EPA-600 /R- 92-214
November 1992
DEVELOPMENT OF SIZE-SPECIFIC
DATA FROM PARTICULATE CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH REPORTS
Prepared by:
T. Allan Dean
Michiel R. J. Doom
William R. Barnard
Robert Coleman
E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.
3514 University Drive
Durham, NC 27707
Contract No. 68-D9-0168
Work Assignment No. 2/042
EPA Project Officer:
Charles C. Masser
Air & Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for:
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Washington, DC 20460
-------
. TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(.Please read Instihctions on the reverse before compter
1. REPORT NO. 2, ,
EPA-600/R-92-214
a.j ' B393-131-456 i
V „. . _ J
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Development of Size-Specific Data from Particulate
Control Technology Research Reports
5. REPORT DATE
November 1992
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHORCSi
T.Allan Dean, Michiel Doorn, William R. Barnard,
and Robert Coleman
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
E, H. Pechan and Associates, Inc.
3514 University Drive
Durham, North Carolina 27707
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11, CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-D9-0168, Task 2/042
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Task Final; 3-9/92
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
is.supplementary notes _^EERL proiect officer is Charles C. Masser, Mail Drop 62, 919/
541-7586. '
16lAJ®J&%SEThe report gives size-specific, uncontrolled emission factors and control
efficiencies developed from many studies of particulate control device performance
conducted under the direction of EPiVs Air and Energy Engineering Research Labo-
ratory (AEERL) between 1974 and 1981. The particle size ranges of concern are 0-
2, 5, 2.5-6, 6-10, and 0-10 micrometers. These data and the sampling and analysis
procedures documented in the reports were subjected to a quality assurance review
and then compared with source- and control-device-specific information in several
data sources maintained by EPA1 s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS). Where no relevant.,information existed in these data sources, it was de-
termined that the data developed from these studies should be incorporated into
them. Each control device study is reviewed individually. For each study, the
source, control device, and sampling configuration are described briefly, the qual-
ity of the sampling and analysis methods is rated informally, the data are compared
with comparable AP-42 data, and conclusions are drawn regarding the need for the
data in the OAQPS data sources. Reviews of documents which yielded data not suit-
able for inclusion in the OAQPS data sources are also included, c^--=, -
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. cosati Fteld/Gioup
Pollution
Particle Size
Emission
Data
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Particulate
Emission Factors
Data Sources
13 B
14G
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS {This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
42
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
REPRODUCED BY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE i
NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE 1
SPRINGFIELD, VA. 22161 ,
-------
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policy of the Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
ABSTRACT
The report gives size-specific, uncontrolled emission factors and control efficiencies
developed from many studies of particulate control device performance conducted under
the direction of EPA's Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory (AEEEL)
between 1974 and 1981. The particle size ranges of concern are 0-2.5, 2.5-6, 6-10, and
0-10 micrometers. These data and the sampling and analysis procedures documented in
the reports were subjected to a quality assurance review and then compared with source-
and control-device-specific information in several data sources maintained by EPA's Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS). Where no relevant information existed
in these data sources, it was determined that the data developed from these studies
should be incorporated into them. Each control device study is reviewed individually.
For each study, the source, control device, and sampling configuration are described
briefly, the quality of the sampling and analysis methods is rated informally, the data are
compared with comparable AP-42 data, and conclusions are drawn regarding the need for
the data in the OAQPS data sources. Reviews of documents which yielded data not
suitable for inclusion in the OAQPS data sources are also included.
ii
-------
CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ii
FIGURES iv
TABLES iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
INTRODUCTION 1
PURPOSE 1
METHODOLOGY 2
REPORT ORGANIZATION 5
SUMMARY OF RESULTS . 6
DATA DEVELOPMENT AND FINDINGS . 8
REFERENCES 21
APPENDIX A - REPORTS YIELDING UNUSABLE DATA 23
iii
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1. Control Efficiency as a Function of Particle Diameter (Hypothetical) 3
2. Inlet Cumulative Size Distribution (Hypothetical) 4
3. Linear Approximation of Control Efficiency as a Function of Particle Diameter
(Hypothetical) 4
TABLES
Number . Page
1. Size-Specific Data Developed from Listed Reports 7
2. Comparison of Size-Specific Data from EPA-600/2-76-077a with AP-42 Data .... 8
3. Comparison of Efficiencies from EPA-600/2-75-013a with AP-42 Data 10
4. Comparison of Emission Factors from EPA-650/2-74-129 with AP-42-Data 12
5. Size-Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-650/2-74-129 , . 12
6. Comparison of Efficiencies for Venturi Scrubbers on Gray Iron Cupolas 15
7. Size-Specific Control Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-77-023 16
A-l. Listed Reports Yielding Unusable Data 24
A-2, Size-Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-76-141 . 29
A-3. Size-Specific Data Developed from EPA-600/7-79-246 30
A-4. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-79-104a 31
A-5. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-77-011 32
A-6. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-78-094, Compared to AP-42 33
A-7. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-78-214, Compared to AP-42 34
A-8. Size-Specific Data Developed from EPA-600/9-80-039a 35
A-9. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-77-208, Compared to AP-42 36
iv
*1
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Kathleen. Manwaring in the
preparation of this report.
v
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) has created and is
maintaining databases which state and local air pollution control agencies and
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional offices can use to inventory and regulate
particulate emission sources. These databases included AIRS Facility Subsystem Source '
Classification Codes and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Air Pollutants
(EPA-450/4-90-003) and Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42).
On July 1, 1987 EPA published a final rule for an ambient air quality standard for
PM10. Consequently, state and local government agencies and EPA regional offices need
emission factor and control efficiency information to perform PM10 emission inventories.
In order to meet this need, the OAQPS developed a computer program which calculates a
control efficiency for PM10 for specific control equipment for various emission source
categories. A subfile in the computer program also generates a PM10 control efficiency for
a given pair of air pollution control devices operated in series at a process operation.
Thus, the PM10 computer file was added to the se.t of OAQPS data sources available to
regional, state, and local agencies.
Between 1974 and 1981 the Air and Energy Engineering Laboratory (AEERL), then
called the Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory (IERL), conducted extensive
research on particulate control technology. A large number of studies investigated the
particle size distribution from various industrial processes and the reductions of these
emissions which could be accomplished using various air pollution control devices (APCDJ.
It is appropriate that valid data from these sources are utilized to update the OAQPS
data sources with size-specific emission factors and control efficiencies which could be
developed from the particulate control technology studies mentioned above. Specifically,
the studies were reviewed to determine if the findings of these reports have been
incorporated into the above listed OAQPS data sources, and recommend revisions to
incorporate any findings not already in the sources. The reports were to be evaluated for
reliability and consistency with other published data, and any discrepant findings were to
be rationally resolved.
1
-------
METHODOLOGY
Early in the review process it was determined that the particle size categories of
interest are 0 - 2.5, 2.5 - 6, 6 - 10, and 0-10 microns aerodynamic diameter (pmA), These
are the size ranges used by the PM10 computer file, and AP-42 frequently has cumulative
emission factors at 2,5, 6, and 10 jimA. Unfortunately, none of the reviewed documents
presented emission factors or control efficiencies for these size categories. Therefore, it
was necessary to develop this data as much as possible from the information provided.
Typically, the reports did not even mention emission factors, and control efficiency
findings were limited to total particulate efficiency and/or graphs showing efficiency as a
continuous function of particle diameter.
Most of the studies used cascade impactors, so information on particulate
concentration as a function of particle diameter was available. Where possible, emission
factors were developed using the following general equation:
If any of the factors in the equation were not available, no emission factor could be
developed. Additionally, if both the volume flow through the APCD and the average
concentration were not given for standard temperature and pressure, they were
considered unsuitable for the purpose of calculating emission factors.
Control efficiencies for the size categories of interest were developed in one of two
ways, depending upon what was presented in the report. If the report includes graphs of
cumulative concentration as a function of particle diameter for the source off-gas before
and after it passes through the control device, or if these graphs can be developed from
published cascade impactor data, then the equation shown below was used to calculate
efficiency for each size range;
Er = Cr * F/A
where, Er = emission factor for size range r
Cr = average concentration for size range r before the APCD
F = volume flow rate through the APCD
A = measure of activity rate
p = C"~C" • 100
where, Pr = percent mass efficiency for size range r
Cn = concentration for size range r before the control device inlet
Cro = concentration for size range r after the control device outlet
2
-------
If both cumulative inlet and outlet concentration data could not be obtained from the
report, it was sometimes possible to use another method to develop control efficiencies for
the three size ranges. Some of the reports included graphs of control efficiency as a
function of particle diameter. An example of this type of graph is shown in Figure 1.
With this type of graph and another graph showing the inlet cumulative particle size
distribution (as shown in Figure 2) the desired control efficiencies could be developed
using the method detailed in Cooper et al. (1976).
Particle Aerodynamic Diameter
<(jimA)
Figure 1, Control Efficiency as a Function of Particle Diameter
(Hypothetical)
As applied in this effort, the procedure was basically as follows. The control efficiency
curve was first approximated with a series of connected line segments, shorter segments
where the efficiency curve is arched and longer segments where it is nearly straight. An
example of this is shown in Figure 3. The efficiency at the midpoint of each line segment
was assumed to be the efficiency for the size range represented by segment. The 2.5, 6,
and 10 pmA diameters were automatically used as line segment endpoints. Then the
cumulative particle size distribution curve was divided using exactly the same particle
diameters as line segment endpoints. To calculate the collection efficiency for particles
smaller than 2.5 pmA, the efficiency for each segment in the curve up to 2.5 pmA was
multiplied by the fraction (of the mass of particles <2.5 p.mA) in the size range covered
3
-------
Figure 2. Inlet Cumulative Size Distribution (Hypothetical)
Particle Aerodynamic Diameter
(pmA)
Figure 3, Linear Approximation of Control Efficiency as a Function of Particle
Diameter (Hypothetical)
4
-------
by that segment. The sum of these products equals the control efficiency for particles
S 2.5 pmA. This calculation is shown in the equation below.
£#o-2J = EEffi * Fraci
1
where, Eff^2 5 = efficiency (as a fraction) for mass of particles smaller than 2.5 iimA
N " = number of line segments below 2.5 pmA
Elfj = efficiency at midpoint of segment i
Fraq = fraction of the mass of particles < 2.5 pmA that is in the size range
represented by segment i
The same method was used to calculate the mass efficiency for particulate in the 2.5-6 and
6 - 10 pmA ranges.
All reports which yielded size-specific emission factors and control efficiencies were
reviewed for quality of sampling methods. If the particle size distribution data was found to
be substantially effected by some sampling artifact, or if some other significant sampling
problem was documented, these problems were noted, and the data was considered
unsuitable for any of the OAQPS data sources.
The emission factors and efficiencies that were developed from reports which passed the
quality assurance (QA) review were then compared with any data on the source and control
device already included in the OAQPS data sources. They were also compared with data
from any other documents covered by the work assignment which passed the QA review and
yielded size-specific data. Conflicting data was reconciled on a case-by-case basis.
Conclusions regarding the developed emission factor and efficiency data and the OAQPS data
sources were then formulated.
REPORT ORGANIZATION
Section 2 is a summary of the data that was developed for this work.
Section 3 presents a discussion of each study which yielded size-specific data and which
passed the QA review. It also presents the emission factors and efficiencies that were
developed from the report and provides a comparison with other published data. Findings
regarding each source/APCD combination are presented and justified. In most cases there
was only one document which dealt with each source/APCD pair, and findings are presented
with the discussion of that document. The only exception is venturi scrubbers on gray iron
cupolas. In this case, findings are presented with the discussion of the last document
covering that pair. In all cases findings are set apart from the text and are emphasized with
a large bullet (#).
The Appendix consists of a table showing those documents studied which did not yield
size-specific emission factors or efficiencies or which did not pass the QA review.
5
-------
SECTION 2
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
Quality assured, size-specific data was developed for 20 of the control device test
reports covered by the work effort. However, in 10 of these test reports a specific, eight-
digit Source Classification Code (SCC) could not be established for the particulate source.
This was the case for most studies involving coal-fired boilers. In order to label a coal-
fired boiler with a particular SCC, several fuel and boiler configuration parameters must
be known. If these details are unknown, there is no basis for comparison of data with
existing OAQPS data sources, which present different emission factors for the different
boiler and fuel types. An attempt was made to gather some of these details by calling the
authors, but this effort proved unfruitful. Making assumptions regarding the SCC was
considered unwarranted for two reasons. First, contrary to many other source types
covered in AP-42, much size-specific information is already available for various coal-fired
boiler types and control devices. Second, errors resulting from an incorrect assumption of
the SCC would be multiplied by the number of times the emission factors are used by
regional, state, and local air pollution authorities.
The test reports for which an SCC could not be determined, as well as those reports
for which size-specific data of reasonable quality could not be developed, are listed in
Appendix A, The specific problems of these reports are also listed there.
Table 1 provides a summary of the data that was considered usable for the OAQPS
data base sources. Those emission factors and control efficiencies which are of
appropriate quality for addition to AP-42 are marked with an asterisk (*), Data from
EPA-600/2-76-077a, the first item in Table 1, is already included in AP-42, Detailed
findings concerning each of the source/control device combinations are presented in
Section 3, at the end of the discussion of each corresponding report.
6
-------
Table 1. Size-Specific Data Developed from Listed Reports
Document
Source
Classification
Code
Device Code
Particle Size
Range
(timA)
Uncontrolled
Emission Factor
(lbs/ton)
Efficiency
(%>
EPA-600/2-76-077a
1-01-001-01
Anthracite Fired
Boiler
016, 017, or 018
Baghouse
(unspecified)
0-2.5
12,3
99.83
2.5 - 6
11.2
99.90
6-10
6.4
99.85
0-10
29.8
99.88
EPA-600/2-75-013a
1-01-002-05
Coal Fired Boiler
016, 017, or 018
Baghouse
(unspecified)
0-2.5
99.36
2,5 - 6
99.56
6 - 10
99.68
0 - 10
99.54
EPA-600/2-77-193
3-03-006-05
SiMn, Electric
Smelting Furnace
053
Venturi Scrubber
0-2.5
94.94
EPA-65Q/2-74-129
3-03-007-03
FeCr, Electric Arc
Furnace
053
Venturi Scrubber
0-2.5
4.53*.
97.0*
2,5-6
1.04*
98.8*
6- 10
0.73*
99.25*
0- 10
6.30*
97.6*
EPA-650/2-74-093
3-04-003-01
Gray Iron
Foundry, Cupola
053
Venturi Scrubber
0-2.5
98.6
EPA-600/2-76-282
3-04-003-01,
Gray Iron
Foundry, Cupola
053
Venturi Scrubber
0-2.5
98.7
EPA-600/7-77-023
3-04-007-01,
Steel Foundry,
Electric Arc
Furnace
016, 017, or 018
Baghouse
(unspecified)
0-2.5
99.2
2.5 - 6
97,3
6 - 10
96.8
0-10
98.7
EPA-600/2-77-209b
Borax Fusing
Furnace (no SCC)
053
Venturi Scrubber
0-2.5
94.04
EPA-600/2-76-164
3-05-007-14
Cement, Clinker
Cooler
063
Gravel Bed Filter
0-2.5
0.037*
41.72*
EPA-650/2-74-093
3-05-021-02
Salt Dryer
058
Wetted Fiber
Scrubber
0-2.5
0.0095*
68.52*
* Appropriate for Inclusion in AP-42
7
-------
SECTION 3
DATA DEVELOPMENT AND FINDINGS
Cass, Reed W. and Robert M. Bradway. Fractional Efficiency of a Utility Boiler Baghouse:
Sunburv Steam Electric Station. EPA-600/2-76-077a. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. March, 1976.
SCC: 1-01-001-01, (anthracite fired boiler)
Device Code; 016, 017, or 018, (baghouse of unspecified temperature)
The document is referenced in AP-42 and the Interim Report on New or Revised PM,,j
and other Emission Factors in the section on anthracite coal combustion. The text in both
references is identical and cites uncontrolled emission factors which are included in
Table 2.
Table 2. Comparison of Size-Specific Data from EPA-600/2-76-077a with AP-42 Data
Particle
Size Range
(pmA)
Emission
Factor, AP-42
(lb/ton)
Emission
Factor
(lb/ton)
Efficiency
AP-42
<%)
Efficiency
(%>
0-2.5
0.6Af
12.3
99.0
99.83
2.5-6
1.1A
11.2
99.64
99.90
6 - 10
0.6A
6.4
99.5
99,85
0- 10
2.3A
29.9
99.4
99.88
Total
Particulate
10An
99.92m
t Multiply by A = weight % ash content -
ft Same as in Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors for 1985 NAPAP
ttT Calculated by the authors
8
-------
The Sunbury Steam and Electric Station is equipped with four -unspecified anthracite
fired boilers. Data presented in the above table are for dry bottom boilers (AP-42, Table
1.2-1). The normal fuel consumption is 41 tons/hour/unit with an exhaust gas volume of
approximately 125,000 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) per boiler. Emission control
is performed with bagfilters manufactured by Western Precipitation/Joy. Each boiler has
its own baghouse. The baghouses are considered to be identical.
Both new and old bags were tested. The authors note a 25 percent difference in
emission rate between the old and new bags. A variety of other parameters were also
investigated, including fuel mixture, boiler load, and time between bag cleaning cycles. In
our calculations the test data were averaged out to account for the divergence. Total
mass was measured with two types of stack samplers. Andersen Mark III and the U. of
W. Mark III cascade impactors were initially used to collect size distribution data. At the
inlet a precollector (cyclone or gooseneck nozzle), was installed upstream from the
impactor in order to remove the largest particles. During testing it became evident that
the Andersen impactor was showing abnormal weight gain due to sulfate precipitation.
As it was not possible to adjust for this weight gain, the data were discarded and new
tests were done with the U. of W. impactor.
It was difficult to assess the quality of the sampling methods, because no raw data
were provided. There were problems with artifact formation on the impactors, for which
the authors tried to adjust. Sampling was done at a single point, rather than along a
traverse. Where this report is cited in AP-42, the data is appropriately rated "D".
Bradway, Robert M. and Reed W. Cass. Fractional Efficiency of a Utility Boiler Baghouse:
Nucla Generating Plant. EPA-60G/2-75-013a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. August 1975.
SCO: 1-01-Q02-05 (coal-fired stoker boiler)
Device Code: 016, 017, or 018 (baghouse, unspecified temperature).
This document is not referenced in AP-42.
The efficiency of a baghouse in controlling emissions from a coal-fired stoker boiler
was tested. The boiler had a capacity of 120,000 pounds of steam per hour. Coal
throughput rate was approximately 15,500 lbs/hr. A large baffle was employed to remove
the largest particles from the gas stream before entering the baghouse. Twenty-two
sampling tests were conducted with cascade impactors. Raw cascade impactor data was
not published. For each sampling run, a graph was presented showing cumulative inlet
concentration as a function of particle diameter. In another graph, average penetration
was also shown as a function of particle diameter. In order to acquire average efficiencies
for the particle size categories, the following approach was taken. An average inlet
particle size distribution was calculated by tabulating cumulative concentrations at 2.5, 6,
and 10 y.mA from the individual graphed distributions and fitting a curve to the averaged
9
-------
data. This graph and the published average penetration graph were used to calculate
efficiencies shown in Table 3 according to the method set forth in Cooper et al. 1976.
Emission factors could not be developed for this source due to a lack of activity data.
Table 3, Comparison ot Efficiencies from EPA-6G0/2-75-013a with AP-42 Data
Particle Size
Range (umA)
Efficiency
(%>
Efficiency
AP-42 (%}
0-2.5
99.36
98.3
2.5-6
99.56
99.1
6 - 10
99.68
99.7
0 - 10
99.54
99.1
Because no inlet or outlet concentration data or other supporting data was provided,
it was impossible to assess the quality of the data. Therefore, the data was deemed
unsuitable for use in AP-42.
# It is appropriate that the efficiency data be appended to the PM10 computer file
for SCC 1-01-002-05, with a baghouse, device code; 016, 017, or 018, and no
secondary control device.
Drehmel, Dennis C. "Field Test of a Venturi Scrubber in Russia." in Second EPA Fine
Particle Scrubber Symposium. EPA-600/2-77-193. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. September 1977.
SCC: 3-03-006-05 (electric arc furnace, silieomanganese production)
Device Code: 053 (venturi scrubber)
The performance of a venturi scrubber on an electric arc furnace used to produce
silieomanganese was measured using Brink cascade impactors for the inlet gas stream
and Andersen impactors for the outlet. Average inlet and outlet concentrations were
published for the size intervals created by the impactors. Both inlet and outlet impactors
had the same series of cutpoints. The report did not indicate that the concentrations were
based on dry, standard conditions. The largest cutpoint was 5.0 y.m. Therefore, the only
efficiency of interest here was that for particles < 2.5 pm; 94.94 percent. Emission
factors could not be developed because data on furnace production was not published.
This report is not referenced in the AP-42 data sources.
O It is appropriate that the control efficiency for particles smaller than 2.5
piA be appended to the PM10 computer file for SCC 3-03-006-05 with a
-------
venturi scrubber, Device Code 053, as the primary control device and a
single cyclone, Device Code 075, as the secondary control device.
Cooper, Douglas W., Richard Wang, and Daniel P. Anderson. Evaluation of Eight Novel
Fine Particle Collection Devices, EPA-600/2-76-035, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. February 1976,
McCain, Joseph D, Evaluation of Aronetics Two-Phase Jet Scrubber. EPA-650/2-74-129.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
December 1974.
SCC: 3-03-007-03 (electric arc furnace; ferrochromium production)
Device Code; 053 (modified venturi scrubber)
This document is not referenced in OAQPS data sources regarding ferrochromium
production. One of the scrubbing devices evaluated in this report was called an Aronetics
Two-Phase Jet Scrubber. The scrubber is designed basically as follows. Pressurized,
heated water is sprayed through a nozzle immediately upstream from a venturi throat.
The change of some of the hot water to vapor and resultant expansion of the vapor and
water drop mixture increases the velocity of the mixture as it passes through the venturi
throat. The gas stream then travels down a "mixing section" duct and into a cyclone
separator where the water droplets and dust particles are removed. The most
advantageous use of the scrubber would be on sources which create a hot particle - laden
gas. The heat source for the water nozzle would be a heat exchanger which transfers
heat from the furnace gas to the water.
The field testing was performed at a submerged arc ferroalloy furnace which was
producing ferrochromium. According to McCain (telephone communication, 8/6/92), the
furnace was closed with a fairly good seal. Cascade impaetors, optical counters, and a
diffusion battery were used to measure particle size distribution before and after the
control device. The inlet particle size distribution was described by a table of average
mass loading in each of a series of particle size ranges. The outlet distribution was
presented in the same manner except that the particle size intervals were different.
There is no obvious problem with the data quality. Therefore, this data was used to
generate tables and corresponding graphs of cumulative mass as a function of particle
diameter.
The data points were joined by smooth curves. Inlet and outlet concentrations for the
size ranges of interest were then obtained from these graphs and were used to develop
emission factors and control efficiencies.
Emission factors were derived from the inlet concentration data and from production
and air flow information provided in the report. They are shown in Table 4, along with
AP-42 emission factors for an open type submerged arc furnace (SCC; 3-03-006-07), the
11
-------
only furnace type for which size-specific emission factors for ferrochrome production were
available. The large discrepancy might be explained by the significant difference in
furnace closure. The control efficiencies developed from this report are shown in Table 5.
Table 4. Comparison of Emission Factors from EPA-650/2-74-129 with AP-42 Data
Emission Factor
Particle Size Range ObS/ton)
(umA) EPA-650/2-74-129 AP-42
0 - 2.5 4,53 99
2.5 - 6 1.04 39
6 - 10 0.73 ^ 5
0 - 10 6.30 143
Table 5. Size-Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-650/2-74-129
Particle Size Range Average Efficiency
(pmA) <%)
0
1
no
in
1 97.0
2.5 - 6
98.8
6 - 10
99.25
o
o
97.6
c
The following findings are made regarding this study:
# The uncontrolled emission factors developed from this study should be
included in AP-42, Section 7.4,
# AP-42 should also include the controlled emission factors resulting from
the application of the control efficiencies to the uncontrolled emission
factors.
12
-------
# The uncontrolled PM10 emission factor developed from this study should
be included in the AIRS Facility Subsystem Source Classification Codes
and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Air Pollutants. This may
necessitate the refinement of the SCC into two separate codes, one for
open and one for covered submerged arc ferrochromium furnaces.
# The size-specific control efficiencies developed from this study should be
added to the PM10 computer file, as there is presently no information in
it for this SCC. The primary control device is essentially a venturi
scrubber, Code 053, and the secondary device is a mist eliminator,
Device Code 014 or 015.
Calvert, S., N.C. Jhaveri, S. Yung. Fine Particle Scrubber Performance Tests. EPA-650/2-
74-093. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. October 1974.
SCC: 3-04-003-01 (cupola; gray iron foundry)
Device Code: 053 (venturi scrubber)
This study is referenced in AP-42 Section 7.10, "Gray Iron Foundries." The
performance of an Environeering Venturi-rod scrubber in controlling emissions from a
cupola in an iron foundry was evaluated in this document. Neither uncontrolled nor
controlled emission factors were provided, and they could not be calculated because no
rate of output was reported.
The venturi rod scrubber was preceded in the gas stream by a "quench drop-out box"
where "all the large particles drop out." No cutpoint was estimated for this pretreatment
device. Inlet samples were collected between this quench box and the scrubber. Outlet
samples were taken downstream from the scrubber and a draft induction fan. Particle
penetration through the scrubber was graphed as a function of aerodynamic diameter.
Tests were conducted for both gray and ductile iron production; control efficiency was
essentially the same for the two products.
Because the test report did not provide control efficiencies by particle size category,
these values had to be derived from published graphs which showed the cumulative
particulate mass as a function of aerodynamic diameter for the inlet and outlet samples.
Due to the focus on fine particles, insufficient data were gathered on cumulative
concentrations for sizes between 4 and 40 pmA to develop reliable control efficiencies for
the 2.5-6 and 6-10 pmA size ranges. For the purpose of studying finer particles, the data
appears to be of reasonable quality. The average control efficiency for particles in the
0-2.5 iimA size range was 98.5 percent.
The performance of the venturi rod scrubber on cupola emissions is also discussed in
National Dust Collector Model 850 Variable Rod Module Venturi Scrubber Evaluation.
-------
EPA-600/2-76-282, which is reviewed herein. Findings regarding this study are made
after the discussion of that document.
Calvert, Seymour, Harry F, Barbarika, and Charles F. Lake. National Dust Collector
Mndfil ftnf) Variable Rod Module Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/2-76-282.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
December 1976.
SCO; 3-04-003-01 (cupola; gray iron foundry)
Device Code: 053 (venturi scrubber)
This report is cited in AP-42, Section 7.10. The scrubber configuration evaluated in
this test report was similar to the one discussed in the report titled Fine Particle
Scrubber Performance Tests (EPA-650/2-74-093). Note that this study (EPA-600/2-76-282)
was conducted two years after the one reported in EPA-650/2-74-093. The device has a
different name, although in both studies they are referred to generally as venturi rod
scrubbers. Some design changes were apparent from the device diagrams and
descriptions. For example, the device studied in the latter report featured much more
water spray nozzles than did the earlier design.
Again, the cupola production rate was not documented, so no emission factors could
be calculated. However, impactor data were published for samples collected upstream
and downstream from the device for 14 sampling runs. Because the primary interest of
the researchers was fine particle collection efficiency, for many sampling runs no cut sizes
were provided in the range between 4 and 40 ymA. Therefore, control efficiency for
particles smaller than 2.5 pmA was the only usable piece of information which could be
derived from this report. The efficiency for each of the 14 sampling runs was interpolated
from graphed cascade impactor data: 98.7 percent.
A comparison of efficiency data developed from this study, from EPA-650/2-74-093,
and from AP-42, Section 7.10 is provided in Table 6. The AP-42 efficiency was developed
from Figures 7.10-3 and 7.10-5, which show cumulative emission factors for uncontrolled
and venturi scrubber controlled gray iron cupolas, respectively. These two figures
reference EPA-600/2-76-282 and EPA-650/2-74-093 exclusively. Neither of these two
documents included information on operating rates, which implies that AP-42 writers
obtained information on operating rates from the report authors in order to calculate
emission factors based on units of metal produced. Our collection efficiencies are based on
particulate concentrations before and after the control device. Appendix C.2, "Generalized
Particle Size Distributions" includes a table (Table C.2-3) of typical collection efficiencies
for various particulate control devices. In this table, the venturi scrubber is given a
control efficiency of 90 percent for particles < 2.5 pmA. This lends some credence to the
higher control efficiency developed from these test reports.
14
-------
Table 6. Comparison of Efficiencies for Venturi Scrubbers on Gray Iron Cupolas
Percent Efficiency for Size 0 - 2.5 pmA
EFA-6Q0/2-76-282 EPA-650/2-74-093 , AP-42
98.7 98.5 80.2
Findings regarding cupola emissions and the use of venturi scrubbers for control are
as follows:
• Unless better documentation can be provided for the manner in which
both uncontrolled and controlled emission factors were developed in
AP-42 Figures 7.10-3 and 7.10-5, these figures should be removed.
# A control efficiency of 98.6 percent for particles in the 0 - 2.5 jimA range
should be entered into the PM10 computer file for SCC 3-04-003-01, with
a venturi scrubber, Device Code 053, as the primary control device, and
a mist eliminator, Device Code 014 or 015, as the secondary control
device. 98,6 percent is the average of the results from the two studies.
Cass, Reed W, and John E. Langley, Fractional Efficiency of an Electric Arc Furnace
Baghouse. EPA-600/7-77-023. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina. March 1977.
SCC: 3-04-007-01 (electric arc furnace; specialty steel production)
Device Code: 016, 017, or 018 (baghouse; unspecified temperature)
This report documents an engineering study of the ability of a baghouse to control
particulate emissions from an electric arc furnace producing "high strength, low alloy
specialty steel," The study also included tests in which emissions from two operating
furnaces were ducted through the baghouse. The study is not referenced in the OAQPS
data sources.
Two types of cascade impactors were used to measure inlet and outlet particle size
distribution and, in turn, penetration as a function of particle diameter. The University ,
of Washington Mark III Source Test Cascade Impactor was used to sample upstream from'
the control device, whereas the Andersen Mark III Stack Sampler was used to take outlet
measurements. Samples were collected during nearly all stages of the furnace cycle.
Several inlet samples were collected for each corresponding outlet sample.
15
-------
Emission factors could not be developed because no information was provided on the
actual production rate.
A graph of average penetration versus particle diameter was published in the report.
In order to develop size category emission factors from this type of graph, the cumulative
inlet size distribution must also be known. The report did not include a single size
distribution representative of the entire furnace cycle, but rather several size
distributions which indicated that the distribution varies somewhat according to the stage
of the furnace cycle. When this occurs, the average inlet size distribution should ideally
be obtained by weighing each measured distribution according to the time interval of its
occurrence relative to the duration of the entire furnace cycle. In other words, a sample
collected during a period in which the furnace lid or doors are closed should be given a
greater weight than a sample taken while the furnace is back-charged and the lid is open,
because the latter is a much shorter stage. Two factors prevented utilization of this
approach. First, the time interval of each stage in the furnace cycle was not given.
Second, a single sample often covered more than one stage of the cycle. As a second best
approach, all of the inlet samples (which covered nearly the entire furnace cycle) were
given equal weight in calculating an average distribution.
The control efficiencies in Table 7 were developed using the graph of penetration as a
function of particle diameter and the average cumulative size distribution, following the
method presented in Cooper et al. 1976. The average total particulate efficiency of 98.1
percent was calculated from published total particulate penetration data. This figure
agrees with AP-42 Section 7.13, "Steel Foundries," which indicates that the overall
efficiency of a baghouse on an electric arc furnace is 98 - 99 percent. AP-42 does not
provide size-specific data for this source.
Table 7. Size-Specific Control Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-77-023
Particle Size Range Average Efficiency
(pmA) {%)
0 - 2.5 99.2
2.5 - 6 97.3
6 - 10 96.8
0 - 10 98.7
The authors theorized that the anomalous trend of higher efficiency for smaller
particles was due to the escape of captured and agglomerated particles from the baghouse.
The report mentioned several other problems encountered in the sampling program.
Unexpected weight gains occurred on coated cascade impactor substrates. Particle
collection in the sampling probe was higher than anticipated. Total mass (by EPA
Method 5) and total impactor mass did not match well. This could have been due to the
16
-------
cyclical nature of the source. The authors took reasonable steps to reduce the significance
of these problems. Therefore, the data developed in this study is considered to be of a
quality suitable for inclusion in AP-42.
• It is therefore appropriate that the size-specific control efficiencies
developed from this study be appended to the PM10 computer file for
SCC 3-04-007-01 with a baghouse, Device Code 016, 017, or 018, as the
primary control device and no secondary control device.
Calvert, Seymour, Harry Barbarika, and Gary M. Monahan. American Air Filter
Kinnactor 10 x 56 Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/2-77-209b. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
November 1977.
SCC; no SCC established (borax fusing furnace)
Device Code: 053 (venturi scrubber)
Simultaneous inlet and outlet cascade impactor samples were collected upstream and
downstream of a venturi scrubber used to collect particulate from a borax fusing furnace.
No SCC was found for this process in AIRS Facility Subsystem Source Classification
Codes and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Pollutants, and borax production is not
mentioned in AP-42. This document is not referenced in any of the OAQPS data sources.
The average overall efficiency of the scrubber was reported at 97.5 percent. Impactor
data from 12 sampling runs were published in tables in an appendix to the report.
Published data from one of these runs was discarded because the diameter cutpoints were
not in order. Furthermore, the inlet sampling location - 0.4 duct diameters downstream
from a 90° bend and one duct diameter upstream from the venturi section - and the use of
precutters with cut diameters at 4.5 pmA rendered calculated control efficiencies for
particles larger than 2.5 pmA unrepresentative of the control device. The remaining data
was used to generate graphs of cumulative concentration as a function of particle
diameter. The paired (inlet-outlet) cumulative concentration curves were used to estimate
a control efficiency for the size category 0-2.5 p.mA for each test. The average mass
efficiency was 94.04 percent.
Emission factors could not be calculated because data on production rate was not
provided.
The following findings are made regarding borax fusing furnace emission control:
# An SCC should be established for a borax fusing furnace.
# For particles in the 0 - 2.5 iimA size range a mass collection efficiency of
94.04 percent should be entered into the PM10 computer file for the
17
-------
established SCC with a venturi scrubber, Device Code 053, as the
primary control device and a cyclone, Device Code 075, as the secondary
control device.
McCain, Joseph D. Evaluation of Rexnord Gravel Bed Filter, EPA-600/2-76-164. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. June
1976.
SCC; 3-05-007-14 (clinker cooler; cement manufacturing)
Device Code: 063 (gravel bed filter)
This study is not referenced in the OAQPS data sources. Gravel bed filters are very
common on clinker coolers. In this case the control device consisted of eight modules,
each including a "cyclonic inlet section" and two parallel gravel beds. Built-in stirring
rakes were used to agitate the gravel during the cleaning stage. The ability of the
Rexnord Gravel Bed Filter to control particulate emissions from two clinker coolers was
tested on two different occasions. After the first period of testing, it was discovered that
the cycle of normal operation and filter cleaning was not optimally set. Adjustments to
the system were made, and the investigators measured greater total particulate efficiency
in the second test series. Therefore, only data from the second test series were used to
develop representative size-specific control efficiencies.
Fine particles were stated as the primary concern in this study, although about
98 percent of the uncontrolled dust mass was in particles larger than 10 prnA. The inlet
impactor had a cutpoint of 5 pmA. From the presented average inlet and outlet
distribution data, we calculated an average efficiency of 41.72 percent for particles
< 2.5 pmA, AP-42, Appendix C.2: "Generalized Particle Size Distributions", Table C.2-3
lists a 0 percent efficiency for gravel bed filters, for particles < 2.5 pm. More information
can be found in AP-42, Section 8.6, "Portland Cement Manufacturing". Table 8.6-4 gives
uncontrolled and controlled emission factors for gravel bed filters. For particles up to
5 ym, the controlled emission factors are larger than the uncontrolled ones, thus
indicating negative efficiencies.
Production data and flow rates were available, from which an emission factor could be
calculated: 0.037 lbs/ton. The authors did not specify whether the production rate of 500
tons/day was based on tons of cement or tons of clinker. We will assume it is clinker.
The AP-42 emission factor is 0.05 lbs/ton of clinker.
The data from this report are of reasonable quality. Therefore, the following findings
are made:
• The control efficiency (41.72 percent) and emission factor (0.037 lbs/ton) for
0 - 2.5 pmA should be incorporated into AP-42.
18
-------
• AP-42, Table 8.6-4 should be corrected to reflect positive or zero collection
efficiencies for all particle sizes.
• The PM10 computer file should incorporate the 0 - 2.5 pmA control efficiency
(41.72 percent for device code 063) developed from this study.
Calvert, S., N.C, Jhaveri, S. Yung, Fine Particle Scrubber Performance Tests. EPA-650/2-
74-093. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. October 1974.
SCO: 3-05-021-02 (stack dryer; salt mining)
Device Code: 058 (wetted fiber scrubber)
055 (impingement plate scrubber)
This document is not referenced in OAQPS data sources regarding salt drying. AP-42
does not have a section on salt drying. Two devices were tested for their ability to control
particulate emissions from salt drying operations: a wetted fiber scrubber and an
impingement plate scrubber. However, for the tests of the impingement plate scrubber,
calculated efficiencies were very inconsistent, and emission factors could not be developed;
therefore, this part of the report is not suitable for inclusion in the OAQPS data sources.
No emission factors were published for the wetted fiber scrubber test either.
However, average uncontrolled emission factors could be developed using average
operating conditions (actual operating rates during the sampling were not published).
Data for particles over 2.5 ymA was considered unreliable, due to the use of inlet
impactor precutters with cutpoints in the 3 - 6 pmA range. The average emission factor
for 0 - 2.5 pmA particles was 9.55 lbs/1000 tons of salt dried . Impactor data from
simultaneous inlet/outlet sampling runs were tabulated and graphed. Six of these
included cutpoints greater than 10 pmA for both inlet and outlet samples. Cumulative
mass was plotted against particle diameter. Again, only the efficiency data for the size
range 0 - 2.5 pmA was considered reliable. The average efficiency was 68.52 percent.
Several factors serve to diminish the quality of the data developed from this report.
Sampling traverses were not used in collected size distribution data. The report was not
specific about the actual operating conditions at the time of the sampling. Additionally,
the authors noted changes in particle size with the progression of the drying cycle.
However, because AP-42 contains no data on salt drying, the data is still somewhat
valuable.
The following findings are made regarding the data developed from this study:
# The uncontrolled emission factor ( 0.0095 lbs/ton) should be included in a
section of AP-42 which covers salt drying.
19
-------
AP-42 should also include the controlled emission factor resulting from
the application of the control efficiency to the uncontrolled emission
factor.
The PM10 computer file should be appended to include the above
emission factor (0.0095 lbs/ton) and control efficiency (68.52 percent) for
SCC 3-05-021-02 with a wetted fiber scrubber, Device Code 055, as the
primary control device and no secondary control device.
20
-------
REFERENCES
Bradway, Robert M. and Reed W. Cass. Fractional Efficiency of a Utility Boiler Baghouse:
Nucla Generating Plant. EPA-600/2-75-0l3a (NTIS PB246641). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. August 1975.
Calvert, S., N.C. Jhaveri, and S. Yung. Fine Particle Scrubber Performance Tests. EPA-
650/2-74-093 (NTIS PB240325). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina. October 1974.
Calvert, Seymour, Harry F. Barbarika, and Charles F. Lake. National Dust Collector Model
850 Variahle Rod Module Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/2-76-282 (NTIS
PB263617). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. December 1976.
Calvert, Seymour, Harry Barbarika, and Gary M. Monahan. American Air Filter Kinpactor
10 x 56 Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/2-77-209b (NTIS PB276716). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. November
1977.
Cass, Reed W, and Robert M. Bradway, Fractional Efficiency of a Utility Boiler Baghouse:
Sunburv Steam-Electric Station. EPA-600/2-76-077a (NTIS PB253943). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. March 1976.
Cass, Reed W. and John E. Langley. Fractional Efficiency of an Electric Arc Furnace
Baghouse. EPA-600/7-77-G23 (NTIS PB266912), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. March 1977.
Cooper, Douglas W., Richard Wang, and Daniel P. Anderson. Evaluation of Eight Novel Fine
Particle Collection Devices. EFA-600/2-76-035 (NTIS PB251621). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. February 1976.
Drehmel, Dennis C. "Field Test of a Venturi Scrubber in Russia." in Second EPA Fine
Particle Scrubber Svmoosium. EPA-600/2-77-193 (NTIS PB273828). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. September 1977.
Ensor, D.S. Ceil cote Ionizing Wet Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/7-79-246 (NTIS PB80-
131170). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. November 1979.
21
-------
Gooch, J.P. and G.H. Marchant Jr. Particulate Collection Efficiency Measurements on an
Electrostatic Precipitator Installed on a Paper Mill Recovery Boiler. EPA-600/2-76-141
(NTIS PB255297). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. May 1976.
Gooch, J.P., G.H. Marchant Jr., and L.G. Felix. Particulate Collection Efficiency
' Measurements on an ESP Installed on a Coal-Fired Utility Boiler. EPA-60Q/2-77-Q11
(NTIS PB272125). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. January 1977.
Marchant, G.H., Jr. and J.P. Gooch. Performance and Economic Evaluation of a Hot-side
Electrostatic Precipitator. EPA-6GG/7-78-214 (NTIS PB 292648). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. November 1978.
McCain, Joseph D. CEA Variable-Throat Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/7-78-094
(NTIS PB285723). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. June 1978.
McCain, Joseph D. Evaluation of Aronetics Two-Phase Jet Scrubber. EPA-650/2-74-129
(NTIS PB239422). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. December 1974.
McCain, Joseph D. Evaluation of Rexnord Gravel Bed Filter. EPA-600/2-76-164 (NTIS
PB255095). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. June 1976.
Patterson, R.G., P. Riersgard, R. Parker, and S. Calvert. Effects of Conditioning Agents on
Emissions from Coal-fired Boilers. Test Report No. 1. EPA-6GQ/7-79-l04a (NTIS
PB299191). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. April 1979.
Thompson, George S., Jr. and Grady B. Nichols. "Experience With Electrostatic Precipitators
as Applied to the Primary Copper Smelting Reverberatory Furnace." In Proceedings:
Particulate Collection Problems Using ESP's in the Metallurgical Industry. C.E. Feazel,
Editor. EPA-600/2-77-208 (NTIS PB274017). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. October 1977.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. AIRS Facility Subsystem Source Classification Codes
and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Air Pollutants. EPA-450/4-90-003 (NTIS PB90-
207242). Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. March 1990.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors.
Volume I, 4th Edition, Supplement D. AP-42 (NTIS PB92-126945). Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. 1991.
22
-------
APPENDIX A - REPORTS YIELDING UNUSABLE DATA
This appendix consists of reports which did not render usable data. Table A gives an
overview of these reports and lists the reason(s) why they could not be used. The data
was considered unusable for several reasons:
a. the report described a laboratory or pilot test,
b. there are no data which can be broken into the three PM categories,
c. the quality of the data, including source operation parameters, are
questionable,
d. the device or source is not properly described, the SCC or Device Code
cannot be defined accurately.
After this table, more detailed reviews are provided for those test reports which
yielded data of reasonable quality but for which no specific SCC could be determined for
the source.
23
-------
Table A-1. Listed Reports Yielding Unusable Data
Report Number(s) Report or Section Name
Problem
EPA-6GG/2-76-141
NTIS PB255297
EPA-600/7-79-246
NTIS PB80-131170
Particulate Collection
Efficiency Measurements on
an Electrostatic Precipitator
Installed on a Paper Mill
Recovery Boiler
Ceilcote Ionizing Wet
Scrubber Evaluation
Device Code, nor specific
SCC was identifiable
A specific SCC was not
identifiable
EPA-600/7-79-104a
NTIS PB299191
Effects of Conditioning
Agents on Emissions from
Coal-Fired Boilers. Test
Report No. 1
A specific SCC was not
identifiable
EPA-600/2-77-011
NTIS PB272125
Particulate Collection
Efficiency Measurements on
an Electrostatic Precipitator
Installed on a Coal-Fired
Utility Boiler
A specific SCC was not
identifiable *
EPA-600/7-78-094
NTIS PB285723
CEA Variable-Throat Venturi
Scrubber Evaluation
A specific SCC was not
identifiable
E PA-600/7-78-214
NTIS PB292648
Performance and Economic
Evaluation of a Hot-side
Electrostatic Precipitator
A specific SCC was not
identifiable
EPA-600/9-80 039a
NTIS PB81-122202
Second Symposium on the
Transfer and Utilization of
Particulate Control
Technology, Vol. 1.
A specific SCC was not
identifiable; limited data
EPA-650/2-74-093
NTIS PB240325
(Chemico) Venturi Scrubber
on Coal-Fired Boiler
A specific SCC was not
identifiable; very limited
data
24
(continued)
-------
Table A-1 (continued)
Report Number(s) Report or Section Name
Problem
EPA-600/2-75-Q74
NTIS PB249562
Evaluation of a Particulate
Scrubber on a Coal-Fired
Utility Boiler
A specific 6CC was not
identifiable; data of
insufficient quality
EPA-650/2-74-093
NTIS PB240325
Mobile Bed on Coal-Fired
Boiler
A specific SCO was not
identifiable; insufficient
data
EPA-650/2-74-093
NTIS PB240325
Turbulent Contact Absorber
A specific SCC was not
identifiable; insufficient
data
EPA-600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
EPA-650/2-74-036
NTIS PB234146
EPA-600/7-82-044
NTIS PB82-249186
Braxton Sonic Aqglomerator
Evaluation
Augmentation of Fine Particle
Collection in the PxP
Scrubber
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
EPA-6QQ/7-80-077
NTIS PB80-187438
Charge Measurements of
Particles Exiting Electrostatic
Precipitators
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
EPA-600/7-80-034
NTIS PB80-190994
A Mathematical Model of
Electrostatic Precipitation
(Revision 2)
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
EPA-6QQ/7-81-148 ¦
NTIS PB82-1S6856
Flux Force/Condensation
Scrubber System For
Collection of Fine Particulate
Emissions from an Iron
Meltino Cupola
Extreme Variation in
Results Between Tests
EPA-600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
E PA- 650/2-75-024a
NTIS PB240397
Pentaoure Imoinger
Evaluation
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
25
(continued)
-------
0
Table A-1 (continued}
Report Number(s) Report or Section Name
Problem
EPA-600/2-77-208
NTIS PB274017
"Test of University of
Washington Electrostatic
Scrubber at an Electric Arc
Steel Furnace"
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
EPA-600/2-77-208 "The Application of Wet Not possible to develop
NTIS PB274017 Electrostatic Precipitators for size-specific information
the Control of Emissions from
Three Metallurgical
Processes"
EPA-600/2-77-208
NTIS PB274017
"A Precipitator Performance
Model: Application to the
Nonferrous Metals Industry"
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
EPA-600/2-77-208
NTIS PB274017
"Experience With
Electrostatic Precipitators as
Applied to the Primary
Copper Smelting
Reverberatory Furnace"
Absence of field data;
scant documentation of
sampling procedures;
unable to determine
specific SCC
EPA-600/2-77-208
NTIS PB274017
\
EPA-60 0/2-75-018
NTIS PB249297
EPA-600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
EPA-650/2-74-028
NTIS PB232436
EPA-650/2-74-102a
NTIS PB245184
"Studies of Particle
Reentrainment Resulting
From Electrode Rapping"
Control Device Evaluation
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
Not possible to develop
size-specific information
Study of Flux Force/
Condensation Scrubbing of
Fine Particles
Lone Star Steel Steam-Hydro
Air Cleaning System
Evaluation
Particle Sizing Techniques for
26
(continued)
-------
Table A-1 (continued)
Report Number(s) Report or Section Name
Problem
EPA-600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
EPA-650/2-74-083a
NTIS PB243365
Dvriactor Scrubber Evaluation
Laboratory data is
unsuitable for use in AP-
42; device was not tested
on a real source
EPA-600/2-76-142
NTIS PB257128
EPA-650/2-75-033
NTIS PB244173
Wet Electrostatic Precipitator
System Study & Particulate -
Collection Efficiency
Measurements on a Wet
Electrostatic Precipitator
Authors noted that data
was flawed
EPA-600/2-77-209a
NTIS PB274449
Gas-Atomized Sorav
Scrubber Evaluation
Not all of source emissions
were routed through the
control device; use of
precutters with cut
diameters smaller than 10
umA; inlet cascade
impactor samples were not
dry
EPA-600/2-78-062
NTIS PB281320
EPA-600/2-76-154b
NTIS PB258824
EPA-600/2-76-202
NTIS PB256689
A.P.S. Electro-Tube
Evaluation
Laboratory test using
artificial source
Laboratory .Evaluation of the Laboratory test using
Cleanable High Efficiency Air artificial source
Filter (CHEAP)
EPA-600/7-79-070
NTIS PB294716
Apitron Electrostatically
Augmented Fabric Filter
Evaluation
Laboratory test using
artificial source
EPA-600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
EPA-650/2-75-058a
NTIS PB256311
Johns-Manville CHEAF
Evaluation
Many sampling problems
listed; little or no
commercial application of
the device
27
(continued)
-------
Table A-1 (continued)
Report Number(s) Report or Section Name
Problem
E P A-650/2-74-093
NTIS PB240325
Valve Tray on Urea Prilling
Tower
Limited, inconsistent data
EPA-650/2-74-093
NTIS PB240325
Vaned Centrifugal Scrubber
on Potash Dryer
Authors noted that the inlet
size distribution was
altered by the use of a
cyclone precutter on the
cascade impactor
EPA-650/2-73-035
NTIS PB226292
Field Measurements of
Particle Size Distribution with
Inertial Sizing Devices
Authors note that the data
are not accurate
EPA-600/7-78-096
NTIS PB283941
Preliminary Design and Initial
Testing of a Mobile
Electrostatic Precipitator
Not possible to develop
size-specific data
EPA-650/2-75-059
NTIS PB246287
Mobile Fabric Filter System
Design and Field Test
Results
Size distribution data not
based on aerodynamic
diameter
EPA-600/7-78-178
NTIS PB290213
EPA-600/7-77-116
NTIS PB276520
Electrified Bed Evaluation
Century Industrial Products
FRP-1Q0 Wet Scrubber
Evaluation
Very inconsistent results
Liquid carry over into outlet
side cascade impactor;
substantial outlet opacity
EPA- 600/2-76-035
NTIS PB251621
EPA-650/2-74-129a
NTIS PB243626
Evaluation of Centrifield
Scrubber
Control device was applied
to duct from multiple SCCs
28
-------
Gooch, J.P.,Marchant Jr., G.H., Felix L.G. Particulate Collection Efficiency Measurements
nn an Klprrt.rostat.ic Precipitator Installed on a Paper Mill Recovery Boiler.
EPA-600/2-76-141 (NTIS PB 255297). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. May 1976,
SCC: 3-07-001-04/10 (recovery boiler on paper mill)
Device Code: 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
This document is not referenced in the OAQPS sources. The objective of the project
was to study the performance of an electrostatic precipitator installed on a recovery boiler
at a Kraft paper mill. The test series were conducted at a boiler firing rate of 210 gallons
of black liquor per minute. No gas flow data were presented, so no emission factors could
be calculated.
Three different impactors were used, The authors noted that during testing it
became apparent that data from the "Andersen" impactor were not accurate and had to be
discarded. Yet they did not omit these data from the document, thus giving ground for
inaccuracy. For sampling at the inlet, a Brink impactor was used. The highest stage of
this impactor could only capture particles with a D60 of 6,5 pmA. As the cumulative
concentration curves were still climbing, this cut off diameter is too low. This rules out
the possibility of calculating the efficiency for range 6 - 10 jimA and 0 - 10 pmA.
The authors did not mention which sets of data they used. As some numbers
appeared to be out of proportion, the following method was practiced. Test runs with
dissimilar gas parameters were excluded. This left two groups of inlet data, totalling 18
runs. From each group the highest and the lowest data per size category were omitted.
The outlet sampling yielded six runs with again some data being clearly out of range,
The same procedure was repeated, leaving data equivalent to 5 runs. Efficiencies were
calculated and are presented in Table A-2. The data from this report is not of sufficient
quality to be incorporated into AP-42. However, if the last two digits of the SCC can be
retrieved, the calculated efficiencies could be used for other purposes.
Table A-2. Size-Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-76-141
Particle size range
(pmA)
Control Efficiency
(%)
0 - 2.5
99.92
2,5-6
99.99
29
-------
Ensor, D.S. Ceilcote Ionizing Wet Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/7-79-246 (NTIS PB80-
131170), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina. November 1979.
SCC: 3-05-003-11/12 (refractory brick kiln; gas or oil fired).
Device Code: unknown type of scrubber.
There are no allusions to this report in any of the EPA reference works. The ionizing
wet scrubber (IWS) consists of a vertical, wetted plate ionizer followed by an irrigated bed
of plastic packing, which collects the ionized particulates. In this particular set up the
control equipment consisted of a quencher followed by two IWS units. The brick plant
produces refractory products, used to line ladles for molten steel. The clay shapes are
loaded on cars and pushed through a tunnel kiln.
The author discusses a "submicron fume". Almost all particles are in the smallest
size category, 0-2.5 pm. The average cumulative concentration is included in the table
to show this. AP-42 shows a more even particle size distribution( Tables 8.3-2, 8.3-3).
The uncontrolled emissions are presented in the table. Due to these discrepancies, we do
not recommend these emission factors be used for comparison with other data. As almost
all particles are very small, efficiency calculations for larger particle size ranges, though
included in the table, become trivial. An overall efficiency of 93 percent was presented by
the author. In case the Device Code and the SCC can be clarified, the data could be used
for AP-42.
Table A-3. Size-Specific Data Developed from EPA-600/7-79-246
Particle Size
Range
Average
Cumulative
irilet conc.
Emission
Factor,
AP-42 *
Emission
Factor
Efficiency
(pmA)
(mg/m3)
(lb/ton)
(lb/ton)
(%5
0 - 2.5
200.0
1.72
92
2.5 - 6
202.5
0.0214
(97)
6 - 10
204.5
0.0172
(98)
0 - 10
204.5
0.88
1.759
* total particulate for oil-fired kiln,
30
-------
Patterson, R.G., Effects of Conditioning- Agents on Emissions from Coal-fired Boilers. Test
Rp.nnrt. No. 1. EPA-600/7-79-lQ4a (NTIS PB299191). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. April 1979
SCC: 1-01-002 (coal-fired boiler)
Device Code: 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
No reference to this study was made in any of the sources. A field performance test
was conducted on an electrostatic precipitator (ESP) at a power plant which uses S03
injection for flue gas conditioning. The ESP has a design efficiency of 95 percent when
burning high sulfur coal. The plant, however uses coal with approximately 1 percent
sulfur, as a result of which the efficiency of the ESP drops, to below 80 percent. The tests
show that the efficiency can be increased to about 94 percent with the injection of 32
parts per million (ppm) S03. The improved collection efficiency is attributed to a decrease
in fly ash electrical resistivity. Table A-4 gives size specific control efficiencies.
Testing was performed on a boiler with a rated capacity of 44 megawatts (mw).
Although a flow rate of 217,000 actual cubic feet per minute (acfm) was given, no activity
rate was recorded, so emission factors could not be calculated. Twelve test runs were
conducted, six with conditioning and six without. Efficiencies are presented in the table.
The data prove that the efficiency of an ESP can greatly be enhanced with fly-ash
conditioning. We have to note that the quality of the data cannot be completely, assessed,
since certain testing conditions were not specified.
Table A-4. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-79-104a
Particle Size Control efficiency (%)
Range
(pimA) With S03 Without S03
0-2.5
87.9
58.9
2.5-6
95.2
94.6
88.6
6 - 10
80.6
0 -10
94.6
77.5
31
-------
Gooeh, J,P,,Marchant Jr., G.H., Felix L.G. Particulate Collection Efficiency Measurements
on an Electrostatic Precipitator installed on a Coal-Fired Utility Boiler. EPA-600/2-
77-011 (NT1S PB272125). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North. Carolina. January, 1977.
SCC: 1-01-002 (coal-fired boiler)
Device Code; 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
This document is not referenced in any of the sources. It describes a performance test
on an electrostatic precipitator installed on one of the units at the TVA, Colbert Steam
Plant. Objective was to establish the overall collection efficiency as well as to assess a
mathematical model. There is no description of the boiler, that indicates if it is a wet- or
dry bottom type. The electrostatic precipitator has two collectors, with three
electromagnetic fields each. It is equipped with a drop type hammer rapping system.
Particle size sampling was conducted with impactors. A blank impaetor was ran each
test day. Inlet and outlet data were not collected in pairs.The overall efficiency given by
the authors was 99.5 percent, dropping to 97.5 percent for particles of 1 p.m and smaller.
The data in Table A-5 are derived from averaging out 20 inlet runs and 14 outlet runs.
The report did not specify any operating data. This implies that emission factors could
not be calculated. As data were not collected simultaneously, they have to be regarded
with a certain reservation, although their quality appears to be sufficient for AP-42, The
SCC needs to be further defined.
Table A-5. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-77-011
Parlicle Size
Category
(pmA)
Control Efficiency
(%)
0-2.5
96.77
2.5-6
98.37
6 - 10
99.05
0 - 10
98.15
32
-------
McCain, Joseph D. CEA Variable-Throat Venturi Scrubber Evaluation. EPA-600/7-78-094
(NTIS PB285723). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. June 1978.
SCC: 1-01-002 (coal-fired boiler)
Device Code; 053 (venturi scrubber)
This document is not referenced in the OAQPS data sources with regard to coal-fired
boilers. The facility burned pulverized coal. The efficiency in removing SOs as well as
particulates of the venturi-type scrubber with variable throat size, was studied and
reported in this document. No information was provided on coal throughput, so emission
factors could not be obtained.
The report included a graph of average inlet cumulative mass concentration as a
function of particle size and a similar graph for the average outlet data. The data points
oh these two graphs were joined with a smooth curve to derive control efficiencies for
specific particle size ranges. The concentrations obtained from these graphs were not
adjusted to standard temperature and pressure. However, tabular data elsewhere in the
report gave total inlet and outlet particulate concentrations based on both actual sample
volume and standardized volume. The ratio of these numbers was used to adjust the size-
specific concentrations, to standard conditions. The outcome of these adjustments is
shown in Table A-6.
Table A-6. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-78-094, Compared to AP-42
Particle Size Efficiency Efficiency
Range AP-42*
(pmA) (%) (%)
0 - 2.5 91.9 50
2.5-6 100 92.7
6 - 10 100 93.3
0 - 10 97.2 81.7
Unspecified scrubber
Table 1.1-3 of AP-42 gives an uncontrolled and controlled emission factor for an
unspecified scrubber. These were used to calculate the efficiencies which are included in
the table for comparison. We might conclude from these data that the described venturi
scrubber is more efficient than an ordinary scrubber, especially for the 0 - 2.5 pm particle
size range. We rate the quality of these data as moderate, though not suited for AP-42.
33
-------
Marchant, G.H., Jr., and J.P. Gooch. Performance and Economic Evaluation of a Hot-side
Electrostatic Precipitator, EPA-600/7-78-214 (NTIS PB292648). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. November 1978.
SCC: 1-01-002 (coal fired boiler)
Device Code: 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
This document is not referenced in the OAQPS data sources. The effectiveness of an
Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) in controlling particulates from a coal-fired steam plant
was analyzed and reported. The source was one of three "super-critical, combined
circulation, radiant, reheat steam generators" at a power generation station having "a
center water wall dividing the, furnace into two halves." The furnace burned pulverized,
tangentially blown coal. We do not know if this furnace can be classified as a wet- or dry-
bottom boiler. Uncontrolled emission factors were not reported, nor could they be
computed, due to lack of operating data.
An overall control efficiency (for particles < 100 p.mA) was calculated at 98.56 percent;
slightly less than the 99.2 percent control efficiency presented in AP-42, Section 1.1,
"Bituminous and Subbituminous Coal Combustion." Control efficiency as well as average
inlet and outlet cumulative mass as a function of particle size, was presented graphically
as a function of particle diameter. From these graphs it was possible to derive control
efficiencies for the particle size categories of interest. These efficiencies are shown in
Table A-7. They are consonant with the efficiencies indicated in AP-42, Section 1.1. As
the report covers a large number of tests and the tests were executed according to the
right methods, we rate the quality of the data as being good.
Table A-7. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/7-78-214, Compared to AP-42
Particle Size
Range
(MmA)
Efficiency
<%)
Efficiency *
AP-42
(%)
0-2.5
92.6
96.7 (98.5)
96.4 (98.3)
98.3 (97.9)
97.8 (98.3)
2.5-6
99.4
6 - 10
99.4
0 - 10
98.7
* wet bottom in parenthesis
34
-------
Gooch, J.P., R.E, Bickelhau.pt, and L.E. Sparks. "Fly Ash Conditioning by Co-precipitation
with Sodium Carbonate," In; Second Symposium, on the Transfer and Utilization of
Particulate Control Technology. Vol. I. F.P. Venditti, J.A. Armstrong, and M.
Durham, compilers. EPA-600/9-80-039a CNTIS PB81-122202). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, NC. September 1980.
SCC: 1-01-002 (coal-fired boiler)
Device Code: 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
This study is not referenced. Tests were conducted at an unspecified pulverized coal
fired utility boiler to determine the effectiveness of flue gas conditioning on Electrostatic
Precipitator (ESP) performance. Sodium carbonate and sulfur trioxide were the two
conditioning agents tested. Impactor data was presented only in graphic form; the inlet
cumulative mass distribution and control efficiency were both shown as functions of
particle diameter. These two graphs were used to develop control efficiencies for the four
particle size categories shown in Table A-8. As no raw data were present, we have to rate
the quality of the efficiency data as moderate to low.
The report included data on inlet gas flow rate, the average coal consumption rate
'and information on the ash content. This information was generally not collected at the
same time as the size distribution data, so the calculated emission factors should only be
considered as estimates. The presented emission factors are very high relative to those
shown in AP-42, Section 1.1, "Bituminous and Subbituminous Coal Combustion." To
facilitate comparison the approximate coal ash content has been divided out of the
calculated emission factors.
Table A-8. Size-Specitic Data Developed trom EPA-60Q/9-80-Q39a
Particle Size
Range
Emission Factor*
(lbs/ton)
Control Efficiency
(%)
(ymA)
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Base
Line
NaCQ3
Added
so3
Added
0-2.5
11.77
10.03
11.46
73.5
87.6
96.2
2.5 ¦ 6
11.77
10.03
11.46
92.4
98.2
98.8
6 - 10
6.12
5.22
5.96
90.7
98.4
98.7
0- 10
29.67
25.28
28.89
84.6
94.0;
97.8
Ash content,
(%)
9.3
8.3
9.3
35
-------
Thompson, George S., Jr. and Grady B. Nichols. "Experience With Electrostatic
Precipitators as Applied to the Primary Copper Smelting Reverberatory Furnace." In
Proceedings: Particulate Collection Problems Using ESP's in the Metallurgical
Industry. C.E. Feazel, Editor. EPA-600/2-77-208 (NTIS PB274017). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
October 1977.
SCC: 3-03-005-03 or 07 (copper smelter reverberatory furnace)
Device Code: 010 (electrostatic precipitator)
This paper is not referenced in the OAQPS data sources. Tests were conducted at two
plants on reverberatory copper smelting furnaces. Several instruments were used to
measure the particle size distribution and mass concentration of ESP inlet and outlet gas
streams. Field data was not included in the report. Discussion of the sampling methods
was limited. From the information that was provided, the data quality appears to be
good. The paper included, for each plant, a graph of average inlet and outlet cumulative
mass loading as a function of particle diameter. Size-specific efficiency data could not be
derived for one of the plants, due to the use of logarithmic scales and very few interval
demarcations. Efficiencies for the other plant are shown in Table A-9. Emission factors
could not be calculated due to the lack of production data.
Tabie A-9. Size Specific Efficiencies Developed from EPA-600/2-77-208, Compared to AP-42
Particle Size Average Efficiency
(%)
Range
(pmA)
Thompson, et al. AP-42
0 - 2.5 93,62 97.36
2.5- 6 91.50 rid
Total Particulate 96.6 99
The efficiency data developed from this study is not usable in any of the OAQPS data
sources. Due to the absence of field data and scant documentation of sampling
procedures, the efficiencies should not incorporated into AP-42. A specific SCC must be
known in order to append data to the PMl0 computer file.
36
i
------- |