terms of concentration unite.
3.2 Spaa. The value of pollutant concen-
tration at which tbe continuous monitor-
Ing system U act to produce tbe maximum
data display output. The (pan aball be act
at tbe concentration specified la emch appli-
cable su opart.
3J Accuracy (Relative). Tbe degree of
correctness with which the continuous
monitoring system yields the value of (U
concentration of a sample relative to tbe
value given by a defined reference method
This accuracy la expressed la terms of error.
which is the difference between trie paired
concentration measurements expressed a* a
percentage of tbe mean reference value.
84 Calibration Error. The difference be-
tween the pollutant concentration Indi-
cated by the continuous monitoring system
aad tbe InowB eonosatntloa of the teat
gu mixture.
3 6 Zero Drtft. The change IB the continu-
ous monitoring tyitcm output over a stated
period of time of normal continuous opera-
tion wbea the pollutant concentration at
the time for the meuuremenu Is cent.
31 Calibration Drift. The change IB the
continuous monitoring system output over
« stated tune period ef normal continuous
operations when the pollutant concentra-
tion at the tune of the meanueaeatt U the
aaoie known upscale value
3.7 Response Time. The time Interval
.from a step change In pollutant eoneenn-a-
Uoa at the Input to tbe continuous moni-
toring system to the time -at which 06 per-
eeat of tbe corresponding final value is
reached as displayed on the continuous
monitoring lyvtem data recorder.
3J Operational Period. A minimum period
of time over which a measurement system
U expected to operate within certain per-
formance specifications without unsched-
uled maintenance, repair, or adjustment.
3.0 Stratification A condition Identified
ay a difference ID exccea ef 10 percent be-
tween the average concentration in tbe duct
or stack and the concentration at any point
more than 1.0 meter from the duct or stack
wall.
4. Installation Speclflcatloaa. Pollutant
continuous monitoring systems (BO, and
NO,) shall be Installed at a aampllng loca-
tion where meuuremenu can be made which
are directly representative (4.1). or which
can be corrected so u to be representative
(4.3) ef the total emissions from the affected
93
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Chapter IEnvironmental Prelection Agency
App.B
facility. Conformaoce with tola requirement
tlia]] be accomplished aa follows:
4.1 Effluent gases may be assumed to be
aonstraUfied U a sampling location tlgbt or
more alack diameters (equivalent diameters)
downstream of any air la-leakage I* ee-
Iceted. This assumption end data correction
procedures under paragraph 4.3.1 may not
be applied to sampling locations upstream
of an air preheater In a steam generating
facility under, Bubpart D oi this part. Tor
sampling locations where effluent gases are
either demonstrated M-3) or may be as-
sumed to be noiutrailflcd (eight diameters),
a point (eitractlTe systems) or path (In-sltu
syitemsl of average concentration ma; to
monitored.
42 For sampling locations where effluent
gases cannot be assumed to be nonstretl-
fled (leu than eight diameters] or bate been
ttiovn under paragraph 4 3 to be stratified..
result* obtained must be consistent!; repre-
sentative
tractive systems) or cross a path (la-eltu
systems) oust to corrected (42.1 sad 4J3)
10 as to be representative ot the total emis-
sions from the affected facility. Conform*
anee with this requirement ma; be accom-
plished in either of the following way*:
4.3.1 Installation of a diluent continuous
monitoring system (O, or CO, ai applicable)
In accordance with the pToceduitt AinieT
paragraph 43 of Performance Specification
1 of thU appendix. II toe pollutant end
diluent monitoring systems are aot of the
same type (both extractive or both tn-lltu).
the extractive system must use a multipoint
probe.
4.23 Installation of eilraetlve pollutant
monitoring systems uslcg multipoint aam-
pllug probes or In-iltu pollutant monitoring
systems Uist sample or dew emlsalon* which
»r« cotuljteatly repre»ntatlve of Ute total
emissions for the entire cross section. The
Administrator miy require data to be sub-
mitted to demonstrate tbat the emission*
sampled or viewed are consliteatl- repre-
sentative for several typlcsl facility process
optutlng conditions.
4J The owner or operator may perform a
traverse to characterize sny stratification of
tffl'Jtnt gases that might Hist fa a sUek or
duct If DO strstlBcalloa Is present, sampling
procedures under parsgrspb 4 I may to ap-
plied evtn though the eight diameter criteria
Is not net.
4.4 When single polat sampling probes for
extractive tyttems are Insured within the
stack or duct under paragraphs 4.1 and U.I.
the aaaple may not be eitraded at any polat
leu than 1.0 meter from the suck or duet
vail. Multipoint sampling probes installed
under paragraph 4.3.2 nay to located tt any
points necesaary to obtain consistently rep-
resentative samples.
8. Contlmfeug Monitoring Brrtqa Per-
fprmane* Bpeelieatleo*.
The continuous moniurug eyrtem shall
meet the perrormaacs (peeifleatieae la Table
3-1 to to eooaldered acceptable under this
method.
2-1.Performance tpc&flcatloni
faevutrr
1. aobancy'....- .....................
I CtUbndon uror >_ _ ^P" °f """* (I° prt' * **' eiJll"*liM **' »JnBri
4. Zen flrtft 134 h)l """* ".. . I,."""............. Uft-
». Ctllbretieo drill (! b)' _. Do.
s. Csllbnnoo firth (24 b) i............................... ^J DCL ef span
i! Opfnuooal naHed'.'.II"!"""!"!!"!!!""!""!!"" IB h minimum. _^
i Eiprcsxd ss SUB of sbsoluu eieao Talue pins OS pel oe-ifldenosl nur-al ol s esrla of lasts.
6. Perfonntnce Bpeelfl cation Test Proee-
dures. The following ten procedures shell to
used to determine eoniormaaee with the
requirements of paragraph a For NO. «n-
sJyEere that oxidize nitric ezlde (HO| to
cutrofea dloslda (KO,). the response ttne
lest under paragraph fl J of this method shall
to performed ueing nitric oitde (MOI span
gu OUier teste for NO. coatiBuous monllor-
log sritems under paragraphs B.I and 93 aad
all tests for fulfur dloslde arcteme shall .to
performed using the pollutant spaa gas tpe-
ClBed by each subpart.
e 1 Calibration Error Test Procedure. Bet
up and calibrate the complete continuous
monitoring system according to the manu-
facturer's written Instructions This may to
aeeompllabtd tltaer to tb« laboratory or tn
the neld.
6J.1 Calibration Das Analyses. Triplicate
analyses of the gas mixtures shall be per-
formed within two weeks prior to use using
Reference Methods a for BO, aad 7 for XOt.
Analyze each calibration «aa mixture (U%.
M>%> and reeoM the results on the example
Inset shown la Figure S-l. Each sample ten
result must to wltbla 30 percent of the aver-
a«ed result or the tests shall to repeated.
This step may to omitted for non-extractive
monitors where dynamic calibration gas mix-
tures an not used (fl.li).
6JJ Calibration Error Test Procedure.
Uake a total ef 16 neaeoaaecutlve measure-
mints by alternately using xero gas and each
calibration gas mlrture/eonceptretlon ttf.
0%. 80%. 0%. 90%, 60%. M%. H%, 0%.
etc.).fm ^^*^»^']^^;i^"i">*y'»J^-
«^.-.~i w- rflrc i ..«> .in^Q-
94
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App.B
Title 40Protection of Environment
edit whose concentrations are certified by
the manufacturer to be functionally equlva-
lent to these gu concentrations Convert tbo
continuous monitoring system output ret fl-
ag* to ppm and record the resulu oa the
example iheet shown in Figure 2-2.
6.9 Field Test for Accuracy (Relative).
Zero DrUt. end Calibration Drift. Install and
operate the continuous monitoring system in
accordance with the msnulseturer's written
Instructions and drawing* at follows:
6.2.1 Conditioning Period. Offset the ccro
aetting at lean 10 percent of the span M
Uut negative zero drUt can be quantified.
Operate the system for an Initial 168-hour
conditioning period la normal operating
manner.
6.3.3 Operational Test Period Opermta the
continuous monitoring system for aa addi-
tional 168-hour period retaining the too
offset. The system shall monitor the source
effluent at all tunas except when being
ceroed. calibrated, or back-purged
i»M T»« f-t-^-T fC
For continuous monitoring systems employ*
Ing enraetlTe sampling, the probe tip for the
continuous monitoring system and the probe
tip for the Reference Method sampling train
should be placed at adjacent locations la the
duct. For NO, continuous monitoring sys-
tem*. make 37 NO, concentration measure-
ment*, divided into nine sets, using tie ap-
plicable reference method. No more than one
set of tests, consisting of three Individual
measurement*. ah all be performed In any
one hour. All Individual measurements of
each set shall be performed concurrently.
or within a taree-mlaute Interval and the
resulu averaged. For BO, continuous moni-
toring systems, make nine GO, concentration
meesuremeets using the applicable reference
method. No more thaa oae measurement
shall be performed la any one hour. Record
the reference method test data and the con-
tinuous monitoring system concentrations
oa the esaaple data sheet shown la Figure
1322 Field Test for Zero Drift and Cali-
bration DrUt. For extractive systems, deter-
mine the values given by aero and spaa gu
pollutant concentrations at two-hour Inter-
vals uatu 15 sets of data are obtained. For
STStem e
ad-all-
ascbban-eu-cnttry~iacte.dlac.4be
rafllsrlrgLjKpin-ii inn flstnrtm sawintily nr
by-tosetting-Uiiee uniiore-csdlbrmtioa *aa
ceils aad computing the cere point from -the
upsrsle omeeureeaeBU. Xf-cmrlettBrteefe-
alq.ua Is iis*rtre graph«f-sautt-be-r»talned
by-s&e -owner or-eperetar-fer esehtBeenre-'
*tBent eyetem that ahowi the relationship be
tw*ea-«ie -nr»r8Je -measurements-end tbe
cero point. Jne spaa of -the eystem ehall be
checked "T irlnr ralirintlrm cm mil imr-
«m«ii KT «K« manufaeturer-to-be funettoa-
aUxjequIvalent4o-M percent of spaa eoaeea-
-tnuoa. Record the zero and epaa aeejm*-
ment* (or the computed tero drift) oa Ihi
example data sheet shown In Figure 2-4.
The two-hour periods over whJch measure-
ments are conducted need not be consecutive
but may not overlap. All measurement* re-
quired under this paragraph may be con-
ducted concurrent with testa under para-
graph 6.2.3.1.
62.2.3 Adjustments Zero and
corrections «nfl adlutftn.tm l
at 24-noui intervals or at such shorter In-
tervau as the manufacturer's written In-
structions specify Automatic corrections
made by the measurement system without
operator Intervention or Initiation are allow-
able at any time. During the entire 168-hour
operational test period, record on the ex-
ample sheet shown In Figure 3-5 the values
given by sero and spaa gas pollutant con-
centrations before aad after adjustment at
24-hour Interval*.
e J Field Ten for Response Time.
6.3.1 Scope of Test. Dae the entire continu-
ous monitoring system as Installed. Including
sample transport llaei If used Flow rates.
line diameters, pumping rates, pressures (do
not allow the pressurized calibration gas to
change the normal operating pressure la the
sample line), etc, shall be at the nominal
values for normal operation as specified In
the manufacturer's written instructions. 11
the analyzer Is used to sample more than one
pollutant source (stack), repeat this test for
each sampling point.
6.9.2 Kespona* Tine Test-Procedure. In-
troduce cero gas Into the continuous moni-
toring system sampling interface or M close
to the sampling interface as possible When
the system output reading baa stabilized.
switch quickly to a known concentration of
pollutant gas. Record the time from concen-
tration switching to 95 percent of final stable
response For non-extractive monitors, the
highest available callbrstlon gas concentra-
tion shall be switched Into sad out of the
sample path aad response times recorded
Perform this test sequent* «**« fy) tii-^
riecora ue resulu of each test on the
example sheet shown la Figure 3-6.
7. Calculations. Data Analysis aad Report-
Ing.
7.1 Procedure for determination of mean
values aad confidence intervals.
-. T.I.I The xaeaa value of a date, eet to
calculated """««'"g to equation 3-1.
* '-I Equation 2-1
where:
«.=ab«oiutt value of the measurements.
X=eum of the Individual values.
s=mean value, and
a = number of data points.
7.1.3 The 95 percent eonfldenee Interval
(two-elded) Is calculated according to equa-
tion 3-2:
C.I.B
Equation 2-2
95
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Chopttr 1Environmental Protection Agency
App.B
where:
£x( = sum of all data points,
tw-li-o/2, and
C.I.u=95 percent confidence interval
estimate of the average mean
value.
Values for >.975
B '.TO
................ 4. KB
:::: :. i IB
i
10...
n...
15...
U...
It...
IS...
u...
1*71
144:
IMS
1KB
1283
isa
12D1
1179
1UO
Hi!
1111
The rallies ID this Ubte art already cor-
rected for n-l degree! of freedom. Use n
equal to the number of samples as data
pomta.
7.3 Data Aaaly&ii and Reporting.
72.1 Accuracy (Relative). For each of the
nine reference method test polnti. determine
U>e average pollutant concentration reported
by the continuous monitoring system. Then
average concentration! shall be determined
from the continuous monitoring system data
recorded under 7.3.3 by integrating or aver-
aging the pollutant concentrations over each
of the time Intervals concurrent with each
reference method testing period. Before pro-
ceeding to the next step, determine the basis
(vet or dry) of the continuous monitoring
system data and reference method test data
concentrations. XX the bases are not con-
sistent, apply a moisture correction to either
reference method concentrations or the con-
tinuous monitoring system concentrations
as appropriate. Determine the correction
factor by moisture tests concurrent with the
reference method testing periods. Report the
moisture test method and the correction pro-
cedure employed. For each of the nine test
runs determine the difference for each test
run by subtracting the respective reference
method test concentration* (use average of
each set of three measurements for NOi)
from the- continuous monitoring system Inte-
grated or averaged concentrations. Usixtg
these data, compute the mean difference and
the 9S percent confidence interval of the dif-
ferences (equations 3-1 and 9-3). Accuracy
la reported as the sum of the absolute value
of the mean difference and the 09 percent
aonfldenee Interval of the differences ex-
pressed u a percentage of the mean refer-
ence method value. Dae the example sheet
sbown In Figure 3-4.
7.3.3 Calibration Irror. Dang the date
from paragraph 0.1. subtract the measured
pollutant concentration determined under
paragraph 6.1.1 (Figure 3-1) from the value
abown by the continuous monitoring system
for each of the five Radices at each con-
centration measured under 61.3 (Figure 3-3).
Calculate the mean of these difference values
and the 95 percent confidence Intervals ac-
cording to equations 3-1 and 3-3 Report the
calibration error (the eum of the absolute
value of the mean difference and the 95 per-
cent confidence Interval) as a percentage of
each respective calibration gu concentra-
tion. Dse example sheet shown in Figure 2-3.
73.S Zero Drift (3-hour). Using the cere
concentration values measured each two
hours (luring the field test, calculate the dif-
ferences between consecutive tiro-hour read-
Ings expressed In ppm Calculate the mean
difference and the confidence interval using
equations 3-1 and 3-3 Report the zero drift
as the sum of the absolute mean value and<
the confidence Interval aa a percentage of
pan. Use example sheet shown In Figure
3-*.
73.4 Zero Drift (34-hour). Uslag the tero
concentration values measured every 34
hours during the field test, calculate the dif-
ferences between the tero point after cere
adjustment and the cere value 3« hours later
Just prior to tero adjustment. Calculate the
mean value of these points and the confi-
dence Interval using equation* 3-1 and 3-3
Report the tero dnft (the sum of the abso-
lute mean and confidence Interval) as a per-
centage of span. Use example iheet shown in
Figure 3-6.
7.3.8 Calibration Drift (9-hour). Using
the calibration valuea obtained at two-hour
Intervals during the field test, calculate the
differences between consecutive two-hour
readings expressed as ppm. These values
should be corrected tor the corresponding
aero drift during that two-hour period. Cal-
culate the mean and confidence interval of
these corrected difference values using equa-
tions 3-1 and 3-3. Do not use the differences
between non-consecutive readings. Report
the calibration drift as the sum of the abso-
lute mean and confidence Interval as a per-
centage of spaa. Use example sheet shown in
in Figure 3-4.
73.8 Calibration Drift (34-hour). Using
the calibration values measured every 34
hours during the field test, calculate the dif-
ferences between the calibration concentra-
tion reading after cere and calibration ad-
justment, and the calibration concentration
read tag 34 hours later after aero adjustment
but before calibration adjustment. Calculate
the mean value of these differences and the
confidence Interval using equations 3-1 aad
3-3. Report the calibration drUt (the eum of
the absolute mean aad confidence Interval)
as a percentage of span. Use the example
sheet shown In Figure 3-4.
73.7 Response Time. Using the chart*
from paragraph 8J. calculate the time Inter-
ral from concentration switching to 95 per-
cent to the flaal stable value for all upscale
and downscale testa. Report the mean of the
three upscale test times and the mean of the
three downseale test times, no two aver-
age times should not differ by more than IS
percent of the slower time. Report the alowar
96
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App.B
Title 40Protection of Environment
time u tbe system response time Use tbe ex-
ample sheet shown In Figure 3-4.
1J.B Operational Test Period. During the
168-hour performance and operational test
period, the continuous monitoring system
ball oat require any corrective maintenance,
rcpilr. replacement, or adjustment ether tban
that clearly specified a* required la tbe op-
eration and maintenance manuals u routine
and eipected during a one-week period. If
Uae continuous monitoring system operate*
within the specified performance parameter*
and does sot require corrective maintenance,
repair, replacement or adjustment olber loan
aa specified above during the 168-hour teat
period, tbe operational period will be (ucceaa-
tu)i; concluded. Failure of tbe continuous
monitoring ifitcm to meet tnli requirement
bill call ror repetition of tne 166-bour teit
period. Portlonj of tbe test which wen utla-
factorlly completed need not be repeated.
Failure to meet any performance ipeclflca-
tloni (ball call for a repetition of tbe one-
week performance teit period and that por-
tion of tbe testing which U related to the
fa'Jed specification All maintenance and ad-
fuAmenta required (ball be recorded. Out-
put readings shall be recorded before, and
after all adjustment*.
I. References.
B.I "Monitoring Instrumentation for the
Measurement of Sulfur Dloilde In Stationary
Bource Emissions," Envlronaenlal Protection
Agency. Reaearea Triangle Park, N.Q, Feb-
ruary 197).
13 'Instrumentation for the Determt&a*
tton of Nitrogen Oxldet Content of Station'
ary Source Emlulons," Environmental Pro*
tectlon Agency. Resesreb Triangle Park. N.C.
Volume I. APTD-OB4T. October 1071; Vol-
ume a. APTD-0912. January 1872
«J Experimental Statistic*." Department
of Commerce. Handbook Bl, 1963, pp. 3-41.
paragraphs 1-3.1.4.
84 "Performance Specifications for Sta-
tionary-Source Monitoring Systems for Oaae*
and Visible Emlulon*." Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Research Triangle Park. N.C.
EPA-4SO/3-74-013, January 1074.
ffflfVOCI IvttM f»H
IItin M. IMI/III « CiiiiniM an
97
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
K^f-Kf-- ter-r /
Oiopttr I-Envlrcmmenlol^ProltcHon Agency
APP.B
Calibration CM Klxture D«U (From Figure M)
*1d (SOS) ppq High (901)
Callorttion fat
Concentration.ppnt
Measurement Syiten
Reading, ppn
PlffereneetJ
1L
u
IS
Hem difference
Confidence 4ntervil
Calibration error
Hem Difference' * C.T.
MU High
Avenge Calibration Gas Concentration
X 100
'Calibration gas concentration - measurement systea reading
'Absolute value
2-2, Callbritten Error Dttenslnaticn
98
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App. B
Title 40Protection of Environment
tit
w.
1
?
1
1
fell
Ttol
)
!_! '
I
7
,
,
(tin
Iff
ISIC
iOf
Itl
ft ftrtKi*
Mint (JOjl
«f1Mnci 1
*tw«
aurrili
NIB Bf
«
(«'
1if«l« t
(B-)
Nut rtfirv
tni win
M
tiXl!
MirtH
I
fia.l . .
tki 'Kfnntti . IK cD"fi«»n liimil .
11 l Nttn ftftftuci utthoe vilul "
lili (M rtpcrt mUet m< u rtuimlm intifriM inrtgti
«Ml/tir l.kvr
/bingi («"!
(pST"
10, «,
Min cf
UK tft
Zrro)
»-lf« (Nun Spin I
MuUlt «ilw.
I t !»»») i W i
1 t [ifu] i 10
Tl|*f« i-
2m tM ulitrittcn Brlft (I i
99
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Chapter IEnvironmental Prelection Agency
App.B
Date Zero Span Calibration
nd Zero Drift Reading Drift
Tine Reading (iZero) (After tero adjustment)
Zero Drift [Ketn 2en Drift* » C.I. (Zero)
« tlnitrument Span] x 100 .
Calibration Drift [Mean Span Drift* * C.I. (Sp&n)
« Ilnstrunent Span] x TOO
Absolute value
Figure 2-5. Zero and Calibration Drift (24-hour)
100
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APP.B
THIt 40Protection of Environment
Date of Tctt
Spin Cit Concentration
Analyzer Span Setting _
_PP»
_PP»
Upscale
jeconds
jeccnds
teeendi
Avenge upscale response
teeonds
1
2
3
jeconds
seconds
Oownscalt
seconds
Average downieale rssponie ,
System average response tine (slower time) _
_sieonds
seconds.
(deviation from slower
system average response
average uptcale minus averioe dewnscsle
slower time
* IOCS
Figure 2-6. Response Tine
petUcauon and specification test proce-
dure* tat monitor* of CO, aad O, from sta-
Senary sources.
1. Principle and Applicability.
U Principle. Effluent gaies are eontlnu-
ou»ly campled and »re analyzed for carbon
dioxide or oxygen by a continuous monitor-
ing synem. Test* of the system are performed
during a minimum operating period to deter-
mine zero drift, calibration drift, and M*
tpoaM time characteristic*.
1.3 Applicability. This performance speci-
fication ! applicable to evaluation ot con-
ttnuout monitoring ayctcma for meaiurement
ot carton dioxide or oxygen. Tbeie speelflca-
tton* contain teit proeedurei. luuilatlon r»-
qulrementi. and data computation proce-
dure* for evaluating th» accepublllty of tb»
oontlnuouf monltortn; lyitcmi nbject to
approval by toe Administrator. Sampling
may Include either ex tractive or aon-cxtrae-
Uv« (tn-iitu) proeedune.
9. Apparatui.
3J Contlououi MonltorlBf ByiUm for
Cartoon Dioxide or Oi7gen.
9J Calibration Oaa Mixtures. Ulxture or
known eoneenuatlom of carbon dlotld* or
oxygen In nitrogen or air. Mldrange and 90
percent of span carbon dioxide or oxygen
eoncentratloni are required. Tie 90 percent
Of span gai mixture 1* to be wed to ett and
check U>* analyxr ipan and if referred to
M ipan (ma. Per oxygen analyzers, if IB*
pan U blgber than 31 percent Or ambient
air may be -uied IB place of tie 90 percent of
span calibration gas mixture. Triplicate
analyses of the gas mixture (except ambient
air) ahall be performed within two weeks
prior to iue ualng Reference Uethod of
this pan.
3J Zero das. A gas containing leas than 100
ppm of carbon dioxide or oxygen.
34 Data Recorder. Analog Chan recorder
or other suitable device with Input voltage
range compatible with analyser eyitem out-
put. The resolution of the recorder's data
output anal] be sufficient to allow completion
of the test procedures within thie specifica-
tion.
a. DeOaitiou.
8.1 Continuous Monitoring System. The
total equipment required for the determina-
tion of carbon dioxide or oxygen in a given
aource effluent. The ayitem eonalfU of three
major subsystem:
1.1.1 eampllng Interface. That portion of
the continuous monitoring system that per-
forms one or more of the following opera-
tions: Delineation, acquisition, timtuporu-
tion, and conditioning of a sample of the
eource eSuent or protection of the analyur
from the hostile aepeett of the sample or
eource environment.
101
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Chapter IEnvironmental Protection Agency
App. B
81J Analyzer. That portion of the «oo-
UDUOUI monltorlDg system which senses the
pollutant gas and generates a signal ootput
that U a function of tht pollutant concen-
tration.
3.1.3 DtU Recorder. That portion of the
continuous monitoring system that provides
a permanent record of ibe output signal in
term* of concentration units.
3.2 Span. The value of oxjgen or carbon di-
oxide concentration at wbjch ibe continuous
monitoring system U *et that produeai the
maximum data display output. For the pur-
pose! of thla method, tat fpan shall be tat
no lesi tban 1.3 to 1* umei the normal car*
boa dioxide or normal oxygen concentration
In toe itack gaa of the affected facility.
8J Midrange. Tne value of oxygen or car-
bon dioxide ooncentratlon that la represent*-
Uve of the normal condition* In the stack
gas of the affected facility at tjpleal operat-
ing rates.
9.4 Zero Drift. The change In the eonttn-
uous monitoring system output over a stated
period of time of normal continuous opera-
tion when the carbon dioxide or oxygen con-
centration at the time lor the measurements
to tero.
S.5 calibration Drift. The change In the
continuous monitoring ijitem output over a
stated time period of normal continuous op*
eratlon when the carbon dioxide or oxygen
continuous monitoring system Is measuring
the concentration of spaa gas.
1.6 Operational Test Period. A ralalmmn
period of time over which the continuous
monitoring system Is expected to operate
within certain performance specifications
without unscheduled maintenance, repair, or
adjustment.
3.7 Bespoase time. The time Interval from
a step change la concentration at the Input
to the continuous monitoring system to the
time at which 06 percent of the correspond-
ing final value Is displayed on the continuous
monitoring system data recorder.
4. Installation Specification.
Oxygen or carbon dioxide continuous mon«
Itorlng systems shall be installed at a loca-
tion where measurements are directly repre-
sentative of the total effluent from the
affected facility or representative of the same
effluent sampled by a SO, or HQ, continuous
monitoring system. This requirement shall
be complied with by use of applicable re-
quirements la Performance Specification 3 of
this appendix as follows:
4.1 Installation of Oxygen or Carbon Di-
oxide Continuous Monitoring Systems Hot
TJsed to Convert Pollutant Data. A sampling
location shall be selected la accordance with
the procedures under paragraphs 4.3.1 or
4.3.3. or Performance Bpedflcanon a of this
appendix.
43 Installation of Oxygen or Oarboa Di-
oxide Continuous Monitoring Systems Used
to Convert Pollutant Continuous Monitoring
System Data to Unite of Applicable Stand-
ards. The diluent continuous monitoring sys-
tem (oxygen or carbon dioxide) shall be In-
stalled at a sampling location where measure-
meat* that can be made are representative of
the effluent gases sampled by the pollutant
continuous monitoring syttem(s). Confonn-
ance with this requirement may be accom-
plished in any of the following ways:
4.3.1 The sampling location for the diluent
system shall be near the sampling location for
the pollutant continuous monitoring system
such that the eame approximate polnt(s)
(extractive systems) or path (in-eltu sys-
tems) la the cross section Is sampled or
viewed.
122 The dllueat and pollutant continuous
monitoring systems may be Installed at dif-
ferent locations If the effluent gases at both
sampling locations are aonstratlfled ae deter-
mined under paragraphs 4.1 or 44. Perform-
ance Specification 3 of this appendix and
there U no la-leakage occurring between the
two sampling locations. If the effluent gases
are stratified at either location, the proce-
dures under paragraph 4.3.3. Performanoe
Specification 3 of this appendix shall be used
for *-'«»**''£ continuous monitoring systems
at that location.
S. Continuous Monitoring System Perform-
anoe Specifications.
The continuous monitoring eyiteia shall
meet the performance specifications la Table
8-1 to be considered acceptable under this
method.
6. Performance Specification Test
dune.
The following test procedures shall be i
to determine eonfomance with the require-
ments of paragraph 4. Due to the wide varia-
tion existing In analyser designs and princi-
ples of operation, these proeeduree are not
applicable to all analyzers. Where this occurs.
alternative procedures, subject to the ap-
proval of the Administrator, may be em-
ployed. Any such alternative proeeduree must
fulfill the same purposes) (verify response.
drift, and accuracy) as the following proce-
dures, aad must clearly demonstrate eaa-
formance with specifications la Table t-L
«.l Calibration Cheek. BMablUb a calibra-
tion curve for the continuous monitoring
system using tero. mldraage. and epaa eon-
eentration gas mixtures. Verify that the re-
sultant curve of aaalycer reading compared
with the calibration gas value Is consistent
with the expected response curve ae described
by the aaalycer manufacturer. If tne ex-
pected response curve Is not produced, addi-
tional calibration gas meeeuremeate shall
be made, or additional steps undertaken to
verify the accuracy of the response curve of
the analyzer.
93 Field Ten for Cere Drift and Cali-
bration Drift. Xairuil aad operate the eoa-
tlauous xBonltorlag system la
102
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App.B
Tille 40 Protection of Environment
with the manufacturer^ written Instructions
ad drawings H tollowi:
TABLC S-l.Per/ormenee sped/lcatteiu
FtnnOtt
Sputfotfton
I.ZvodririQb)! .......... <0«xiO,or C0k
J. Zeio drift (24 b) i ......... 30J pel OiOf COt
I. Calibration drill (1 b) '.. <04 pel Oi « COi.
4. CiUbnOon drtll (14 b) « . ?<« pet Oi oi CO*
1. Opwtdentl peitod ------- 1(6 b miolaiun.
s. RopooM Oa» .......... .
> Eipreucd u turn of tbulate man valas ptoi U pel
eoafidincs loicrval of I un u oi lests.
6.2.1 Conditioning Period. Offset tbe aero
setting at lent 10 percent of span to Uimt
negative uro drift may be quantified. Oper-
au tli» continuous monitoring system (or
an Initial 188-hour conditioning period In a
normal operational manner.
6.3.2. Operational Ten Period. Operate the
continuous monitoring eyiUm for an addl-
tlonal 186-hour period maintaining the HTO
ooan. Tne 1711*10 (ball monitor tne aouree
effluent at all times eieept when being
(reed. ceJlbrated, or backpurged.
923 Field Test for Zero Dmt and Calibra-
tion Drift. Oetcrmln* the value* given by
(era and mldrange gas concentrations at two-
new Intervals until IS seta of data an ob-
tained. For non-eitractlve continuous moni-
toring systems. determine the taio value
given by a mechanically produced cero con-
dition or by computing the aero value from
upscale measurement* using calibrated gas
cells certiaed by the manufacturer. The mid-
range ebeeke shall be performed by using
certified calibration gas cells functionally
equivalent to leu than 60 percent of span.
Record these readings en the example sheet
Shown In Figure 8-1. These two-tour period*
need not be consecutive but may not overlap.
In-dtu CO, or O, analyzers which cannot be
fitted with a calibration gas cell may be cali-
brated by alternative procedures acceptable
to the Administrator. Zero and calibration
corrections and adjustments are allowed
only at 24-hour intervale or at rack shorter
Intervals at the manufacturer's written In-
etrucUons specify. Automatic corrections
made by the continuous monitoring ty*tem
without operator intervention or initiation
are allowable at any time. Curing tbe en-
tire 168-bow tett period, moid the values
given by eero and span gas concentrations
before and after adjustment at 24-hour In-
terrala la the example sheet shown In Figure
9* Field Test for Response Time.
5.1 Beope of Tut.
This ten ahnl! be accomplished using the
continuous monitoring eyctem as installed.
including sample transport lines U vatd.
Flow rates, line diameters, pumping rate*.
pressures (do net allow the pressurized call-
bratlon gas to change the normal operating
pressure In tbe Maple Use), etc, shall be
at tbe nominal values for normal operation
ae specified in tbe manufacturer's written
Instructions. If the analyzer Is used to sample
more than one source (stock), this lest snail
be repealed for each sampling point.
3 2 Response Time Test Procedure.
Introduce tero gas Into the continuous
monitoring system sampling interface or as
close to the sampling Interface as possible
Wben tbe system output reading has stabi-
lized, switch quickly to a known concentra-
tion of gas at (0 percent of span Record the
time from concentration switching to 95
percent of final stable response. After the
system response has stabilized at the upper
level, switch quickly to a zero gas Record
tbe time from concentration switching to 05
percent of final stable response. Alterna-
tively, for nonextractive continuous monitor-
Ing systems, the highest available calibration
gas concentration shall be switched Into and
out of tbe sample path and response times
recorded. Perform this test sequence three
O) times. For each test, record the reculta
on tbe data sheet shown In Figure S-S.
7. Calculations. Data Analysis, and Report-
Ing.
7.1 Procedure for determination of mean
values and confidence Intervals.
7.1.1 Tbe mean value of a data set Is cal-
culated according to equation S-l.
s-:fe"
wbere:
Equation
i,=absolute value of the measurements.
I = sum of the individual values.
=aaan value, and
n=number of data point*.
7J.I The 05 percent confidence interval
(two-sided) is calculated according to equa-
tion ft-2:
C.I.U--
Equation 3-!
where:
ZXssum of all data polnta,
OS percent confidence interval es-
timates of the average mean vsuue.
/or >.I75
103
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Diopter IEnvironmental Protection Agency
APP.B
Tbe values la this table are already corrected
(or n-J degrees of freedom. D«e a equal to
tbe number of samples as data poiata.
7.2 Data Analysis aod Reporting.
7.2.1 Zero Drift (2-hour). Uilog the iero
eoaeentratloa values measured each two
hours during the field test, calculate tbe dlf-
fereaeea between the consecutive two-hour
readings expressed In ppm. Calculate tbe
mean difference and the confidence Interval
using equations 3-1 and 3-2. Btcord tbe sum
of the ibsolute mean value and the confi-
dence Interval on the data sheet sbowo la
Figure-3-1.
7.2.2 Zero Drift (24-hour). Using tbe cero
concentration values measured every 94
hours during tbe field test, calculate the dif-
ferences between tbe cere point after iero
adjustment and tbe zero value 94 hours
later just prior la cero adjustment. Calculate
the mean value of tbese point* and the con-
fidence interval using equations 3-1 and 3-2.
Record tbe zero drift (the sum of the ab-
solute mean and confidence interval) oa toe
data sheet shown la Figure 3-3.
7.2.3 Calibration Drift (2-hour). Using the
calibration values obtained at two-hour In-
tervals during the field test, calculate tbe
differences betweea consecutive two-hour
reading! expressed as ppaa. Tbese values
should be corrected for the corresponding
cero drift during that tvo-bour period. Cal-
culate the mean and confidence Interval of
these corrected difference values using equa-
tions 3-1 and 3-3. Do not uae the differences
between non-consecutive readings Record
the sum of the absolute mean and confi-
dence Interval upoa tbe data sheet shows
In Figure 3-1
7.2.4 Calibration Drift (34-hour). Uslag the
calibration values measured every 94 hours
during tbe field test, calculate tbe differ-
ences between the calibration concentration
reading after zero and calibration adjust-
ment and tbe calibration concentration read-
Ing 24 hours later after cero adjustment but
before calibration adjustment. Calculate tbe
mean value of tbese differences and tbe con-
fidence Interval using equation* 3-1 and 3-9
Becord the tuna of the absolute mean and
confidence Interval on tbe date, sheet shown
In Figure S-2.
7.2.8 Operational Test Period. During toe
168-hour performance and operational test
period, tbe continuous monitoring system
shall aot receive any corrective maintenance.
repair, replacement, or adjustment other
than that clearly specified as required In tbe
manufacturer's written operation and main-
tenance manuals as routine and erpected
during a one-week period. If tbe continuous
monitoring system operates within tbe sped*
fled performance parameters and does not re-
quire corrective maintenance, repair, replace*
ment or adjustmeat other than as specified
above during tbe 168-bour test period, tbe
operational period will be successfully con-
cluded. Failure of tbe continuous monitoring
system to meet this requirement shall call
for a repetition of the IBS hour test period.
Portion* of the test which were satisfactorily
completed need not be repeated. Failure to
meet any performance specifications shall
call for a repetition of tbe one-week perform-
ance test period and that portion of tbe test-
ing which Is related to the failed specifica-
tion. All maintenance and adjumente re-
quired shall be recorded. Output reading!
shall be recorded before and after all ad-
justments.
7.34 Response Time. Using tbe data devel-
oped under paragraph 6.3, calculate tbe tune
Interval from concentration switching to 95
percent to tbe final stable value for all up-
scale and dowaicale teste. Report tbe mean of
tbe three upscale teat times and tbe mean of
tbe three dowascale test times Tbe two av-
erage times should not differ by more than
16 percent of tbe slower time. Report tbe
slower time as tbe system response tune. Re-
cord tbe results en Figure 1-8.
B. References.
.1 "Performance Specifications for Sta-
tionary Source Monitoring Systems for Oases
and Visible Emissions." Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, H.C,
ZPA-aM/9-74-013. January 1(14.
ta "Experimental Statistics.' Department
of Commerce. National Bureau of Standard*
Handbook 01. 1963. pp. a-*i. paragraphs
104
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
App. B
Title 40Protection -of Environment
lit
u.
TIM
Oiu
Zm
I«ro
Drift Spiii
biding
SHU blltriilo
Drift Drift
(U««i)
Clllbritlc* Drift [1
-------
Chapter IEnvironmental Protection Agency App. B
te Zero Span Calibration
nd Zero Drift Reading Drift
Ine Reading (aZero) (After zero adjustment) (aSpan)
Zero Drift [Mean Zero Drift*
Calibration Drift [Mean Span Drift*
.4 C.I. (Zero)
.« C.I. (Span)
Absolute value
Figure 3-2. Zero and Calibration Drift (24-hour)
106
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APP.C
Title 40Protection of Environment
Bite of TfSt
Span Gas Concentration
Analyzer Span Setting
I.
Upscale 2.
3.
ppn
.PP«i
_seconds
,seconds
seconds
Average upscale response
seconds
Downscale
1.
2.
3.
.seconds
_seconds
seconds
Average downscale response.
seconds
ijrstem averege response time (sioner time) seconds
:evwrf«»/ from slower m avsraae upscale mirus tvertoe dewnscale
system average response slower time
Figure 3-3. Response
» p 'i
S
(«0 FR 46259. Oct. 6. 1973. 40 FR 69904, 40205. DM. 22. 1976. u amended at 49 FR 6937.
_£»n.Sl. 1977J
Aims C-Drmwounoii or EUJCOK BUB
> CS1MOC
Ll Tb* to'la«lni nitlood tbill b* urd la dtionln
bctber * phniealor epemUoaal ebtait la u txlrtni
bellltT faulud la »n laenut ID tb* ralnlon r»u la UM
atzanpbtri. The method uud H th» Stadcot'l ( ten.
eommoolf BJed la auk* lalucaeu bom null auapui.
S. Ate.
II Eieb emlBloo tot tail! eoniUt of« mat (oraiDy
Ibn*) vblcb prodoct * ualBfloa nut Thai two arti of
d, on* b*»or« tad CM afur tb*
wben:
S,.raMi« nu far tb* I tb ran.
U CtlnbU tb* oopli nriiaee, P, Uu
tut Mlnj BooKlon L
mcb ml t*
wiri, tb* two «ru boat of cqiul alt*.
U wbeo ulot roumJeaJnloD ton, «e>pt u no-
d*d In t «.KW el itti pin. Ux itfmnoi mttbod* of
«ld*d In t «.KW el itti pin.
Appmdu A to^bli nn tbiU be uied ln*eeerd«ue with
tta pragedorei ipeJftea ]B la* ipplleablt nbput boib
btfMi tnd ifur lb* chantt la obuin the diu.
U Wh«uDmooDUnnoaiinonlUiii,lh»fidmyib»Dbe
apmud u U ainuU unlulon UM «» belni per-
Igmtd. Vtlld d»u uilci Ik* tTcimcf nf Urn* which would
b* rrqalird 1' r iriiual cmlaloo UM wtn b*Uf an-
daeud ibtll b*
£>-
n-l
(2)
LI Mesial* tb* poatod eMmtU,
ttaa S.
1.1 BaberflpU ud b dooU pnebiBj* tad
~ *-P
ynm
a.2 Ctlruuu ttn krttbjBtBe
b an at data out Iqoauea i.
_
eal^oa nU, X, br
(3)
A.
107
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APPENDIX E
RESULTS OF PREVIOUS TESTS AT SITE 4
108 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Sampling Locations
Unit #3 is equipped with a Western Precipitator Multiclone cyclone
type dust collector. Sampling sites were selected such that inlet and
outlet data and emission characteristics were obtained for the collection
device. The inlet sampling plane, located just upstream of the cycone in
the inlet breaching, was the only area available to obtain inlet data due
to the duct configuration of the boiler. Figure E-l presents a cross
sectional diagram of the inlet sampling site. This site was somewhat
unsuitable for particulate measurements due to its nearness to an upstream
bend in the ducting. Some of the inlet particulate data is questionable,
however the gaseous data is accurate. Figure E-2 presents the cross sectional
view of the inlet sampling probe locations. Twelve probes were installed
for gaseous emission testing and of these twelve stainless steel probes, six
were equipped to measure hot line data. The twelve probes were installed in
six ports, two in each port. Twelve 3/8 inch diameter type-T nylon sample
lines connected the sample probes to the mobile test lab. Sampling took
.place during the middle of winter in the cold prairie section of the Midwest.
The sections of sample lines that were outside the building were insulated
with fiberglass insulation and wrapped with a pipe heating tape. The entire
sample line bundle was covered with a waterproof plastic liner to protect
it from moisture.
An existing location in a section of breeching between the ID fan and
chimney was used for the outlet sample site (Fig. E-2). This location had
been used for previous compliance tests. Four ports were located at the site.
Three probes were installed into each port at the centroids of equal areas
for a total of twelve sample probes. This sample site was outside and special
insulating material and heating tapes were required to keep the nylon sample
lines from freezing during the cold winter weather.
109 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
SAMPLING PORT
I-BEAM
I
CAT WALK
106.7cm
(42")
A
1
172.7cm O
(68")
104.1 cm
O (41")
'1
121.9cn>
(48")
WESTERN
PRECIPITATION
MULTICLONE
Figure E-l. Side view, inlet sampling area.
110
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Cross Sectional Area: 6.039 m (65.0 ft }
Probe Lengths from Outside Edge of Port: 43.34 cm (17-3/4"),
93.98 cm (37-1/4")
Probe Numbers Shown
Probe Numbers 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12 equipped for Hot Line Testing
^"
So.
(20
f1
2
_ll
8cm
")
609.6 cm
+3 +5 +7 +9
+4 +6 4-8 +"
|| || II)" 20.32cm | |
** 101.6cm*
(40")
«^
t +»
99.06cm
T +i2
"
Figure E-2. Cross section, inlet sampling duct, top view, gas flow is into
paper.
111 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Cross Sectional Area:
2.016 m2 (21.7 ft2)
Probe Lengths From Outside Edge of Port: 35.56 cm (14-1/8"),
76.2 cm (30-3/8"), 16.8 cm (46-5/8")
Probe Numbers Shown
162.6 cm
(64")
+.
"
-f
16
+
19
14
17
20
23
15
30.5 cm
(12-1/2")
4-
+
18
21
24
-1-
+
33.02 cm
(13")
121.9 cm
(48-3/4")
}
(6")
Figure E-3. Cross section, outlet sampling duct, top view, gas flow is
out of paper.
112
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Comparison of Test Coals
Unit #3 normally burns a western type fuel, because the utility had
trouble in obtaining a reliable supply of eastern coals. Several years ago
they switched to the more dependable western coal supplier. The western coal
burned during these tests was a Montana coal from Colstrip, Montana. For
the test series a special order of eastern type coal was obtained. This fuel
was from the Sahara mine in Southern Illinois. As with most western subbituminous
coals the Colstrip coal had a high moisture content, high volatile and low
fixed carbon content and moderate sulfur content.
Western Coal Burning at Unit #3
Montana coal is normally burned at this facility. A small penalty is
paid in total unit capacity when using the subbituminous coal in a stoker
originally designed to fire a high Btu eastern type coal. The maximum load
obtained with the Montana coal was 16,1 kg/s (128,000 Ib/hr) steam flow while
the maximum load on the Southern Illinois fuel was 16.8 kg/s {133,400 Ib/hr)
steam flow. These values are somewhat deceptive since, at the time the boiler
was tested, there was a defective air heater in service. This air heater had
large leaks in it which allowed incoming air to short circuit its route to
the combustion zone, and hence starve the undergrate air chamber. This
resulted in the unit smoking at a lower than normal maximum load on the
eastern coal and resulting in a reduced maximum load at the given conditions.
The unit should be able to make 20.2 kg/s (160,000 Ib/hr) steam flow with the
eastern coal when the air heater is repaired and the stoker is properly adjusted.
Western coal can be successfully fired on a spreader stoker with only
minor changes in existing equipment. For a given boiler output, feeder rates
must be increased to get the same amount of energy input into the stoker on
western coal as for eastern coal. The fineness of the western coal ash
requires thicker bed to prevent ash from being blown off the grate. Unit #3
ran an ash bed thickness of 5 to 10 cm when firing western fuel. Feeder rates
were increased about 10 to 15 percent.
113 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Higher superheat temperatures were encountered with the higher
moisture western coals. Unit #3 was equipped with a through-th-mud drum
type steam attemperator. This device was used when firing western coal to
control the superheat temperature. No control read-outs were available to
measure the absolute percentage of steam by-passed into the attemperator but
the controller which controlled the bypass valve was set at about 50 percent
for Montana coal. Increasing the overfire air can reduce the CO emissions
somewhat; but, the unit did not operate in that mode as a normal operating
procedure. A short series of tests ran overfire air pressure from normal
as-found settings of 7.5 - 8.5 inches H20 to the maximum setting, and
corresponding CO emissions of 181 ppm at 3.0% excess 02 were reduced to 140 ppm
at 3.0% excess 02- Nitric oxide emissions did not vary significantly with
the change in overfire air.
There was no appreciable flame impingement on the furnace side walls
or back walls with western coal firing. The fuel bed was uniform and well
established. The coal combustion on the grate was nonswelling and nonagglom-
erating. Coke pieces tended to retain their individual size and identity
when burning on the grate. The main flame front began about four feet from
the vertical plane of the feeders for western coal burning. No clinkers
were formed while burning western coal. There were "sparklers" or suspension
burning with the western coal. These sparklers were carried up into the
superheat pendant section.
Moderate slagging occurred in the superheat pendant tube section.
Slag deposits of two to four inches in thickness covered the pendant loops
about 1/2 to 2/3 up the tubes. There was some flame impingement on these
areas. Some slag build-up was sufficient to cause bridging of formations
between pendants, however it was not of sufficient quantity as to cause flow
restriction through the superheater.
Generally the Montana coal performed well on the stoker. Except for
the reduced load, the coal was a better fuel than the eastern coal which
clinkered and had a serious smoking problem.
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Emissions Data
A. Sulfur Oxides
Table E-l contains a summary of all emission tests conducted at this
unit on both eastern and western coal. In all, thirty-four tests were run
(fourteen on eastern coal and twenty on western coal). Sulfur oxides emissions
from western coal were about half that of eastern coal. The average S02
emissions from the eastern coal were 1489 ng/J (3.47 lb/106 Btu) compared
to 766 ng/J (1.79 lb/106 Btu). The Colstrip coal tested on this unit exhibited
the greatest sulfur retention of any coal tested with an average of only 65%
of the fuel sulfur emitted in the flue gas. This number compares to a fuel
sulfur emissions of 94% on eastern coal on this same unit.
The SO2 emissions from either the western or the eastern coal did
not follow a trend with either load or excess air. The SO3 component of
the SOx emission was generally less than 3 percent of the total. Neither the
amount of 803 nor the ratio of SC>3/SOx exhibited a definable trend with any
of the test variables.
B. Particulates
The uncontrolled particulate loadings were found to exceed the ash
content of the fuel by as much as a factor of four. Even when the carbon
content of the ash was taken into account, these figures could not be reconciled
with the uncontrolled particulate loadings. Therefore, the error must be with
the sampling location described above.
Controlled particulate loading were within reasonable limits of
166-545 ng/J (0.39 - 1.27 lb/10 Btu). The overall average particulate
loading of all the tests for eastern and western coal are shown in Table E-l.
The average western coal emission was some 24% less than the average for
eastern coal. The carbon content of the western coal fly ash was also 33% less
than that from the eastern coal. The particulate emissions followed no definable
115 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE E-l. EMISSION SUMMARY, UNIT 3
Teat
No.
USTI
II
11
11
14
IS
16
17
IB
1»
10
11
11
11
14
Avei
Data
fit COAL
l/IS/7*
1/19
1/10
1/11
1/11
1/11
1/16
1/1!
1/28
1/10
1/11
1/1
1/1
i/s
*«
Load
ko,/a
IIO1 lu/hr)
11. S
1107.4)
14.1
(112.0)
11. a
(114.5)
14.1
(111.11
11.1
(10S.4I
13.1
IIOS.SI
IS.fi
1114.0]
IS. 8
(iis.41
11.4
4*1.0)
10. S
(81. S|
9.6
176.1)
11.0
167.1)
11.8
(109. S)
16.8
(111.4)
11.4
(106.1)
Condition*
Nonal Oj. (tod. UMd
Monal Oj. Had. Load
Honul 0^. Hod. load
Moraal Oj, Ned. Load
High O,, Mad. toad
Spill Put* Raaat
High 0 . Mad. Load In
Out
Nonal Oj. High Load
Honal Oj. MJflh Load
itorul O,. UM-Had.
UMd
Moraal O}. Uw Load
Uaw O_f Low Load
IU«h O,, Uw Load
UW 02> Itod. Load
Hai. Cant. Load, font
O.S. Boilar Tuna Up
Hater
It 0,
ppn
DOS
DOS
COS
OOS
1798
179S
1711
OOS
OOS
OOS
OOS
MS
OOS
COS
CYCLONE INLET
Oj. t
B.5»
8.11
8.17
8.18
9.41
8.S6
6.61
6.4S
7.41
9.9S
8.18
11.91
6.61
S.8S
8.18
CO
PP»
1« O]
114
16S
146
168
44
19
289
50»
111
11
16
84
89
116
190
CO,
«
9. IS
9.74
9.9
9.67
9.01
9.1«
11.11
11.24
10.34
B.iS
9.91
7.18
11.08
11.7
9.87
HO
PP«
1» 02
447
471
491
S14
491
S12
41S
19S
M6
441
141
491
175
116
416
CYC1ONE OUI LET
0,. »
9.0
8.61
.11
.6
11. O
8.7
7.4
10.7
12.1
7.1
9.17
CO
PP»
It 03
108
151
167
1106
10
44
riuzE
S20
maze
SB
mozB
90
~
10S
IIS
CO,
8.8
9.4
8.9
8.6
8.4
8.8
10.6
7.88
7.4
10.9
a. 99
HO
ffm
1»02
49S
44S
419
SIS
SOI
S20
291
431
481
~
126
441
kg Steim
kq Coal
8.2
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.6
8.7
8.4
8.1
e.9
e.s
e.i
8.S
8.7
a. 67
8.91
t c
In Ash
--
--
16.8
as.a
--
--
26.9
IS. 9
18.4
16.8
18. 0
21.0
27
Pact
ng/J
(l/HBtu)
Out
116
(0.71SS)
~
171
(0.8621)
"
294
(0.6814)
ISO
I0.81J5J
264
10.6111)
S4S
(1.26)0)
114
|0,S4«1I
120
(O.76JO1
11B
I0.10&S)
so*
ppn
1641
IS14
146]
1589
1061
1849
1721
~
I6S1
1788
1791
1718
IBIS
1724
Hotel
Pralln. Unit
Check Out
Pact In and
Out
SOx In
SO* Out
Pact In and
Out
SOU Inlat
SOi Inlat
SO* Inlat
Caaeom Only
Part In and
Out) SO« In
Pact In and
OuLi SO* In
Part In and
Outi SO* In
Part In and
Ouci SO* in
Pact In and
Outi SO* in
ffl
I
en
o
M
Ln
M
to
in
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-l. (continued)
Teat
NO.
Data
WESTERN COAL
1
'
1
4
Sft
SB
5C
SO
6A
60
61
7
B
9A
98
12/2/75
11/1
12/4
12/S
12/8
12/8
12/8
12/8
12/9
12/9
12/9
12/10
12/11
12/12
12/12
Load
kg/a
Iflllb/lirl
11. S
(1071
14.1
(1121
12.1
197. SI
11.0
(101)
11.2
(105)
11.2
I10S)
11.2
(105)
11.2
1105)
11. a
(109. SI
11.8
(109. S|
11. a
(109. SI
12.9
(102)
11.7
(loa.si
14.6
(111)
14.0
(1111
Condition!
Normal O . Normal
Operation
Normal O.. Normal
operation
Normal O . Normal
Operation
Normal O . Normal
OperatloR
Vary Overflra Air
(OTA) Ae round
Vary or» - Incraaaa
Mr
Vary OTA - furtlwr
Incraaaa Mr
Vary OTA - Datum
to Normal
Vary OTA - Blaa Top
Row
Vary OTA - Aa round
Vary OTA - Blaa Top
ROM
Vary Grata Air.
Normal O
Han. O., Normal In
Operation Out
Vary Grata Mr - A*
round
Vary Grata Air - Hea
Throttle. Bast Open
SO,
Hater
972
627
791
776
1126
9SS
92O
945
978
..
__
980
91S
1091
880
675
CYCI£NB 1ULCT
02.
7.8
7.1
7.9
,.
9.2
9.S
T.S
8.2
7.7
7.1
7.2
7.5
8.6
7.4
7.1
CO
ppm
It 02
340
880
527
eoo
461
116
14S
181
178
117
111
176
112
280
117
CO,
t
10.1
10.4
10.1
10.4
9.1
9.0
10.9
10. S
10.4
10.9
10.9
10.5
9.7
10.6
10.6
NO
PP"
It Oj
J61
187
1B9
198
166
162
156
111
111
155
152
135
427
192
169
CVCLOMk OUTLET
°2- »
"
"
"
8.6
..
..
8.1
a. 2
9.1
CO
It Oj
"
466
209
227
126
.-
CO,
"
10.1
.-
..
10.2
10.1
9.4
NO
It 0,
--
"
407
-.
--
'--
412
162
419
kg Steam
k 10S-J
--
--
SO.
BG7
IBS
851
"
859
1020
914
--
--
Motee
SO* Out
SO* In
Part In
Part Out
Meter Outlet
Hater Out
Heter Out
Part In and
Outi SO* In
I
o>
O
M
U1
M
10
10
in
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-l. (continued)
Teet
HO.
WEST
10
11
12
11
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
avef.i
Oat*
MM COAL -
12/16/75
12/17
12/18
12/19
12/20
12/22
1/6/76
1/7
1/8
1/12
1/13
JO
Load
kg/a
Cent Inue
9.1
(72)
10.4
(81)
10.4
(82)
10.2
(80)
9.9
179)
,
9.9
179)
14.0
(111)
15.9
(126)
16.1
(118)
19. 8
III))
14.5
(115)
12.9
(107.6)
Condition*
1
tonal 0^, low toad
lonal OJt UM Load
Ml9h Oj. Low Load
llqh Oj. Low Load
UM Oj. .Low load
Low-tied. 0,. Lou
Load
Low-Hod. 0 . Low
UMd J
Noraal O,. Hailawai
Load
Normal O,. HaalBua
UMd *
Low O2< Hedluai Load
Noraal O . Hedluai
UMd '
Hater
11 0 2
pgm
1020
1129
712
770
664
716
917
1057
961
COS
008
CYCLONE INLET
0,. %
9.5
8.6
10.6
9.9
7.7
8.2
6.6
6.7
6.0
6.8
6.9
7.9
CO
11 0,
262
141
165
198
129
214
1182
642
2200
1221
1001
504
"I*
9.4
9.8
9.1
9.0
10.5
10.4
11.6
11.4
11.9
11.4
008
10.16
NO
11 O]
118
166
170
182
284
144
124
166
115
141
174
159
CVCLOIIB OUTLLT
a,, i
--
~
8.6
"
--
7.85
8.1
8.19
CO
PI'"
11 O2
--
"
"
111
--
876
1052
467
t>
~
--
~
10. 0
~
~
11.4
II. 0
10.14
HO
PP"
11 O2
"
~
~
107
~
"
156
150
176
kg Coal
5.71
5.82
5.61
5.70
DOS
5.72
5.75
5.68
5.59
5.58
5.61
5.98
% C
In A.h
12.2
--
11.1
15.0
21.9
25.5
18.14
Part
ng/J
(l/HOLul
Out
8.028
186
\p 41I5J
8.080
290
/ie.79\
V..6754J
9. BO]
166
/ll.496\
\0. 1B61J
4.657
277
fio.ai\
12.214
258
(2t«_\
\p.6001/
"
"
J58
SOI
PPO
1146
846
815
849
912
~
878
~
899
Note a
Part In and
Out
SO. In
SOx In
Part In and
Out
Part In and
Out
SOx In
Part In and
Outi SOU In
SOx In
Part In and
Out
SOx Out
Inlet anil
Outlet Caaoou*
oo
a\
o
10
to
U1
-------
trend with either boiler load or flue gas excess 02. Indicated cyclone
collection efficiencies were very high due to the questionable inlet
particulate loadings. Assuming a cyclone efficiency of 85 percent one can
back-calculate the inlet particulate loading of about 2252 ng/J (5.3 lb/106
Btu) which is a factor of 4 to 5 lower than the measured loading. Therefore
the measured inlet loadings are considered to be unreliable. The problem is
thought to be the sampling location rather than any procedural error in the
sampling technique.
C. Nitric Oxide--
Nitric Oxide (NO) emissions measurements are given in Table E-l for
both coals. The overall average emission of NO was reduced approximately
18 percent by switching to western coal. Figures E-4 and E-5 contain the
nitric oxide vs. ©2 data for Montana and Illinois coal respectively. Both
data sets are at <* medium load and both exhibit the expected trend of increasing
NO with increasing excess Q^' The N0 emissions from the Montana coal are
all about 50 ppm lower than the NO emissions from the Illinois coal. This
difference may be a result of differing fuel nitrogen content (111. = 1.35%
fuel N, and Mont. = 0.68% fuel N) of the two coals; or it may be due to the
high moisture content of the Montana coal which affects the combustion
intensity (flame temperature] resulting in lower thermal fixation. The
nitric oxide emissions were relatively constant with load for both coals.
D. Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Carryover
The characteristic carbon monoxide emissions are given for Montana
and Illinois coals in Figures E-6 and E-7 respectively. Both coals exhibit
increasing CO emissions with increasing load. The quenching of the CO
combustion is more extensive on Montana coal than on the Illinois coal. It
has been demonstrated on other units, as well as this one, that CO emissions
can be controlled by increasing the excess air. Inspection of the data in
Table E-l shows that when the excess 02 is lowered to 6 percent, the CO
emissions become significant. Comparing Tests 17 and 18, at the same load,
demonstrated that increasing the excess 02 by 0.7% reduced the CO from 2200
ppm to 642 ppm.
119 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
600
500
CM
O
* -»
0
o! 400
en 0 300
z ^
o o
w >
tn o
2 *4
g
H S*
x 11
100
5.0
Medium Load
13.6 kg/s (lOSxlO3 lb/hr) steam
6.0
7.0 3.0 9.0
EXCESS OXYGEN, percent
10.0
11.0
Figure E-4. Nitric oxide vs. excess oxygen, Unit 3, western coal.
120
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
700
600
n "S 500
U j)
13 £
CU M
M U
01 S,
400
x
M «
X ki
O «
u <
200
100
5.0
Medium Load
13.6 kg/s
(108xl03 Ib/hr
steam
6.0
7.0 8.0 9.0
EXCESS OXYGEN, percent
10.0
11.0
Figure E-5. Nitric oxide vs. excess oxygen, Unit 3, eastern coal.
121
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
2000 ppm
1800
1600
1400
IN
* "1200
*» JJ
» 2
KS £
2 ^
£1000
a a
ft c
S "o
u 2
«
800
600
400
200
I
Rated Load =20.2 kg/s
(160xl03 Ib/hr) steam
44
20
18
8H
17
SO
56 62 68
PERCENT OF RATED LOAD
74
80
Figure E-6. Carbon monoxide vs. load, Unit 3, western coal.
122
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
1400
~ 1200
m w
01
** -9
« p
1000
t-
Q, l-l
W 0
a w
M <«
w
w o<
Q «
M 14
800
600
400
200
T
T
Rated Load =20.2 kg/s
(160x103 Ib/hr) steam
44 50 56 62 68
PERCENT OF RATED LOAD
74
O _
80
86
Figure E-7. Carbon monoxide vs. load, Unit 3, eastern coal.
123
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
Figures E-8 and E-9 contain the carbon carryover data as a function
of load for western coal and eastern coal respectively. The western coal
shows increasing carbon carryover with increasing load while the eastern
coal data was a monotonic function of load. The magnitude of the eastern coal
carbon carryover was approached only at high loads while firing western coal.
Stoker Operation and Boiler Efficiency
The operational limits of the stoker are presented in Figures E-10
and E-ll for western and eastern coal respectively. The data is plotted as
a function of excess 02 and unit load. The upper dashed line represents the
limit of the induced draft fan. The lower dashed line represents the limit
defined by fuel bed clinkering, high CO, and/or smoke. The region defined
by these two dashed lines is the area of normal operation. The solid line
on these figures is drawn through test points within this normal operating
range. Comparison of the two solid lines shows that the western coal can be
fired at lower excess air than the eastern coal over the entire load range.
These plots may also be viewed as defining the limits of staged combustion in
this particular unit.
Table E-l contains a column labeled kg steam/kg coal. On the average
the western coal produced 30 percent less steam per kilogram of coal than the
eastern coal. This number gives some indication of how much more coal a plant
would have to process to obtain the same steam load. However the actual
boiler efficiencies are not so severely impaired as shown in Table E-2 which
contains the heat loss boiler efficiency calculation results for eastern coal
and western coal respectively. Tests 23-34 are on eastern coal and tests
3-18 are on western coal. On the average the western coal reduced the boiler
efficiency by three percent from 80.9% to 78.5%. The largest differences
between the two coals occur in the moisture and hydrogen losses. This, of
course, is due to the high moisture content of the western coal. There
are three factors which would cause loss of steam generation on western
124 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
35
30
:
u
CO
s
fa
20
15
10
1 1 r
Rated Load = 20.2 kg/s
U60xl03 'Ib/hr) steam
14
44
50
56 62 68
PERCENT OF RATED LOAD
I I I I I
74
80
Figure E-B. Carbon vs. load, Unit 3, western coal.
125
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
40
35
30
0)
u
a*
*
1
J 20
2
M
z
15
10
31
30
o
33
23
25
Rated Load =20.2 kg/s
(160xl03 Ib/hr) steam
1
I
I
.34
28
44
50
56 62 68 74
PERCENT OF RATED LOAD
80
86
Figure E-9. Carbon vs. load, Unit 3, eastern coal.
126
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
12.0
11.0
10.0
o 9.0
g 8.0
en
CO
u
u
7.0
6.0
T
T
T
Percent Carbon in Outlet Fly Ash is
Value in Brackets [%C in Ash]
[13.3] Normal Operation
[12.2] 13H \ / ID Fan Limit
Q
10
CO, Clinker, or
Excessive Smoke Limit
Rated Load -20.2 kg/s
(160xl03 Ib/hr) steam
I I I
44
50
56 62 68
PERCENT OF RATED LOAD
74
80
Figure E-10. Excess oxygen vs. load, staging limits, Unit 3, western
coal.
127
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
12.0
11.0
o
H 10.0
4) n
C A
C.
-------
TABLE E-2. CALCULATION OF EFFICIENCY
Boiler Category 111
Unit Description
Location Ho.
Boiler Ha.
furnace Type
Capacity
kV«
10) Ib/hr
MBtK/hr
exaction Nethod
Burner Type
4
1
Iff
20.2
160. 0
285
I960
Plaid
S3
Baitern COM
Fuel Analya
C
H
0
H
a
HjO
Alh
IDIV/IBtu/lb)
HJ/H9
1
kl
69.26
.71
.47
.17
.28
.11
.76
11448
18.9
Kl
VO
Taat Ho.
Test Load, » of fcapaelty
Stack Oj (t pry)
Stack CO (p(«)
Stack Teaperatura
K
P
Aobiant Air T«pa»tura
Ml Inlat Cseaia Air
kH Cult tacaia Mr
Mr llaatar Laakafa
Mr Hcatar efficiency
PCT. »lr Through Air Heater
21
71.6
a.>
14&.0
464
411.»
101
es.o
61.66
74.71
7.49
16.68
102.IS
2S
6f.«
9.4
44.0
491
42S.8
101
80.0
BOIUH OONOIT10H9
26
76.4
6.1
509.0
4B4
411.0
100
ai.o
10
$2.2
10.0
Sl.O
471
191. S
101
86. S
Calculated Mr Kaatar Valuaa. percent
79.18
106.66
14.6S
29.47
19.44
41.06
SI.86
6.SI
17.B9
110.08
87.4*
100.92
6.81
IB. 51
101.19
11
47.6
8.4
26.0
469
18S.O
308
95.S
64. SO
75.71
6.4i
16.91
100.71
11
S4.6
11.9
S4.0
472
190.0
199
78.1
117.51
117.14
4.14
40.66
115.56
II
68.«
6.6
89.0
4OO
440.0
101
81.S
44.82
SI.97
S.92
29.81
84 92
14
81.4
S.9
216.0
489
410.0
299
78.0
17.51
50.68
.94
14.61
101 46
BOILER HEAT BAUUKB LOSSES, percent
Heat Balance Lonea Corrected to 100 *K (80 TJ Entering Air Teoperature
Dry Cat
Holeture » Hj
Holatura In Air
Unbumod CO
CoMtaietlblea
Radiation
Dollar Efficiency
10.41
4.91
0.2S
O.O8
2.48
0.56
81.10
11.74
4.95
0.11
0.01
2.16
0.61
79.01
9.11
4.91
0.21
0.24
2.49
O.S1
82.49
11.16
4.89
0.27
O.O)
2.17
0.77
80.52
9.42
4.87
0.21
0.01
2.69
0.84
81.94
11.11
4.89
0.12
0.06
2.48
0.11
78.10
10. OO
4.98
O.J4
0.04
2.64
0.58
81.52
9.28
4.95
0.21
0.10
1.64
0.48
81.14
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-2. (continued).
Boiler Category 112
Unit Description
Location Ho. 4
Boiler 1
Furnace Typo HT
Ca|»acUr
kg/a JO.2
10> Ib/ht 160.O
HBtu/hr 176.0
Inotallod 1*60
Brectlon Hethod field
Burner Typo 63
Meatorn Coel
Fuel Analysla
C
H
O
M
S
H,0
A
o
Taut No.
Teat Load. » of Capacity
Stack 02 O 0»y>
Stack CO
Sta
k Tevparatura
A»u ant Air Taaparatiura
Ml Inlat Enceea Air
All B«lt Excaaa Air
Air Heater Laakaga
Air llaatar EfClclaney
KT. Air Through Air llaatar
6O.»
7.4
S2T.O
479
402.0
105
90.0
S9.0
70. S7
6.66
IB. 18
100.21
BOILEB COHOITIOHS
B 10
67.a 41.0
B.6 9.5
112.0 262.0
484 462
412.0 171.0
298 104
77.0 88.0
11
so.o
9.9
198.0
47S
19S.O
10S
90.0
Calculated Air llaatar Valuae. percent
67.85
74.81
1.B2
18.38
111.71
BO. 84
97.86
B.71
19.10
IDS.20
87.28
10S.61
9.10
16.87
99.17
14
49.4
7.7
179.0
46S
178.0
106
91.0
S6.6S
67.87
6.S7
40.29
107.10
16
6.6
11B2.0
4SO
351.0
101
82. 0
44.Bl
54.34
3.98
47.80
134.98
18
80.O
6.0
2200.O
4SO
1S1.0
100
80.0
19.12
48.90
6.17
49.19
143.06
BOILER IIEAT BALANCE LOSSES, percent
Heat Balance Loaeva Corrected to 1OO *K (BO T) Entering Air Teafwratur*
Dry C*a
Holatura * Mj
Holatura In. Air
Unburned OO
Coabuatllilea
Kadlatlon
Boiler Efficiency
9.BB
B.ll
0.24
0.28
3. 80
0.66
78.04
10.61
8.11
0.21
0.18
2.91
O.S9
77.28
10.12
8.02
0.2S
0.16
1.64
0.89
78.51
11.71
8.09
0.28
0.11
1.81
0.80
77.17
9.O4
a.oi
0.22
O.O9
2.08
0.81
79.72
7.14
7.96
0.18
0.16
1.11
o.sa
79.88
7.22
7.97
0.17
O.99
4.04
0.50
79.11
-------
coal, they are: (1) limitation of maximum steam generation due to high
superheat temperature, (in this case this limit resulted in a four percent
reduction in maximum load); (2) limited coal handling and feeder capacity,
(this was not a problem at this site); and (3) reduction in boiler efficiency
due to increased moisture losses, (efficiency reductions of some three percent
were measured when comparing western to eastern coal at comparable load and
excess O2's).
Eastern Coal Burning on Spreader Stoker
Unit 3 was designed to burn a high heat content eastern type coal.
However, the Southern Illinois coal did not perform as well on the Montana
coal. There were two reasons for the poor performance of the eastern coal.
First, the test batch of eastern coal contained a large percentage of fines.
Second, the overfire air fan was not functioning properly. The stoker developed
a smoking problem and a Detroit Stoker factory representative was sent out
to retune the stoker. The results of that effort are summarized below.
The boiler had a smoking problem when firing the Southern Illinois
coal. The field representative from the stoker manufacturer noticed several
problems with the boiler operation. First, the furnace draft was too low
at -0.203 cm (-0.08 inches) of H20 when it should have been almost twice
that at -0.38 cm (-0.15 inches) H20. Second, the feeders on the stoker
were out of adjustment in two ways. Both the hand wheels were out of adjust-
ment and the spill plates were not set right. Third, the overfire air was
not biased properly and not of sufficient pressure. After determining these
three items, correction of the problem proceeded as follows.
First, all spill plates were reset to factory recommended setting
of approximately 1.27 cm (1/2 inch). This adjustment is made by turning the
spill plate adjusting screw clockwise all the way in until the center rib
of the spill plate bears against the inner end of the screw. The adjusting
screw was then backed off counter-clockwise until the ll27 cm (1/2 inch)
setting existed between the rib and inner end of the screw. This was done
for all six feeders. Once the spill plates were set the hand wheels were
readjusted.
131 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
To readjust the hand wheels, which control the feed rate, all the
hand wheels were turned clockwise until they could not be tightened anymore.
From this position, they were backed off from 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 turns counter-
clockwise until a satisfactory fuel bed was formed, up and down the firing
lane. From the 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 turn position the adjustment was made in 1/4
turn intervals. This concluded the fuel supply controls adjustment.
The overfire air was then reset. The first problem with this system
was that the outlet of the blower was producing only 25.4 cm (10.0 inches)
of H2O pressure and it should have been about 68.6 cm (27 inches) of H2O.
A search for leaks in the overfire air system turned up none. Subsequent!
discussions with plant personnel revealed that the overfire air blower had
been overhauled recently and closer inspection of the blower showed that the
impeller had not been reinstalled properly. This reinstallation error
resulted in insufficient "bite" by the impeller in the shroud to the fan and
a resultant loss in air pressure. To compensate for the low fan capacity
a blower from the adjacent unit #2 which was connected via a crossover duct
was put in service. This additional fan raised the overfire air supply
pressure to the required 68.6 cm (27 inches) of water pressure.
With sufficient air pressure restored to the overfire air system,
the overfire air pressures were reset to factory specifications.
An overview of the overfire air settings were such that the back
wall was at a higher pressure than the front wall. The back wall upper and
lower rows were almost equal at about 43.2 on (17 inches) H20 pressure on
the upper row and 41.4 cm (16.3 inches) H20 pressure on the lower rear wall.
On the front wall (feeder wall) the overall pressure was lower than the back
wall. The upper and lower rows on the front wall were similarly biased.
The lower row had about 38.1 cm (15 inches) of H2O pressure, and only three
to four inches on the top row on the front wall. This low pressure was just
sufficient to keep the nozzles from heating up and did little to aid combustion.
With most of the air through the lower jets the turbulence mixing immediately
above the bed was increased. This resulted in increased residence time and
improved carbon burnout.
132 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
This improved firing mode of the unit allowed the combustion air to
be reduced which allowed the furnace draft to be increased. The final boiler
configuration was a definite improvement over the initial condition of the
stoker but still was not a complete solution to the smoking problem. Some
smoking still existed and flue gas analyses of the excess 02 distribution at
the boiler outlet in a test (#34) immediately preceding the boiler tune-up
revealed a high degree of stratification in the exhaust duct. This is shown
in Table E-3 which presents the inlet cyclone flue gas distributions. The
cyclone inlet is essentially the same as the boiler outlet. Also, shown in
Table E-3 is a flue gas distribution from before the stoker tune up, this
was test #23. The important thing to notice is the maldistribution of excess
02 across the duct from east side to west side. For test 34 the average of
east side probes (#1 though #6) is 4.98% excess 02 and the west side probes
(#7 through #12) average 6.79% 02. A difference of 1.81% excess O2 from
east to west. Test 23*s corresponding excess 02 distribution is 6.69%
for the east side and 9.58% for the west side. A change in excess O2 of
2.89% from east to west. For test 34 the percentage variation of excess 02
across the duct is 31% and for test 23 the percentage is 35%. The ultimate
cause of the maldistribution of fuel and air was not discovered, even though
a change in the smoking problem resulted.
Western coal burned better on the stoker. The eastern fuel had a
tendency to form clinkers more readily than the western coal. This was
probably due to the uneven fuel/air distribution which resulted in local
cooling of the ash below its fusion temperature. The poor air/fuel distribution
also caused the eastern fires to impinge on the back wall of the boiler.
The western coal fires did not do this. Flame impingement and flame carryover
into the superheat pendant section which caused slagging was more evident
with the eastern than with the western coal. However, high superheat steam
temperatures were a problem with western coal and some attemperation was required.
Smoking was a continuous problem with the eastern coal firing. Interestingly
enough, CO emissions tended to be higher for the western coal firing, yet smoke
formation was not a problem as it was with eastern firing. The volatile matter
to fixed carbon ration (vm/FC) is higher for eastern coal than for western
coal resulting in a burnout problem on eastern coal.
133 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TABLE E-3. FLOE GAS DISTRIBUTION BEFORE AND
AFTER STOKER READJUSTMENT
°2
CO
HO
(East)
Inlet
Averages :
02 - 5.85%
CO - 216
NO - 336
°2
CO
NO
Inlet
Averages :
02 - 8.17%
CO - 145
NO - 491
TEST 34 - INLET CYCLONE - 83% load
1
4.8%
278 ppm
333 ppm
2
4.85%
312
331
3
4.6%
258
316
4
5.7%
353
308
5
4.7%
364
309
6
5.2%
399
321
7
5.4%
213
312
8
6.3%
196
331
9
6.55%
69
354
10
7.3%
53
374
11
7.7%
54
337
12
7.5%
53
333
Outlet averages 7.2% O2, 267 ppm CO, 326 ppm NO
Test 23 - Inlet Cyclone - 72% load
1
6.0%
360
444
2
5.87%
357
438
3
6.3%
343
453
4
6.9%
243
466
5
7.45%
66
494
6
7.6%
87
500
7
8.2%
91
534
8
8.8%
59
528
9
9.48%
39
539
10
9.3%
38
548
11
10.95%
36
546
12
10.75%
35
558
Outlet averages 9.13% 02/ 177 ppm CO, 439 ppm NO
(West)
134
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
APPENDIX F
TABULATION OF HOURLY DATA
135 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft*
* 2« HOUR DATA
* DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION *
** *
* 02 co2 NO NO NO
«* Ll'»0 VULJ VOLX PP"V PPKV NG/J *
* DATE TlMfc M"TH H£*S MEAS HEAS 3*0* «
*««««*»*«**«»»««»*»»***
« 8/11/79
«« a/12/79
* 8/1J/79
* 8/14/79
8/15/79
8/16/79
8/17/79
8/18/79
8/14/79
** B/20/79
6/21/79
* 8/22/79
8/23/79
6/2U/79
** 8/25/79
* 8/26/79
8/27/79
8/28/79
« 8/29/79
*« 8/30/79
* 8/31/79
* 9/ 1/79
* 9/ 2/79
9/ 3/79
** S/ U/79
* 9/ 5/7S
«« 9/ e/79
* 9/ 7/79
» S/ 8/79
9/ 9/79
« 9/18/79
*« 9/11/79
** 9/12/79
2«.b
19.1
?l.7
21. «
?!.?
21.7
23.0
22.0
If*. 3
2«.5
2«tO
23.5
21.7
21.5
19.5
Ib.tt
23.*
24.1
25.9
2<«.fl
20.8
22.7
It). 5
|9.l
27.2
2S.7
23. tt
22.2
!>.«*
I'.l
23.8
22.8
.0
9.3
10.6
10.0
10.2
10. S
9.9
9.5
9,9
10.8
9.4
9.2
9.5
10.4
9.9
10.5
10.0
9.9
9.3
9.1
9.4
b.7
9.7
10.5
10.3
a. a
9.1
9.7
9.7
10. t
10.2
S.tt
8.8
10. J
10.1
B.b
9.6
9.5
9.2
9.6
9.7
9. ft
8.3
9.8
10.0
9,8
h.t
9.8
«>.l
8.7
9.6
9.9
10.4
10.1
10.7
9.9
9.1
9.5
10.8
to. a
9.9
V.7
9.1
9.1
1U.1
10. U
8.5
*52.
219.
225.
20U.
22".
221.
230.
227.
222.
241.
220.
23S.
206.
221.
20H.
195.
231.
225.
2«S.
235.
239.
217.
207.
196.
238.
239.
223.
224.
231.
244.
241.
257.
214.
390.
389.
371.
341.
384.
360.
362.
36«.
393.
374.
336.
366.
3*0,
350.
356.
340.
374.
348.
372.
360.
350.
348.
355.
333.
353.
363.
355.
350.
385.
407.
37a.
382.
359.
229,
229.
218.
20V.
225.
211.
212.
217.
231.
219.
198,
216.
206.
210.
209.
199,
220.
204.
218.
216.
206.
204.
208.
|9e.
207.
213.
208.
210.
226f
239.
220.
224.
211.
**
«
*
*
*
**
**
**
*
ft*
*
*
*
ft*
ft*
ft*
**
ft*
ft*
**
*
**
*
*
ft*
*
*
**
*
*
I*ft*
136 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*******************«*
HUURLV OAT* *
«« DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
**
ft
»
«
*
t*
**
*
ft.
*
*
t*
«
ft.
**
*
ft.
ft
*
*
ft
ft
DATE
>***<
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
8/11/79
6/11/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
6/11/79
8/11/79
6/11/79
8/11/79
6/11/79
8/11/79
8/11/79
6/11/79
8/11/79
TIME
»*****
0
0
U
0
0
0
u
u
0
0
0
120U
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1600
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
LO
M*
**
23
27
28
£6
26
2*
27
20
26
19
j7
17
IT
AD
TH
<
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.4
.2
.4
,4
.4
.1
.6
.1
.«
.0
!o
02
VOLX
PEAS
>***<
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
8.5
9.0
8.9
8.9
.3
.1
.5
.6
,6
.2
.0
10.5
1U.6
C
vo
ME
!
13
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
8
9
8
6
02
LX
AS
***!
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.4
.2
.4
.3
.4
.4
.4
,4
,6
.9
.0
.3
.3
NO
PPHV
HEA3
ft
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1»1.
284.
281.
286.
291.
273.
291.
302.
282.
190.
J99.
201.
203.
NO
PPMV
]XO<
*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
276.
427.
419.
427.
449.
414.
457.
478.
410.
291.
315.
346.
353.
NU
N6/J
I******)
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
162.
251.
206.
250.
264.
243.
268.
261.
241.
171.
IBS.
203.
207.
*
*
>
*
*
»*
*
**
**
*
*«
«
«
«**»**»»*»*****«»««««*»»»**»»«
137
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*«»»,*«**»»**«
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
HGUKLV DATA
OHY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
02 C02 NO
LIHD VULX VOLX PP"V
1>ATE
t ft ft ft* * ft** 4
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
B/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
fl/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
b/12/79
6/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
8/12/79
TIft
r* ft* ft ft *
1 M 0
20u
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
170U
teoo
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
MWTH
19.0
IB. 5
17.3
17.0
17.6
17.0
16.7
17.3
19.3
16.3
20. a
19.6
20.2
19.9
19.0
ift.fl
19.0
17^9
IB. 2
19.9
21.4
21.1
MEAS
1 * * * ft ft ft *
lo.s
10.9
1 1 t4
11.5
11,5
11.7
11.7
11. 5
11.1
10.7
10.1
10.4
10.2
10.5
10.5
10.6
10.6
10.8
10.9
10.7
10.5
10.0
10.2
11.0
HEAS
ft ft ftft * ft fl
H.fl
B.5
B.I
8.1
B.I
7.9
7.9
8.1
8.5
8.7
9.4
9.1
9.3
8.9
8.9
8.1
8.8
B.6
a. s
8.7
a, 8
«|2
B.I
HEAS
1 *ft ft ft* ftl
«J29.
226.
216.
215.
207.
211.
204.
208.
217.
206.
230.
212.
2UB.
196.
208.
211.
228.
225.
227.
230,
236.
255.
240,
221.
NO
PPHV
NO
Ntt/J
3*0?
I**.**""""" ^.^.^^.^.^.^J
394
005
-------
**************************
HOURLY DATA *
** DRV STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
**
**
DATE
I
8/13/79
* 8/13/79
«* 8/13/79
* 8/13/79
* 8/13/79
8/13/79
« 8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
* 8/13/79
* 8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
*« 8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
B/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
8/13/79
« 8/13/79
8/13/79
TIME
>***»»*
1UU
200
300
400
500
600
700
BOO
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
19QO
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
LOAD
MtaTH
*«***>
J7.8
28.7
28.1
27.8
28.1
26.4
24.9
24.3
22.9
21.4
22.0
20.5
19.9
17.6
17.3
18. S
18.2
|8.5
19.0
19.6
18.2
17.6
17.6
17.0
02
VOLX
MEAS
t******t
11.0
10.6
10.8
10.7
10.4
10.4
11.2
10.2
11.0
9.2
9.1
8.9
8.5
8.5
8.6
9.3
9.3
9.7
9.9
10. 2
10.1
10. a
10.8
11.7
C02
VULX
NEAS
»******<
8.3
8.8
8.6
8.8
9.1
9.1
8.2
9.5
8.4
10.1
10.
10.
11.
11.
11.
10.
10.5
10.0
9.B
9.4
9.5
8.8
8.8
7.8
NO
PPMV
MEAS
>**<
226.
240.
230.
230.
219.
239.
210.
234.
212.
247.
243.
223.
217.
224.
230.
234.
242.
247.
244.
235.
206.
202.
199.
176.
NO
PPnv
3XOf
»**<
409.
417.
408.
404.
373.
407.
388.
391.
383.
378.
369.
333.
313.
323.
335.
361.
373.
395.
397.
393.
341.
358.
353.
342.
NO
Nb/J
»****
240.
245.
239.
237.
219.
239.
228.
230.
225.
222.
216.
195.
184.
190.
197.
212.
219.
232.
233.
231.
200.
210.
207.
201.
*
*
»**
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
**
**
*
**
*
*
*
ft***************************************
139
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*************.«
**
**
**
«
**
* DATE
ftftftftftftftftftftft
** 8/14/79
** B/lu/79
** B/14/79
** 8/14/79
* 8/14/79
** 8/14/79
8/14/79
** 8/14/79
** 8/14/79
** 8/14/79
»* 8/14/79
*« B/14/79
* 8/14/79
B/14/79
* 8/14/79
* 8/14/79
* B/14/79
8/14/79
* 8/14/79
B/14/79
* b/14/79
** 8/14/79
B/14/79
* 8/14/79
TIME
i ***** t
iuu
200
300
40U
500
000
700
BOO
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
loOO
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
24UO
A****************************************
hOUKLY DATA
DRY SJACK (.AS CONCENTRATION
LOAD
MKTH
******
1«. 5
1^.0
It. 6
19,0
1Q.3
|7|3
2l!l
24.9
27.5
27.8
25.2
24.6
25.5
24.9
24.3
22.0
20.5
19.6
20)2
17.6
17.6
02
VOLX
MEAS
k******i
11. D
10.7
11.1
10.7
10.0
10.0
11.4
11.2
.9
.1
.0
.3
.3
.0
.0
.5
.5
10.0
10.5
10.9
10.8
10.7
10.7
11.8
C02
VULX
MEAS
tft ft ftftftftt
a, 7
9.0
8.5
8.9
9!2
8,3
8.4
9.7
IU.6
11.1
11.3
10.5
10.7
10.8
10.3
10.2
.8
.3
Q
!o
.1
.1
7.8
NU
PPMV
MEAS
I******
209^
193.
196.
193.
202.
180.
176.
190.
241.
234.
213.
204.
194.
214.
214.
209.
210.
206.
197.
199.
212.
216.
196.
NO
PPMV
3*0f
t******i
353.
367.
353.
344.
335.
351.
339.
325.
309.
366.
341.
303.
315.
292.
322.
336.
328.
345.
355.
353.
353.
372.
379.
386.
NO
NG/J
>*****<
207.
215.
207.
202.
197.
206.
199.
191.
182.
215.
201).
178.
IBS.
171.
189.
197.
193.
202.
208.
207.
207.
218.
223.
226.
**»
*
*
*
*
*
*
>*
*
*
«*
«*
**
**
*
*
*
»
*
*
*
*
**
**
tt
**
*
*
**
*
*
**************
140
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft*****)
ft*
ft*
*
ft*
ft* DATE
HUUNLY DATA
DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
TIME
LOAD
HWTH
U2
VOLX
MEAS
C02
VUlt
HEAS
NO
PPMV
MEAS
NU
PPMV
3XU*
NO
NG/J
ft*
*
*****************«****
8/15/79
* 8/15/79
8/15/79
8/15/79
8/15/79
** 8/15/79
* 8/15/79
8/15/79
* 8/15/79
« 8/15/79
8/15/79
8/15/79
8/15/79
* 8/15/79
8/15/79
8/15/79
B/lS/79
* 8/15/79
8/15/79
* 8/15/79
8/15/79
* 8/15/79
* 8/15/79
* 8/15/79
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
130u
1400
1500
1600
1700
180i)
|9o<)
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
17.6
17.3
18.2
17.0
18.5
20.5
23.7
24.9
25.8
26.1
26.1
26.1
24.9
2«.9
2«.0
21.1
20.2
t9.9
20.2
19,3
18.2
17.6
18.8
17.9
10.9
11.4
11.6
J1.6
11.5
11.4
11.5
11.2
10.2
.5
.4
.2
.3
.4
.4
.5
.5
10.0
10.4
10.6
10.4
10.7
1U.9
11.5
8.7
8.3
8.0
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.5
9.4
10.1
10.3
10.4
10.3
10.3
10.3
10.2
10.2
9,7
9.2
8.9
9.1
8.8
8.5
7.8
217.
212.
209.
213.
212.
219.
224.
230.
253.
254.
2
-------
ft***************************************
* MOUHLY DATA
** DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION *
**
* 02 C02 NO NO NO
* LOAD VOLI VOLI PPHV PPHV N6/J
* DATE TIME HKTM MEAS MLAS HEAS jxo« *
*
«*
*
ft
*
**
*
ft
ft
*
**
*
»*
*
ft
*
*
*
**
6/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
8/16/79
8/16/79
8/16/79
6/16/79
fl/lb/79
8/J6/79
B/16/79
8/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
8/16/79
tt/16/79
6/16/79
6/16/79
8/16/79
6/16/79
8/16/79
too
200
300
400
SCO
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1200
130U
1400
1500
1600
17UO
1800
19QO
2000
2100
2200
2300
24«0
17. J
17.6
16.2
16.2
18.5
17.9
19.0
21.7
2«.0
25.8
26.4
24.9
27.2
26.1
20.7
24.6
24.0
23.4
?2.6
22.6
19.9
19.3
16.1
18.8
1C
It
11
1C
1C
1C
11
1(
1
\(
1
1.7
1.9
.2
.9
.7
1.7
.0
1.7
.7
.1
.9
.8
.9
.8
.0
.0
.3
.5
.7
.7
.7
).l
).3
1.0
8,8
8.5
8.1
a. a
8.6
8.7
8.4
8,6
10.4
11.2
10.7
10,7
10.7
10.7
10.5
10.6
10.3
10.1
9.9
'.7
9,6
9.3
9.1
8.3
198.
196.
199.
212.
213.
229.
216.
214.
220.
237.
229.
219.
206.
230.
230.
236.
236.
239.
235.
233.
z»f,
224,
223.
200.
347.
354.
367.
379.
374.
402.
391.
376.
352.
360.
342.
324.
307.
340.
346.
355.
364.
375.
376.
372.
3«7.
371.
377.
362.
204.
208.
216.
223.
219.
236.
229.
220.
206.
211.
201.
190.
ISO,
200.
203.
208.
214.
220.
221.
219.
204.
218.
221.
212.
**
*
*
**
**
**
*
*
*
*
*
«
*
142
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
************************************
HOUHLY DATA *
* OHY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION **
* «t
08 C02 NO NO NO *
LOAD VOLS VOll PPMV PPHV MG/J *
** DATE TIME HMTH MEAS MEAS HEAS 3x02 *
*»******««*«*««*»««******«««****«****«*****«*«***««*
*
*
**
ft
*
**
**
**
«*
**
*
*
**
ft
*
»*
**
**
*
*
t*
ft
8/17/79
8/17/79
6/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
6/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
6/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/J7/79
6/17/79
6/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
8/17/79
6/17/79
100
200
300
aoo
500
000
70u
<»00
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1100
1500
1000
1700
160U
1900
2000
2100
2200
2)00
2000
17.
1'.
17.
17.
17.
1'.
1*.
20,
23.
2*.
10.3
10. a
11.2
10.9
10.6
10.5
10.0
10.5
9.3
a.a
26.1 8. 5
20.0 6.3
26.1 6.4
29.9 8.1
2*».0
27.5
26.7
2«.l
22. 6
?2.0
22.0
22.3
22.0
.3
.5
.7
.0
.3
.5
.1
.«
.5
]9.9 10. i
9.1
8.6
8.1
e.«
6.7
8.8
8.7
8.8
10.0
10.5
10.6
11.0
10.9
11.1
11.0
10. a
10. 6
10.3
.9
.a
.»
.6
.7
.8
-------
ft***********************************
» HUUHLT DATA *
OHY STACK- GAS CONCENTRAlIUN **
**
*
** DATE
Tlht
LOAD
U£
VUIX
MEAS
C02
VOL*
MEAS
NO
PPMV
MEAS
NO
PPMV
3X02
NO
NG/J
**
**
*
ft************************************** **ti**ft*****************
*« e/18/79
* 8/16/79
** 6/16/79
ft* 8/16/79
*« 6/18/79
ft* 8/16/79
tt/IB/79
** 8/18/79
* 8/18/79
ft* 8/16/79
* B/1B/79
ft* 8/16/79
ft* 8/16/79
* 8/10/79
* 8/16/79
8/18/79
* 8/16/79
* 8/16/79
ft* 8/16/79
ft 8/16/79
* 8/16/79
ft* 3/16/79
ft* 8/16/79
a/16/79
1UU
200
300
100
50U
000
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
19QU
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
19.0
20.2
Ih.fl
17.
17.
17.
1«.
17.
22^3
25,5
26,4
27.0
27.5
27.0
26.1
24.9
24.6
23.4
22.6
22.0
22.0
?0.2
19.0
10.2
10.2
10.3
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.3
10.5
10.2
.5
.0
.0
.0
.9
.1
.4
.5
.6
.7
.9
10.1
10.0
10.0
1U.7
0.9
8.9
6.7
9.5
8.5
8.5
B.7
8.5
8.8
9.6
10.1
10. 0
10.4
10.5
10.4
10.2
10.1
10,0
9.8
' 9.6
9.4
9.5
8.9
8.7
404.
212.
207.
204.
195.
207.
213.
222.
218.
231.
212.
212.
209|
235.
250.
261 .
264,
261.
257.
245.
250.
257.
231.
34) .
355.
350.
351.
336.
356.
360.
382.
365.
363.
319.
319.
322.
312.
356.
3B9.
410.
418.
417.
416.
406.
411.
412.
405.
200.
200.
205.
206.
197.
209.
211.
224.
2131
187.
187.
189.
183.
209.
228.
246|
245.
246.
238.
241.
242.
238.
**
**
*
*
*
*
**
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ft*
**
*
*
*
ft***********************************************
144
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft
ft DATE
HUUHLY DATA
DRY STACK GAS
TIME
LOAD
NHTH
02
VOLX
MEAS
CONCENTRATION
C02
VULX
MEAS
NO
PPMV
MEAS
NO
PPMV
3X0*
NO
NC/J
*
*
ft****************************
ft a/19/79
8/19/79
8/19/79
* 8/19/79
ft 8/19/79
ft 8/19/79
ft 8/19/79
« a/19/79
ft 8/19/79
8/19/79
8/19/79
8/19/79
* 8/19/79
8/19/79
ft 8/19/79
* 8/19/79
ft 8/19/79
ft 8/19/79'
8/19/79
* 8/19/79
8/19/79
8/19/79
ft 6/19/79
* 8/19/79
1UU
200
500
400
500
600
7uU
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1AOO
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2«00
18.8
18.8
16.7
16.1
16.1
16.1
17.3
17.6
jH.5
16.7
18.8
19,3
19.6
19.6
19.0
18.5
18.2
1HJ2
18.5
20*8
19.0
10.8
10.7
11.0
11.3
11.4
11.6
11.4
11.0
11.0
10.9
11.1
10.8
10.6
10.6
10.5
10.6
10.7
10.7
10.6
10.7
10.7
10.3
10.1
10.6
10.7
8.6
8.3
7.9
7.7
7.4
7.5
8.1
a.i
8.2
8.0
8.4
8.7
8.8
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.3
8.4
a. 3
«!a
9.0
8.4
8.3
^32.
222.
215.
211.
197.
207.
218.
225.
224.
219.
228.
233.
231.
218.
226.
226.
224.
222.
221.
225.
225.
238.
217.
214.
407.
401.
401.
398.
379.
390.
394.
407.
401.
400.
404.
405.
401.
375.
393.
397.
393.
386.
388.
395.
380.
394.
377.
376.
239.
236.
235.
233.
223.
229.
231.
239.
235.
235.
237.
238.
236.
220.
231.
233.
231.
227.
228.
232.
223.
232.
221.
220.
ft*
ft*
*
**
**
*
*
*
*
ft*
145 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
******«******************************
** HUU«IT DATA »
*« DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
*
02 C02 NO NO NO *
« LOAD WOLX VQLX PPMV PPMV HG/J
* DATE TIME MWTH MEAS HtAS HEAS 3Xu*
*»»**»*««*»«***»***»«*»****<*»******
» 6/20/79
* 8/20/79
« 8/20/79
* 8/20/79
* 8/20/79
* 8/20/79
«* B/20/79
« 8/20/79
* 8/20/79
8/2U/79
« 8/20/79
» 8/20/79
* b/20/79
8/20/79
* 8/20/79
* 6/20/79
8/20/79
* 6/20/79
8/20/79
« A/20/79
** 6/2U/79
8/20/79
* 8/20/79
«* 8/20/79
100
200
300
UflO
SOU
000
70U
800
900
1000
1100
1200
130U
1400
1500
IbOO
1700
1800
190U
2UOO
2100
2200
2300
2uOU
19.0
18.5
17.5
16.7
17,6
18, 5
19.0
21.1
2«,9
27.8
30.8
J3.1
32.5
S3,tt
31.1
30.2
2«.l
27.2
2«.l
25.5
2«.9
22.6
22.6
i".o
IV
10
1C
1C
10
1C
1C
s
1
(
t
t
f
1
1(
,5
.7
.8
.9
.7
.5
.3
.6
.9
.0
.5
.0
1.2
'."
.3
.2
.«
.5
.7
.a
1
.5
.6
)."
8.5
8.3
8.U
7.8
8.1
8.3
8.5
9.9
"».2
10.7
11.0
11.4
11.2
11. «
11.0
11.1
11.0
10.9
10.6
10.6
10.2
9.8
'.7
8.7
226.
216.
201.
191.
1"3.
208.
213.
230.
230.
299.
310,
2".
300,
261.
2«2.
254,
254.
253.
.255.
'248.
24«.
232.
221.
201.
389,
379.
3S6.
342.
339.
SS8.
360.
360.
374.
442.
447.
415,
423.
359.
344.
358.
304.
365.
374.
367.
370.
364.
350.
3«1.
228,
223.
209.
201.
199.
210.
211,
214.
220.
260.
263.
244.
248.
211.
202.
210.
214.
214,
220.
215.
217.
214.
206.
201.
*
*
*
««
*
*
**
*
**
**
«*
**
**
*
*
»
*
*
**
«**»»*»«*«»««»»»«»»*«***«»*«**
146
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft**************************************************************
HUUHLY DATA
**
*
**
ft*
*
*
DATE
TIME
ft*****************
**
ft*
ft*
*
««
ft*
ft*
ft*
*
*
ft*
*
ft*
ft*
**
ft*
ft*
ft*
ft*
ft
a/21/19
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
B/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
8/21/79
lUli
20')
300
oou
500
600
7l)l>
rtOU
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1000
1500
looo
1700
1600
|9m ST*O tiAS
02
LOAD VULX
M»TH MEAS
»* ft*** *
10
10
15
17
18
1"
19
21
2"
33
31
29
3<>
29
29
2*t
27
?o
?o
20
23
22
20
.7
.0
.a
.6
.5
.5
.0
.1
,
,
t
.
,
,
.
.1
.2
.9
.0
.11
.9
A*************************
*****!
10.3
10. 9
11.1
10.5
10.3
10.3
10.2
10.0
8.9
8.2
7.o
8.1
8.3
7.8
8,0
.1
.0
.6
,9
.1
.0
.2
.3
10.2
CONCENTRATION
C02 NU
VULX PPMV
MEAS MEAS
ft******
0.7
8.0
7.8
8.5
6.7
8.7
8.9
9.1
10.0
.2
.7
.3
.1
.5
.0
.3
.0
10.7
10.0
10.2
10.2
IU.O
9.9
6.8
i******i
206.
192.
186.
206.
191.
19*.
|97.
207.
233.
239.
217*
221.
221.
203.
202.
201 ,
233.
230.
202.
238.
237.
230.
20S.
NO
PPhV
jXUf
»**
3bl
300
300
355
323
331
330
300
308
337
301
303
310
302
306
336
3"S
339
343
367
3*6
3a3
355
3U3
*
.
.
«
»
9
m
,
NU
N5/J
>*<
206.
202.
199.
208.
189.
190.
193.
200.
20«.
198.
177.
178.
180,
177.
200.
199.
203.
199.
201.
2lo.
210.
213.
208.
201.
ft*
*
*
»*
ft*
ft*
*
ft*
ft*
»
*«
**
ft*
**
**
ft
ft
*
ft
ft
ft*
ft*
*
*
ft
**
»»
a******************************
147
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*«*** »»»*»»»»**»«»****»******»**»**»»******
MOURtr DATA **
DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
ft
ft*
DATE
TIME
LOAD
M«TH
02
VULX
MEAS
C02
VULX
MEAS
NO
PPMV
MEAS
HQ
PPNV
3*0?
NO
NG/J
*
*
ft « ft ft ft ft * *. ft ft * * * * ft * ft ft ft * * * * ft * ft ft ft ft ft ft * ** ft * " ****** **ftft»*« ***** ft * ft
* 8/22/79
* a/22/74
« 8/22/79
'* 8/22/79
* 8/22/79
8/22/79
8/22/79
8/22/79
8/22/79
* 8/22/79
8/22/79
» 6/22/79
8/22/79
«« 8/22/79
* 8/22/79
* 8/22/79
8/22/79
* 8/22/79
8/22/79
8/22/79
* 8/22/79
» 8/22/79
* 0/22/79
8/22/79
ft*
too
200
3 (JO
400
5 (JO
600
7yO
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
180(1
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
*«**
19.0
18.2
|7.3
16.7
16.1
20^5
20.5
23.4
26.1
27.8
29.0
27.8
29, 3
2«. 1
2^.3
29.3
2«.l
2«!l
2".3
23.4
22.0
19.6
r«*ftft*<
10.1
10.4
10.6
10.7
10.9
10.7
10,0
10.1
9.2
8.8
8.7
8.6
8.S
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.6
9,1
8.8
9, i
9, 3
9.4
9. a
10.7
**
8.9
8^2
8.0
7.9
8,0
8,9
a.e
10.3
10.6
10.1
10,9
11,0
11.1
11.0
11.1
10.8
10.3
10. *
10,J
10,1
10.0
9 0
8.5
»*
213.
215.
212.
207.
202.
196.
215,
207.
220.
246.
253.
244.
233.
238.
255.
271.
285.
26o«
269.
250.
252.
237,
222.
200.
353.
367.
360.
363.
362.
344,
353.
343.
337.
364.
371.
355.
336.
34 1 .
365.
386.
415.
434.
39tt.
391.
389.
369,
358,
351.
**
207.
215.
216.
213.
212.
202.
207.
201.
196.
214.
21&.
208.
l'7.
200,
214.
228.
244.
255.
234.
230.
226.
217,
210.
206.
* ****
*
*
*
*
*
*
«*
*
*
*
*****
14B
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*«
**
*
*«
* DATE
HOURLY DATA
DRY STACK GAS
TIME
LOAD
KHTH
02
VULX
MEA3
CONCENTRATION
C02
VOL*
MEAS
NO
PPMV
MEA3
NO
PPMV
jtOf
NO
NG/J
**
*
*«
*
*****»««**** *******t*****«**^**** ****************************
** 8/23/79
* 8/23/79
** B/23/79
* 8/23/79
* 8/23/79
8/23/79
* 8/23/79
8/23/79
* 8/23/79
8/23/79
* B/23/79
* 8/23/79
« 8/23/79
** 8/23/79
8/23/79
8/23/79
8/23/79
** 8/23/79
» S/23/79
8/23/79
8/23/79
8/23/79
6/23/79
8/23/79
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1UOU
1500
1600
1700
IBOO
i«oo
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
IB. 2
10.2
16.7
16.|
16.1
16. tt
I". 3
I'.b
22.3
24.3
27.2
27.5
25.2
27.5
26.4
25.2
2«.9
2S.«
22.0
21.4
21.7
20.5
20.5
1«». 3
10.5
10.7
10.9
11.1
11.3
11.3
10.7
10.7
9.7
9.2
a. 9
.0
.0
9.3
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
a. 7
8.4
8,1
7.9
7.7
7.8
6.5
8.6
9.7
10.4
10.8
.0
.0
10.4
.0
.0
.a
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
198.
195.
193.
|69«
178.
179.
l9o.
202.
235.
236.
23».
0.
«.
236.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3*1 1 ,
342.
345.
345.
332.
334.
344.
354.
376.
364.
352.
0.
0.
364.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
200.
201.
203.
203.
195.
196.
202.
208.
221.
214,
207.
0.
0.
210.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
*
*
*
*
**
*
««
*
*
*«
**
*
*
**
*
*
**
**
*»
**
I**********
149 KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft***********************************************************
** hUURLV DATA **
* DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION *
* **
* 02 C02 NU NU NO **
* LOAD VOLZ VOLX PPMy PPHV NG/J **
DATE TIME MMH MEAS MEAS MEA3 3*0?
A************************************************************
* 8/24/79
8/24/79
** 8/24/79
8/24/79
* 6/24/79
** 6/24/79
** 6/24/79
6/20/79
* 6/24/79
* a/24/79
* 6/24/79
8/24/79
** 8/24/79
* 8/24/79
* 6/24/79
** 6/24/79
6/24/79
6/24/79
8/24/79
* 6/24/79
** B/24/79
»* 8/24/79
8/24/79
** 8/24/79
1UO
200
300
40U
500
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
IflOO
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
24QU
17.6
16.7
17.6
1«.2
1«. 2
17.6
16.2
19.0
22.0
2«.3
26.4
27.0
27.5
27.8
25.2
2
-------
***********«*.I
MUUHLY DATA
DRV STACK liAS CONCENTRATION
ft
ft*
ft DATE
AAlAAAAAA*A +
8/25/79
6/25/79
» 8/25/79
** 6/25/79
* 8/25/79
8/25/79
ft 8/25/79
ft 8/25/79
8/25/79
8/25/79
a/25/79
6/25/79
ft 6/25/79
6/25/79
« 8/25/79
8/25/79
8/25/79
* 6/25/79
6/25/79
8/25/79
** 6/25/79
6/25/79
8/25/79
8/25/79
*****«i
TIME
1 * A A A * A
too
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
13uO
1400
1500
1600
170U
1600
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
240U
>!
as
i A * A A A
20.5
19.0
17. b
17. b
17. b
16.7
17.3
16.7
20.5
20.5
22.3
23.
23.4
22.6
21.4
19.9
20.2
19. b
19,0
16.6
19. b
19.0
17. b
17.6
>**<
02
VOL*
Ht*S
1 A A A A A A i
10.4
10.6
.0
.1
.1
.3
.0
.2
10.3
10.2
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
10.0
10.2
10.2
10.4
10.6
10.7
10.5
10.5
11.0
10.6
>***
C02
VULZ
NEAS
1 A * * A* *
9.3
6.9
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.2
8.7
8.4
9.4
toll
io|l
9.8
9.4
.2
.3
.1
.9
.8
.0
.1
6.4
8.5
r«*«*ii*i
NU
PPMV
MEAS
t ****** i
204!
197.
201.
198.
204,
204.
195.
219.
222.
224.
220.
220.
198.
206.
205.
209.
212.
218.
218.
212.
211.
189.
183.
»*<
NO
PPMV
3X02
kAA* A AA
372.
362.
356.
367.
362.
360.
369.
360.
370.
371.
3«9.
3«2l
306.
336.
3«3.
350.
361.
379.
383.
365.
363.
342.
324.
!**
NO
NC/J
**<
216.
212.
209.
216.
212.
223.
217.
211.
217.
218.
20S.
201.
201.
161.
199.
201.
205.
212.
222.
225.
214.
213.
201.
190.
****<
**
>***
*«
*
*
*
ftft
ft.
ftft
ft*
tt
*
ftft
ftft
ftft
ft.
*
>t|
,,
«
>
151
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*«************«*********«*******
* HOURLY 0AM *
** DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRAflUN
*
** 02 C02 NO NO NO *
** LOAD VOLX VOLX PPMV PPHV NG/J
** DATE TIME MMTh HEAS HEAS MEAS 3X0?
ft**************************************!
8/26/79
8/26/79
8/26/79
8/46/79
» 8/26/79
* 8/26/79
* 8/26/79
** 8/26/79
»* 8/26/79
** 8/26/79
*» 8/26/79
* 6/26/79
8/26/79
* B/26/79
8/26/79
ft 8/20/79
* 8/26/79
* 8/26/79
8/26/79
8/26/79
« 6/26/79
8/26/79
8/26/79
«* 8/2e/79
100
20u
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
140U
150U
1600
1700
ieou
1900
200 1>
2100
2200
2300
24QU
17.9
16.7
15.8
16.4
16.7
16.4
18. 2
|7.6
17.3
l<*.8
19.0
18.5
19.0
1ft. fl
IB. 2
19.6
|9.9
l**.5
I'.O
te.B
20.5
21.4
20.2
10.2
10.5
11.0
11.2
11.0
11.0
11.0
10. a
10. a
10. 0
10.5
10.4
10.6
10.5
10.7
10.9
10. a
10.3
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.1
9.9
10.5
11.0
8.7
8.1
7.8
8.0
7.9
7,9
8.4
*.>
8.4
6.8
9.1
6.8
9.0
e.9
tt,6
8.7
.1
.2
.1
.0
.5
.8
.2
0.5
183.
173.
170.
174.
172.
181.
195.
197.
|99,
201.
201.
196.
200.
185.
180.
196.
197.
199.
201.
205.
214.
233.
223.
206.
315.
313.
314.
315.
311.
327.
346.
349.
353.
346.
343.
341.
344.
325.
322.
33tt.
333.
333.
339.
349.
3b5,
379,
3«4.
372.
185.
184.
184.
185.
183.
192.
203.
205.
207.
203.
201.
200.
202.
191,
189.
196.
195.
195.
199.
205.
20».
223.
225.
219.
**
*«
*
«
«
*
*
*»******«*»**«««*«***<*«***»»«»»*«»»«««»*»«
152
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
»»
*
*
**
ft*
ft
ft 1
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
HUUSLY DATA
DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
02 C02 NO
LUAO VOLX VOLX PPMV
DATE
tftftftAftftftftl
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
6/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
8/27/79
TIME
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
ISoo
1600
1700
1600
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
MHTH HEAS MEAS MEAS
14,6 10.7 6.9 217.
17.3
16,7
|6.4
16,7
17.6
1». 5
i".o
22.0
26.1
27.2
2V. 0
29.0
2V. 3
2«,4
26.4
27.5
27.0
25.5
24.3
24.9
22.0
20.2
18.5
11
11
11
11
11
10
11
10
9
9
8
6
8
8
6
a
6
9
9
9
10
10
10
.1
.3
.3
.3
.2
.9
.0
.0
.3
.0
.5
.5
.5
.5
.4
.8
.9
.3
.a
.3
.1
,(|
.9
8.5
6.3
6.1
8,0
8.1
8.5
8.5
9.8
10.5
10.8
11.0
11.2
M.l
II. 1
11.1
10.7
10.5
10.3
10.0
10.1
9.2
8.8
8.2
204.
202.
196.
190.
196,
202.
202.
229.
2«9|
252.
247.
241.
247.
261,
273.
267.
271.
256.
236.
232.
226.
201.
NO
PPMV
3*0?
361.
373
377
365
354
362
362
365
376
373
375
364
357
346
357
374
404
398
418
396
364
385
385
360
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
NO
NC/J
*
*
ft*
224.
219.
221.
215.
206.
212.
212.
214.
221.
219.
220.
214.
209.
204.
209.
219.
237.
234.
246,
234.
214.
226.
226.
211.
*
*
*
*
k
*
ft**********
153
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
*****»«****************************»******
** HOURLY DATA
* DRY ST*CK GAS CONCENTRATION **
* *
* 02 C02 NO NO NO *
** LOAD VOLX VOLX PPnv PPMV NG/J
* PATE TIME MxTh «IEAS HEAS HEA3 JXOf **
ft**************************************************************
* 6/20/79
* 6/26/74
* am/79
** 0/26/79
6/20/79
* 8/28/79
8/28/79
8/28/79
8/28/79
«« 6/26/79
* 6/28/79
8/28/79
** 5/^6/79
** 8/28/79
8/28/79
* 6/28/79
8/28/79
* 8/28/79
8/28/79
* 6/28/79
** 8/26/79
** 8/2U/79
** 8/28/79
»* 8/28/79
100
200
300
«uo
Suo
60 1)
70U
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
. 1600
17QU
180U
19QO
2000
2100
2200
?JOO
2400
IB. 5
1».2
IB. 5
18.2
1«.8
1».2
20.2
20. 5
23.4
20.1
27.8
31.1
29.3
2". 6
32.8
31. a
30,5
27.2
2«.b
23.0
2". b
2«.0
22.6
1«.9
10. 7
10.8
10.6
10.7
10.6
10.6
10.4
10.1
9.3
B.9
6.4
B.I
0.6
6.6
7.7
e.o
H.2
8.6
8.9
e.d
a. 3
9.2
9.6
10.6
a.
8.
8.
a.
8.
8.5
H.8
9.2
10.0
10, 5
11,0
11,3
10.9
10,7
11.6
11.4
11.2
10.8
10,3
10,0
10.6
10,0
9,7
8.6
109.
202.
199,
200.
191.
210.
214,
205.
218.
22«
237,
238.
250.
228.
232.
239.
262.
250.
244.
243.
22S.
237.
227.
211.
3o7.
356.
346.
351.
332.
365.
365.
340.
336.
334.
339.
335.
36U.
332.
315.
332.
369.
364.
364.
359.
320.
363.
360.
367.
215.
210.
203.
206.
195.
214.
214,
199.
196.
196.
199,
195.
214.
195.
IBS.
US.
217.
2)4.
214.
211.
166.
213.
211.
215.
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
******************«* Ik************************************
154
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
A*************************************************************
* HUUHLY DATA
»* DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION *
*
** U2 C02 NO NQ NO
LOAD VULX VULX PPHV PPNV NG/J *
«« DATE TIME H»TH MEAS MEAS MEAS jXOf *
A**************************************************************
*
ft*
ft*
*
ft
*
ft*
*
**
ft
ft
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
6/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
8/29/79
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
I POO
]9QO
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
It*. 5
16.7
16.4
16.1
16. 2
16.6
20.5
22.0
26.4
30.2
32. e
34.3
34.3
34.6
33.7
31.4
30.8
31.1
2". 3
27.2
27.8
25.5
24.3
19.9
10.8
11.0
11.2
11.2
10.7
10.5
10.2
9.7
9.0
B.I
7.5
7.0
7.2
6.9
7.J
8.0
8.4
8.3
a. 9
8.8
8.4
8.9
9.3
10.6
0.6
8,2
8.0
a.o
8.7
8.9
9.2
9.7
10.5
11.3
12.1
12.5
12.3
12.5
12.2
11.7
11.4
11.5
11.0
11.1
11.3
10.7
10.3
8.9
214.
205.
199.
202.
212.
228.
226.
231.
254.
271.
272.
252.
251.
256.
25S.
279.
278.
282.
266.
266.
254.
246.
242.
223.
J79.
371.
367.
J73.
372.
392.
378.
369.
382.
379.
363.
325.
328.
327.
336.
367.
396.
401.
427.
396.
37o!
373.
368.
223.
218.
216.
219.
218.
230.
222.
217.
224.
223.
213.
191.
193.
192.
197.
227.
234.
235.
250.
?33.
214.
217.
219.
228.
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
**
*
*
155
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
I********************************************************
** HUURLT DATA *
* DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION «
** **
* U2 C02 NO NQ NU
* LUAO VULX V(JLX PPHV PPMV NG/J *
DATE TIME MfcTH MEAS ME*S H£AS 3XQ2 **
********************t*«t*****«*********t****»******************
8/30/79
8/30/79
*« 8/30/79
8/30/79
* 6/30/79
* 6/30/79
8/10/79
6/30/79
»* 6/10/79
** 6/30/79
8/30/79
* 8/30/79
8/10/79
* 8/10/79
8/10/79
* e/jo/79
8/10/79
* 8/10/79
8/10/79
6/10/79
* 8/10/79
* 6/30/79
6/30/79
* 8/30/79
. HO
200
300
400
50U
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
190U
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
l«,5
10.7
1614
16.7
17.0
2". 2
22.3
2", 9
27.0
29,0
29.3
29,6
30.8
3D. 8
30.5
30.8
30.5
27.8
27.5
?7.8
25. e
2'».0
20.2
10.6
11.0
11.0
11.2
11.1
11.0
10.2
10.0
9.3
0.9
6.8
B. 6
t>.6
6.2
8.2
8.2
6.1
8.3
6.b
8.8
6.6
9.3
9.4
10.3
8.8
8.1
8.4
8.2
8.3
8.4
9.3
9.6
10.4
10. a
n.o
10.9
M.2
11.4
11.3
11.2
11.4
11.2
10.9
10.7
10.9
10.2
10.1
9.1
221.
204.
204.
200.
186.
192.
206.
196.
215.
223.
236.
246.
253.
252.
266.
266,
286.
260.
272.
264.
246.
249.
248.
214.
392.
369.
369.
369.
340.
3«7.
345.
322.
332.
333.
349.
361.
366,
355.
375.
376.
400.
398.
396.
391.
158.
364.
386.
395.
230.
217,
217,
217.
199,
204.
202.
169,
195.
195.
205.
212.
216.
209.
220.
222.
235.
234.
232.
229.
210.
226.
227.
232.
*
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
**
»*
«
**
*
*
*
*
***************«***«*****«**»**************
156
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
»***«««»««*«*»*««»«»«««»*«»«««»«*
**
**
**
* f
UATE »
ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft 4 f
" 8/31/79
8/31/79
» a/Ji/79
8/31/79
8/31/79
8/31/79
* 8/31/79
8/31/79
* 8/31/79
* 8/31/79
8/31/79
fl/il/79
8/il/79
8/J1/79
8/31/79
8/31/79
* 8/31/79
* 8/31/79
B/31/79
8/31/79
8/31/79
8/31/79
*« 8/31/79
* 8/ii/79
HUUHLT OAT*
DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
Tlhf
1 ft ft ft ft ft ft
1UU
200
iou
400
500
600
70U
600
9QO
1000
1100
1200
1300
14QU
15UU
loOO
1700
1600
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2«00
LOAD
M*TH
***<
1^.9
1».8
]7.b
17. b
10.2
ib.S
2t.Q
23.0
27.8
33.7
3«.0
32.8
32.8
31.9
30. B
32.2
31.6
30.2
2*. 3
27.5
2". 3
2«.l
2".0
2».l
02
VOLX
MEAb
t ft ft ft A ftA4
10.3
10.8
11.1
10.9
11.0
10.8
9.9
9.6
8.6
6.9
7.2
7.4
0.9
7.3
7.8
7.1
7.3
7.8
7.0
0.0
7.7
8.4
8.5
9.0
CU2
VULX
HEAS
hftftftftft'4
9.1
».7
8.2
8.S
B.v
».7
9.7
10.2
10.9
12.3
12.2
12.0
12.2
11.8
11.2
12.0
ll.»
11.3
11.3
11.1
11.3
11.1
11.2
10. B
NU
PPMV
MEAS
kftftftftftftl
^45.
23B.
225.
216.
205.
221.
2«o.
251.
270.
232.
240.
2«(».
253.
249.
2*«.
265.
266.
263.
255.
222.
188.
212.
238.
22«.
NO
PPMV
3*0?
k ft ft ft ft ft ft I
414.
422.
411.
387.
371.
392.
400.
398.
393.
297.
321.
330.
323.
328.
361.
344.
353.
359.
348.
308.
255.
304.
344.
337.
NO
NC/J
kftftftftftftl
2«3.
24b.
241.
227.
218.
230.
235.
233.
231.
174.
|89.
194.
190.
192.
212.
202.
207.
211.
205.
181.
150.
178.
202.
198.
*
**
**
*
*
b A *
*
*
»
*
*
*
»
*
*
*
157
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
* HUURLY DATA
* DRY STACK (.AS CONCENTRATION *
** *
ft
ft*
**
ft
ft 9/
ft 9/
9/
ft* 9/
9/
9/
ft 9/
9/
* 9/
9/
* 9/
9/
** 9/
** 9/
9/
9/
* 9/
* 9/
ft* 9/
* 9/
9/
ft* 9/
** 9/
** 9/
DATE
I
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
1/79
TIME
k******
tuo
200
3oo
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
19u«
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
LOAD
M"TH
***<
24.9
22.9
20.5
19.6
18.8
10.5
20.2
20.2
20.5
22.9
26.1
27.5
27.5
27.5
25.6
24.9
24.6
2«.3
22.9
21.1
21.1
21.1
19.3
19.0
02
VOIX
MEAS
>**
9.2
9.6
10.3
10.6
11.3
11.0
10.7
10.5
10.5
9.7
9.2
8.6
8.7
8.2
8,7
8.9
.0
.2
.5
.8
.3
.7
10.2
10.3
C02
VOIX
MEAS
*»*****(
10.7
' 10.1
9.4
9.2
6.4
6.8
9.1
9.3
'.5
10.2
10.8
11.2
11.1
11.2
10.8
10.6
10.5
10.2
.8
1 !l
.7
.2
.2
NO
PPMV
MEAS
tftftftft'ftftr
220.
200.
182.
175.
160.
159.
166.
171.
170.
195.
214.
223.
252.
269.
274.
277.
269.
257.
241.
232.
229.
236.
225.
221.
NO
PPMV
3X0*
t******i
337.
323.
307.
304.
296.
287.
291.
294.
293.
312.
327.
325.
370.
379.
402.
413.
405.
393.
378.
374.
353.
377.
376.
373.
NO
NG/J
>*
198.
189.
160.
179.
175.
169.
171.
173.
172.
183.
192.
191.
217.
223.
236.
243.
238.
231.
222.
220,
207.
221.
221.
219.
ft
ft*
*
*
*
ft*
*
ft
ft
*
*
*«
*
w
ft
ft
ft
ft*
ft
ft.
*
ft
ft***********************************************************
158
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
***************************************************************
*
*
*1
ft*
ft
ft*
*
ft
ft*
*
ft
ft
*
*
*
ft*
*
*
*1
HOURLY
DRY STACK GAS
s
02
LOAD VOLX
DATE
lftft^*****-
t/
*/
I/
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
9X
>!
2/79
2/79
2/79
2X79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
2/79
>**<
TIME
k ft ft ft ft ft ft
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
>**
M*TM
ft ft ft ft ftft <
19.3
IB. 2
16.7
|7.6
Id. 2
17.6
17.6
18.5
17.3
17.6
18.8
20.2
21.7
21.7
19.0
18.8
18.5
IB. 2
17.9
17.3
]9.0
16. 8
18.2
|7.6
<
MEAS
tftftftAftftft
10.0
10.5
10.6
10.2
10.3
10.5
10.4
10.3
10.7
10.6
10.3
10.0
9.7
9.9
10.6
10.6
10.7
10.9
10.9
11.0
10.5
10.5
10.8
10.8
>**
DATA
CONCENTRATION
C02 NO
VULX PPMV
MEAS
ft ft ***'
9
8
b
9
9
a
9
9
8
a
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
a
9
9
9
8
W m m i
.3
.8
.6
.0
.0
.9
.0
.2
.6
.a
.1
.5
.8
.7
.2
.1
.0
.8
.8
.8
.4
.4
.0
.9
I
MEAS
k ft ft ft fti
218.
206.
199.
205.
202.
208.
209.
208.
185.
194.
201.
211.
217.
209,
210.
208.
211.
207.
209.
209.
212.
220.
202.
198.
>*<
NO
PPHV
3*0?
t ft ft ft ft ft ft 1
358.
355.
346.
343.
341.
358.
356.
351.
325.
337.
339.
347.
347.
340.
365.
361.
370.
371.
374.
378.
365.
379.
35tt.
351.
>**<
NO
NGXJ
1 ft ft ft ft ft ft 1
210.
208.
203.
201.
200.
210.
209.
206.
191.
198.
199.
203.
204.
200.
214.
212.
217.
218.
220.
222.
214.
222.
210.
206.
i
*
*
t
ft*
*
*
*
*
**
«
**
*
*
*
*
ft*
>*
159
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
I*******«*************
* HOUHLY DATA *
DDT STACK HAS CUNCtNTRATIUN
** **
«* 02 co2 NO NO .NU **
* LtHD VOLX VCJLZ PPHV PPMV NG/J **
* DATE HUE MHTH ftA3 MEAS HEA3 3*0? *
******ft**************************************************
*
**
ft*
*
»
ft
ft
*
**
*
**
*
*
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/.
9/
9/
9/
«»/
9/
9/
9/
4/
J/79
3/79
S/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
J/79
3/79
J/79
J/79
J/79
J/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
3/79
100
200
300
100
soo
600
700
SOU
900
100U
11 OU
120U
1SOU
1«00
1500
1600
1700
IttOU
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2«00
1».2
17.0
ib.e
18.5
18.8
18.5
18.5
iB.e
2U.2
IS. 8
IS. 5
1«.0
19.0
19.9
18.5
18. S
ia.«
ie,e
ia.«
19.9
22.0
21.7
19.9
19.0
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
.6 <
.9 t
.4
.4
.5
.6
.5
.5
.3
.6
.6
.4
.3
.2
.0
.6 <
.1 <
.1
.0
.0
.3 1
.1 1
.9
.0
»,2
>.'
.«
.«
.3
.3
.3
.3
.6
.3
.2
.5
.0
.0
.0
J.O
».T
».7
?.a
»,9
0.6
K.5
9.9
.0
200.
191.
199.
199.
193.
207.
20b.
199.
209.
200.
208,
216.
217.
202.
U.
190.
183.
16J.
ISO.
164.
|93.
|9b.
IBS.
0.
3UB.
342.
339.
339.
332.
3oO.
355.
343.
3S3.
361.
361.
360.
366.
330.
0.
330.
303.
30J.
302.
302.
296.
30«l.
301.
0.
204.
2U1.
199.
199.
195.
211.
208.
201.
207,
212.
212.
216.
215,
198.
0.
194.
176.
176.
177.
177.
175.
178.
177.
0.
*«
*
«
*
*
*
«
*
*
*
«*********************
160
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
»««****
*« MUUHLT
URt STACK UAS
**
* 02
* LUAD VULX
* DATE TIME HHTH MEA9
«
*
*
**
**
ft
**
«
ft*
*
ft*
ft*
*
*
**
ft*
**
**
*
«««
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
*
a/79
a/79
a/79
fl/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
a/79
iuo
200
300
aoo
5oo
60J
flOU
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
laoo
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
210U
2200
2300
2100
*
lb!s
lb.5
17.9
18.2
17.6
]9.9
26. a
33^7
33.7
3«.0
3a,9
35.2
35|7
33.7
29.3
32.2
30.8
27.8
22.0
H WM W W W W
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.3
10.3
10.5
10. a
10.2
9.5
8.9
8.2
7.9
7. a
7.2
7.0
7.0
6.7
7.1
8.3
8.9
fl.O
8.0
9.0
10.0
A*************
DATA
CONCENTRATION
CU2 NU
VOLX PP«V
MEAS MEAS
*******-'*'****-
««»«
.7
.7
.6
.2
.2
.0
.0
.3
10.2
10.9
11. I
11.6
12. a
12.5
12.8
12. H
13.0
12.7
11.6
11.0
11.8
11.2
10.6
9. a
« K «
189
192
192
181
185
185
193
196
206
235
25U
215
253
252
29a
298
293
283
2*9
276
266
266
262
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
236.
******
G
NO
PPhv
3X0*
A
310.
315.
315.
306.
312.
318.
329.
328.
323.
351.
358.
337.
335.
329.
379.
38U.
369.
367.
ail.
ai2.
369.
3«7.
39u.
388.
»***<
NU
NG/J
!*
1H2.
185.
185.
179.
183.
187.
193.
193.
190.
206.
210. .
198.
197.
193.
222.
225.
217.
216.
241.
2«2.
217.
227.
231.
22«.
i»*
*
**
*
**
*
*»
*
*
*
*
ft
**
*
*
*
ft
*
161
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
I**************************************************
** HOUNLT DATA *
** PRY STACK bAS CONCENTRATION *
* *
** 02 C02 NO HO NO
** LOAD ₯(JH VOLX PPMV PPMV NG/J **
** OAlE TlMt MNTH HEAS HEAS HEAS J»0f **
a**************************************************************
»
**
**
t*
*
*
*
*
**
*
**
**
**
*
*
*
*
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
'/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
5/79
10»
200
300
400
500
600
700
BOO
90J
1000
1100
1200
1500
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
24QO
22.0
19.9
16,7
18.2
19.6
19.9
22.0
25.5
27.8
32.2
32.2
32.5
M.I
30.8
27.2
30.5
30.8
29.0
28.4
26.4
26.1
24.6
22.6
19.3
9.7
10.4
11.2
10.9
10.5
10.4
9.9
9.4
8.9
8.0
7.7
7.2
7.3
7.7
8.4
. 8.0
8.1
8.5
8.5
8.9
8.4
9.4
9.9
11.1
f
*
to.
10.
11.
12.
12.
11.
11.
11!
n.
11.
n.
10.
11.
10.
9.
8.
8
0
0
4
9
0
6
2
9
7
0
1
8
4
7
5
5
1
1
a
3
3
5
ti
£45.
230.
206.
213.
204,
193,
207,
219.
251,
250.
250,
2.53.
2*62.
272.
272.
292.
286.
260,
260.
246,
226.
229.
216.
199.
392.
392.
38o.
38 1,
351.
329.
337.
341.
374.
347.
339.
331.
345.
369,
390.
405.
400.
375.
375.
370.
324.
356.
351.
363.
2iO.
230.
223.
224.
206.
193.
198.
200.
220.
204.
199.
194.
202.
217.
229.
238.
235.
220,
220.
217.
190,
209,
206.
213.
**
*
*
*«
*«
«*
**
*
*
*
**
**
*
*
*«
**
**
**
**
*
**
**
**
**
162
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft
HOURLY DATA *
* DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION **
*
* 02 C02 NO NQ NO
* LOAD VQLZ VOLX PPHV PPHV NG/J
** DATE TIME HHTH MEA3 MEAS MEA3 3X0? *
**************«***
ft*
*
ft
*
**
**
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
ft*
«*
*
**
**
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9X
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
6/79
0/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
b/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
6/79
100
ZOO
SOU
OOU
500
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1300
1300
1UOO
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
20.5
1".
19.
18.
19.
19.
19.
22.0
24.6
27.5
2'.8
20. a
2«.l
27.8
27.5
27.2
20.7
2S.2
23.4
22.6
24.9
22.3
21.0
17.3
10.4
10. a
10.0
10.7
10.6
10.0
10.6
10.3
9. a
9.0
6.9
6. 8
6.8
8.8
8.9
6.9
.9
. 1
.4
.5
.1
.8
.9
10.8
1<
!<
K
1
1<
11
11
1(
1
1
i
1
<
1
.2
.3
.1
.9
.1
.1
.1
.5
.4
1.6
>.B
).9
1.0
).9
J.9
).8
1.7
1.4
1.0
>.9
1.4
>.S
».5
9.2
220.
224.
212.
199.
IBS.
197.
194.
198.
227.
234.
238.
236.
242.
246.
251.
2«7.
247.
245.
245.
233.
210.
210.
211.
193.
375.
382.
366.
3«9.
322.
342.
337.
334.
353.
352.
355.
349.
358.
364.
374.
366.
368.
372.
381.
366.
319.
339.
343.
342.
220.
224.
216.
205.
189.
201.
196.
196.
207.
207.
208.
205.
210.
214.
220.
216.
216.
218.
224.
215.
167.
199.
202.
201.
*
*
**
ft*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
********************
163
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft*****************************«*******«*««**«**
* HOUHLY DATA *
» OHY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION »
**
** 02 C02 NO NO NO *
* LOAD VULX VOLX PP*V PPMV NG/J **
DATE TIME HMTH MEAS MEAS HE AS J*0< »*
ft*****************************************************
*
*
*
-.«
*
*
*
*
*
»*
*
*
*
**
*
*«
*
*
**
*
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
7/79
100
200
300
400
500
600
70»
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2aOU
1°i8
(6,5
16.7
16.7
16.2
|6,5
|9,3
21.7
24.3
26.1
27.5
28. a
26. a
27.8
27.5
2*. 2
2«.3
22.9
21.7
20.5
22.0
20.2
20.2
10.1
10.4
10.7
10.7
10.4
10.4
10.3
9.9
9.2
9.0
8.8
8.6
8.5
6.7
6.8
0,3
0.2
9.5
9.8
10.0
0.6
10.1
10.1
10.7
9.2
8.6
8.4
8.4
6.7
tt.e
8.9
9.5
10.0
10.6
10. 8
11.0
11. I
10.9
10.7
10.3
10.4
10.0
.7
!*
.2
.3
8.5
238.
228.
21S.
202.
197.
209.
205.
217.
228,
235.
237.
216.
221.
235.
2«3.
237.
236.
236.
232.
230.
2?5.
22».
222.
204.
39a,
389.
377.
354.
336.
356.
346.
353.
349.
353.
351.
317.
319.
345.
359.
366.
361.
37
-------
ft****************************************
ft* HUIIHLY DATA
** DRY STACK 1>AS CONCENTRATION **
ft*
ft*
ft
*
* 9/
** 9/
9/
9/
ft 9/
* 9/
ft 9/
9/
9/
* 9/
* 9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
* 9/
* 9/
ft* 9/
* 9/
ft* 9/
9/
9/
DATE
***<
8/79
8/79
8/79
B/79
8/79
B/79
8/79
B/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/79
8/,79
8/79
8/79
8/79
6/79
B/79
TIHE
!**<**
10 11
20u
300
4UO
500
600
700
BOO
900
1000
1 100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1600
190U
2000
2100
2200
2300
2UOO
LOAD
N*TH
«*)
18. 6
19.0
17.6
17.6
17.3
17.0
lb.6
16.5
19.0
21.7
22.3
23.4
2o.l
26.4
26, 1
16.5
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
i*!s
16.7
17.3
02
VOLX
HEAS
»*<
10.4
10.3
10.6
10.6
10.0
10.8
10.4
10.6
10.5
9.8
9.6
9.4
6.9
8.8
B.9
10.2
10.3
10.3
10.2
10.1
10.1
10.2
10.7
10.5
C02
VOLX
HEAS
>**<
8.9
9.0
8.6
B.5
6.4
a. 3
8.9
«.7
8.7
9.6
9.5
10.0
10.5
10.7
10.7
B.9
9.0
9.0
.1
.2
.2
.1
.5
a. 6
NO
PPMV
HEAS
»***<
213.
221.
215.
211.
201.
207.
207.
199.
191.
209.
214.
202.
225.
252.
277,
246.
255.
253.
258.
262.
262.
273.
254.
248.
NO
PPMV
jXOf
l***«*ftl
363.
373.
374.
367.
356.
367.
353.
346.
329.
337.
339.
314.
336.
373.
413.
412.
431.
427.
432.
434.
434.
457.
446.
427.
NO
NG/J
»***<
213.
219.
219.
215.
209.
215.
207.
203.
193.
198.
199.
185.
197.
219.
243.
242.
253.
251.
253.
255.
255.
266.
262.
251.
*
*
>*
*
*
*
**
**
**
*
**
*
*
**********«************
165
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft********
* MOUHLT DATA »
** DO* STAC* GAS CUNCENTRATIUN *
**
», 02 C02 NO NO NO *
** (.DAD VOUX VOLX PPKV PPMV Nfi/J
ft* DAlE UHE MN1H HCAS HEAS MEAS 3*0* «
««*«*»**************"****
ft*
ft*
ft*
ft*
ft*
*
ft*
ftt
»,
*
*
*«
t«
**
tt
ft*
tt
**
**
ft*
*
ft*
ft*
9/
9/
'/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9X
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
9/79
too
2UU
300
400
500
bOO
700
600
900
1000
1100
120U
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1000
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
I 7.t
IB,;
I7.
|7
17.
10.
17.
1«.
17.
17.
18.
l^f
1 9
!«|i
1 6 '
i"!
i*.
2 10.4
5 10.3
> 10.1
2 10.0
9 9.9
ft 9.0
« 9.2
7 9.7
2 10.0
a
a
8
8
0
8
8
9
8
e
9
9
9
9
a
a
9
9
9
9
10
10
9
9
.9
.9
.«
.0
'.3
.0
.0
.0
!o
t2
.2
|9
.9
Is
IT
.b
.4
.9
.3
244.
2*7.
247.
212.
232.
235.
238.
2*7.
237.
243.
250.
252.
240.
227.
23b.
223.
228.
238.
257,
251.
262.
271.
259.
2«3.
412.
417.
421.
421.
407.
412.
410.
413.
408.
414.
414.
414.
401.
387.
406.
380.
385.
394.
422.
408.
394.
415.
414.
399.
2«2.
245.
247.
247.
239.
242.
241 ,
2^3.
239.
243.
2«3.
243.
23o.
227.
238.
223,
226.
232.
248.
240.
231.
243.
243.
234.
**
**
*
**
*
*
**
*
**
**
**
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
**
*
*«
*
*«
166
KVB11-5015-1225
-------
«*«*****«*********»«******
HOURLY DATA
*
**
*
**
**
** DATE
*****
* 9/10/79
** 9/10/79
t« 9/10/79
*« 9/10/79
* 9/10/79
** 9/10/79
«« 9/10/79
9/10/79
9/10/79
* 9/10/79
9/10/79
9/10/79
* 9/10/79
9/10/79
* 9/10/79
* 9/10/79
9/10/79
9/10/79
9/10/79
» 9/10/79
* 9/10/79
ft 9/10/79
* 9/10/79
* 9/10/79
OBY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
TIME
!*«*
100
200
300
400
500
60U
70v>
aoo
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
LOAD
H-TH
*<
19.6
16.4
17.9
17.9
17.6
1».2
20*2
22.0
25.5
27.8
29.6
30.8
?7ia
27.2
27.8
27. «
27.5
25.8
25.2
26. «
22.9
21. a
|9.o
02
VOLX
ME*S
r* * * * *f
10.5
10.9
10.5
10.5
10.6
10.5
10.2
9.9
8.5
8.4
a. 4
7.9
0.5
8.5
8.5
8.7
8.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
.U
.0
.0
CU2
VULX
MEAS
1 *******
8. a
a. 2
8.7
8.8
8,fl
8.9
9.3
9.7
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.5
11.1
11.0
10.9
10.9
11.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
NO
PPWV
NEAS
r A A * * 1
227,
212.
219.
220.
217.
229.
242.
249.
277.
268.
256.
229.
230.
217.
259.
260.
252.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
NO
PHMV
l******f
391.
379.
377.
379.
377.
394.
405.
405.
400.
38tt.
367.
315.
332.
357.
374.
381.
361.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
NO
N6/J
1 ****** ^
229.
223.
221.
222.
221.
231.
238.
238.
235.
225.
215.
165.
195.
209.
220.
224.
212.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
to
*
*
1 * * *
*
*
**
**
»
t«
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
*
*
*
*
*
167
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
A**************************************************************
*
*
*
**
*
*« DATE
flftfttVftftftftffftfl
9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
9/11/79
* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
»* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
« 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
* 9/11/79
9/11/79
9/11/79
* 9/U/79
« 9/11/79
HOURLY DATA
DRY STACK GAS CONCENTRATION
TIME
I M A ( ft ff t
11)0
200
300
400
500
600
700
600
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1000
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
2400
LOAD
M*TH
ft ft ftft£ ft t
17JO
16.4
16.4
10.7
17.0
20.5
22.0
26. fl
27.0
27.6
27,2
27,2
27.6
26.4
25.2
23.4
22.3
21J7
20.5
02
VOU
ME»S
IftftftftWftJ
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
8.3
8.3
8.3
6.3
6.0
9.1
9.0
8.5
6.5
8.6
6.6
9.1
9.2
6,9
9.3
9.6
10.6
C02
YOU
MEAS
Iftftftftft't
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
II. 0
10.8
10.9
11.0
io|s
10.3
10.8
10.6
10. S
10.5
10.2
10.0
10. «
9.6
9.5
8.3
NO
PPMV
MEAS
(*ft*A4
IWWWWMwi
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
o.
267,
254,
253.
245.
240,
268.
276.
277.
277.
278.
274.
2*9.
2*6.
2*9.
228.
215.
218.
NO
PPMV
3*02
tlkftllftftftl
0.
0.
o.
0.
o.
o.
o.
379.
361.
359.
346.
333.
407.
415,
aoo.
400.
405.
405.
406.
407.
401.
352.
341 .
379.
NO
NC/J
I'AttAAftAl
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
223.
212.
211.
204,
19*.
239.
244,
235.
235,
236.
238.
200.
239,
236.
207.
200.
222.
**
«*
«*
*»
**
**
k 4 £
I
**
*
**
*
*
»*
*
»
**
**
*
*
»*
**
*
*
**
**
*
**
*
**************************
168
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
ft
**
ft
ft
« DATE
**
9/12/79
9/12/79
9/12/79
9/13/79
* 9/12/79
« 9/12/79
9/12/79
*« O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
ft O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
«« O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
« O/ 0/79
* O/ 0/79
** O/ 0/79
ft O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
O/ 0/79
ft O/ 0/79
« O/ fl/79
* O/ 0/79
HUUKIY
D*O STACK GAS
TIME
******
100
200
100
400
500
600
700
0
0
u
0
0
0
0
0
0
II
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LlMD
HfcTH
*
.0
.0
.0
.0
o
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0
.0
.0
.0
0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
02
VOLI
HEAS
r******1
10.4
10.4
10.6
10.3
10.3
10. 1
9.7
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
DATA
CONCENTRATION
C02
VULX
HEAS
t***** *<
«.3
6.3
7.9
8.5
6.6
8.6
9.3
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
NU
PPMV
HEAS
. A *** A*4
1 * V w W
218.
216.
198,
206.
206.
221.
226.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
o.
o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
NO
PPNV
3*02
!******!
372.
366.
3«4.
351.
348.
366.
364.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
'NO
NC/J
1 ****** '
21*.
216.
202.
206.
204.
215.
214.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
o.
0.
o.
0.
o.
**
*
ft*
ft*
ft
1 ft * *
ft*
ft
ft*
t
ft
*
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
»*«*»*»«*****»*****
FIN
169
KVB11-6015-1225
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Inunctions on the reverse before completing)
1 REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-80-085d
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Thirty-day Field Tests of Industrial Boilers: Site 4-
Coal-fired Spreader Stoker
5. REPORT DATE
April 1980
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
W.A. Carter and J. R. Hart
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
KVB, Inc.
P.O. Box 19518
Irvine, California 92714
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE624
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2645, Task 4
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
Task Final; 3/79-3/80
COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES-
541-2477.
project officer is Robert E. Hall, Mail Drop 65, 919/
16. ABSTRACT
This is a final report for a test program to evaluate the long-term
effectiveness of combustion modifications on industrial boilers. Previous short-term
tests had been performed on industrial boilers to determine the effect of combustion
modifications on such air pollutant emissions as NOx, SOx, CO, HC, and particulate
The objective of this program was to determine if the combustion modification tech-
niques which were effective for the short-term tests are feasible for longer periods.
The report gives results of a 30-day field test of a 38.1 MW (130,000 Ib steam/hr)
output coal-fifed spreader stoker. Low excess air was used to control NOx emis-
sions. Results indicate that low excess air firing is an effective long-term NOx con-
trol for spreader stokers. The as-found NOx concentration was 240 ng/J (409 ppm
at 3% O2, dry) with the boiler load at 80% of design capacity. Firing in the low
excess air mode reduced the as-found condition by about 19%. Low excess air firing
also increased efficiency by about 1.2% and decreased particulates by about 22%.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Croup
Pollution
Boilers
Coal
Combustion
Field Tests
Stokers
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Carbon Monoxide
Hydrocarbons
Dust
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Industrial Boilers
Combustion Modification
Spreader Stokers
Low Excess Air
Particulate
13B
13A
2 ID
2 IB
14B
07B
07C
11G
13 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (Tha Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
175
20 SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
170
------- |