THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
PROGRAM
tal Protection Ago
Balteiie
The Btisiiiess o} Innovation
TECHNOLOGY TYPE: PASSIVE INFRARED OPTICAL IMAGERS
APPLICATION: LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR TECHNOLOGIES
TECHNOLOGY NAME: Sherlock® VOC Imaging Spectrometer
COMPANY: Gas Imaging Technologies, LLC
ADDRESS:
WEB SITE:
E-MAIL:
P.O. Box 140
Solvang, CA 93463
http://www.gitint.com
micheleh@gitint.com
PHONE: 805.688.2088
FAX: 805.686.2723
ETV Joint Verification Statement
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established the Environmental Technology Verification
(ETV) Program to facilitate the deployment of innovative or improved environmental technologies through
performance verification and dissemination of information. The goal of the ETV Program is to further
environmental protection by accelerating the acceptance and use of improved and cost-effective technologies.
ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing high-quality, peer-reviewed data on technology performance to
those involved in the design, distribution, financing, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental
technologies. Information and ETV documents are available at www.epa.gov/etv.
ETV works in partnership with recognized standards and testing organizations, with stakeholder groups
(consisting of buyers, vendor organizations, and permitters), and with individual technology developers. The
program evaluates the performance of innovative technologies by developing test plans that are responsive to
the needs of stakeholders, conducting field and laboratory tests (as appropriate), collecting and analyzing data,
and preparing peer-reviewed reports. All evaluations are conducted in accordance with rigorous quality
assurance (QA) protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate quality are generated and that the results
are defensible.
The Advanced Monitoring Systems (AMS) Center, one of six verification centers under ETV, is operated by
Battelle in cooperation with EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory. The AMS Center
evaluated the performance of a passive infrared optical imager for leak detection and repair. This verification
statement provides a summary of the test results for Pacific Advanced Technologies, Inc. Sherlock® VOC
imaging spectrometer.
VERIFICATION TEST DESCRIPTION
This verification test of the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer was conducted October 20 through October 24,
2008 at the British Petroleum (BP) research complex in Naperville, Illinois (laboratory testing) and December 1
-------
through December 5, 2008 at the Dow Chemical Company chemical plants (field testing) in Freeport, Texas.
Battelle coordinated this verification test with support from BP, the Dow Chemical Company, the American
Chemical Council, and the Texas Chemistry Council.
This verification test utilized simulated gas leaks of select chemicals in a laboratory environment, and under real
world conditions at a chemical plant in Freeport, TX. The ability of the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer to
qualitatively detect gas leaks of select chemicals by visual images relative to a quantitative concentration
measurement made by a portable monitoring device acceptable under U.S. EPA Method 21 was verified.
Reference sampling with the portable monitoring device acceptable under U.S. EPA Method 21 was conducted to
determine the mass rate of specific chemical species emitted from each leak observed with the Sherlock® VOC
imaging spectrometer.
During both the laboratory and field testing, the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer was operated by a
representative of Industrial Scientific Corporation, a company with a partnering agreement with Pacific Advanced
Technologies, Inc. for the Sherlock® VOC. This verification test utilized two additional individuals to confirm
the observation of a leak in an effort to eliminate operator bias. The two additional confirming individuals were
the Battelle verification test coordinator and a verification test team member. The use of three individuals to
confirm a chemical leak is not standard practice when using the imaging spectrometer; typical operation relies on
a single operator.
The detection of a gas leak in either the laboratory or field was determined by the spectrometer operator and the
two confirming individuals that reported the results qualitatively as either a "detect" or "non-detect". All three
must have agreed on the results for the observation to be considered detectable. When all three did not agree, the
observation was reported as a non-detect. A non-detect was also recorded if the imaging spectrometer operator
did not observe a gas leak (i.e., no confirmation of a non-detect was performed). Each observation was conducted
using the viewing screen of the spectrometer.
The test quality assurance plan (TQAP) for this verification test indicated that field testing would be conducted at
two field sites. Due to production scheduling issues, a second field site could not be obtained in a timely manner
and this verification test was completed using the laboratory results and the results from one field test site.
The Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer was verified by evaluating the following parameters:
• Method Detection Limit - The minimum mass leak rate that all three individuals observed using the
spectrometer under controlled laboratory conditions. This parameter was not evaluated during the field
testing phase.
• Detection of Chemical Gas Species Relative to a Portable Monitoring Device - The ability of the imaging
spectrometer to qualitatively detect a gas leak by visual images relative to a quantitative concentration
measurement made by a portable monitoring device acceptable under U.S. EPA Method 21. This parameter
was evaluated in both the laboratory and field testing phases.
• Confounding Factors Effect - Background material, wind speed, and stand-off distance were carefully
controlled during laboratory testing to observe their effects on the method detection limit. Background
materials used were either curved metal gas cylinders or cement board; wind speed was controlled to zero,
2.5, and five miles per hour (mph); and stand-off distances were maintained at either 10 or 30 feet (ft).
During field testing, these variables as well as meteorological conditions were recorded.
• Operational Factors - Technology ease of use, cost, user-friendliness of vendor software, troubleshooting,
downtime, and other parameters such as these were recorded.
-------
QA oversight of verification testing was provided by Battelle and EPA. Battelle QA staff conducted technical
systems audits of both the laboratory and field testing, and Battelle QA staff conducted a data quality audit of at
least 10% of the test data. This verification statement, the full report on which it is based, and the TQAP for this
verification test are available at www.epa.gov/etv/centers/centerl.html.
TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION
The following is a description of the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer, based on information provided by the
vendor. The information provided below was not verified in this test.
The Sherlock® VOC is an infrared optical imaging spectrometer that can be used for video imaging of gas leaks.
The spectrometer is portable and battery operated. The Sherlock® VOC is based on patented image multi-spectral
sensor technology.
The Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer can be used for infrared imaging purposes in many types of industries
such as oil, gas, chemical, power generation, pulp and paper, and mining.
The Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer has a 75-millimeter focal length lens embedded in the body of the
instrument. The lens has a set focal ratio (f-number or f/) of 2.5. The horizontal field of view is approximately
seven degrees. The Sherlock® VOC can be carried by an operator using an optional EasyRig harness, enabling
pointing and scanning while the operator looks at the liquid crystal display (LCD). This design leaves the
operator free to watch for safety hazards in the environment of a processing plant.
VERIFICATION RESULTS
Method Detection Limits and Detection of Chemical Gas Species Relative to a Portable Monitoring Device.
Method detection limits were determined during laboratory testing with the Sherlock® VOC imaging
spectrometer. The ability of the spectrometer to qualitatively detect a gas leak by visual images relative to a
quantitative concentration measurement made by a portable monitoring device acceptable under U.S. EPA
Method 21 was assessed during both laboratory and field testing. After the imaging spectrometer method
detection limit had been determined for a particular chemical under the specified test conditions in the laboratory,
the leak was sampled by the Method 21 compliant monitoring device to determine if it was capable of detecting
the chemical leak. Table 1 presents results for the imaging spectrometer and the Method 21 compliant monitoring
device obtained during laboratory testing.
During field testing, a portable Method 21 compliant monitoring device was used to screen each leaking
component as part of the reference sampling method used. Table 2 reports the responses of the portable
monitoring device when screening components, and identifies whether the spectrometer was able to detect the
chemical leak from the leaking component. The chemical-specific mass emission rate from the leaking
component, determined by the reference method, is also provided.
During field testing, daily meteorological conditions were obtained from the Dow Chemical Company's on-site
meteorology station. Although the wind speed and daily maximum and minimum temperatures were obtained
from this station, the actual meteorological conditions at each leak location monitored on the site are unknown.
Influence of Confounding Factors. Stand-off distance, wind speed, and background material affected the
performance of the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer. For example, increasing the stand-off distance from
the leak increased the method detection limits, and increasing wind speed also increased the method detection
limits.
-------
Table 1. Summary of Spectrometer Method Detection Limits(a) and Percent Agreement with a
Method 21 Monitoring Device During Laboratory Testing
Compound
1,3 -butadiene
Acetic acid
Acrylic acid
Benzene
Methylene chloride
Ethylene
Methanol
Pentane
Propane
Styrene
Method Detection Limit (g/hr)
Minimum Maximum
8.1 27
1.7 81
0.92 7.4
3.2 >70(b),(c)
>70(b) >70(b)
3.3 >278(b)
2.1 >69(c)
0.83 >55(bx(c)
0.88 235(b)
15 25
(a) Minimum and maximum method detection limits were measured at
Agreement with Method 21
Monitoring Device
Total No. of Percent
Tests Performed Agreement
4 100%
11 100%
4 100%
4 40%
No data(d)
2 33%
No data(d)
8 75%
No data(d)
4 100%
a 0-mph wind speed unless otherwise noted.
(b) Measured at a 2.5-mph wind speed.
(c) Measured at a 5-mph wind speed.
(d) Percent agreement was not evaluated for methylene chloride, methanol, and propane because these compounds have
an ionization potential
greater than the energy which could be supplied by the Industrial Scientific IBRID MX6 with
photoionization detector.
Table 2. Summary of Field Testing Results of the Sherlock15 VOC Imaging Spectrometer
Leaking
Stand-
Wind off
Leak Component Speed Distance
Location Type
1 3 -in Plug
(mph) (ft)
8 12
10
2 !/4-inTube 21
3 1/2"in
91 in
Connector
6-in Block
Valve
21 10
8-in Block
6 ,, , 21 10
Valve
Control
is in
Valve Flange
8 2-in Block
Valve
9 1-in Valve 1R in
Plug
6-in Pressure , lft
Relief Valve
M21 Device
Screening
Leak
Cone. Detected by
(ppmv)
>100,000
20,500
>100,000
>100,000
20,500
17,500
8,000(B)
835
>100,000
Camera?
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
i^\J
No
i^\J
Bagging Results:
Average Leak Rate
(g/hr)
8.8 (methane)
4.3 (ethylene)
0.95 (ethylene)
2.3 x 10"3 (ethylene)
7.8 (methane)
5.2 x 10"2 (ethylene)
8.7 x 10"3 (styrene)
0.08 (benzene)
3.4(a) (benzene)
1. 9 xlO"3 (ethylene)
0.28 (benzene)
1.9(b) (1,3-butadiene)
0.35 (dichloro methane
[methylene chloride])
6.8 (1,2-dichloropropane
[propylene dichloride])
(a) The pre- and post-bagging leak concentrations differed by 24%. This exceeded a minimum acceptance criterion for
data quality indicator (DQI) in the TQAP of 20% for the DQI for the confirmation of detected leaks. Thus, the data
are considered suspect
and reported with this qualifier.
(b) The calibration check response for the portable monitoring device, conducted after screening this component, resulted
in a 24% difference. This exceeded a minimum acceptance criterion for a DQI in the TQAP. Thus, the data are
considered suspect and reported with this qualifier.
-------
Operational Factors. The Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer was found to be easy to use, and ready to
deploy in 10 minutes. The imaging spectrometer weighs 19 pounds with battery, and operated on batteries when
performing visual screening of leaking components. Because the imaging spectrometer was operated by
Industrial Scientific personnel and there were some disagreements on detections with the two other confirming
individuals, the ability of the operator may influence the operation of the instrument. The imaging spectrometer
is not intrinsically safe, and cannot be used in explosive atmospheres or environments.
The cost of the Sherlock® VOC imaging spectrometer is $89,000 and includes the LCD video display, a Pelican
shipping case, battery, charger, personal computer, HYP AT software, and all necessary cables.
Signed by Tracy Stenner 12/1/10 Signed by Sally Gutierrez 12/20/10
Tracy Stenner Date Sally Gutierrez Date
Manager Environmental Solutions Product Line Director
Energy and Environment Global Business National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Battelle Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NOTICE: ETV verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific,
predetermined criteria and the appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA and Battelle make no
expressed or implied warranties as to the performance of the technology and do not certify that a technology
will always operate as verified. The end user is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable
federal, state, and local requirements. Mention of commercial product names does not imply endorsement.
------- |