AP42 Section: 8.4

Background Chapter: 4

Reference Number:

Title:

7

Emission Test Report Chevron Chemical Richmond, California,

EPNEMB Report 79-NHF-12, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,

March 1979.

*' .1,. United States Oiilcr o! Air Qual i iv EMB Peoorr 79-NHi~l2 ~~ ~ ~ . .. .~

Envt ronmeru l Prorecrion P h n n ~ n g an6 Srandards M a r c h 1'979 Agencv Raseaic'l Triangle Park i i C 2771 i

il I SET #2632-01-0179

FINAL REPORT

PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM AN

AMMONIUM SULFATE PLANT

CONTROLLED B Y A VENTURI SCRUBBER

EPA C o n t r a c t No. 68-02-2813 Work Assignment No. 26

Prepared f o r :

Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency Emiss ion Measurement Branch

ESED M a i l Drop ;13 Research ' T r i a n g l e Park , N.C. 27711

May 29, 1979

SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, I N C 2600 Cajon Bou leva rd

San Berna rd ino , C a l i f o r n i a 92411

Scott Environmental T e c h w y IK.

SET # 2 6 3 2 - 0 1 - 0 1 7 9 F INAL REPORT

'il

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Number

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1-1 2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ............... .... ...................... 2 - 1 3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS.. .................................... 3-1

4 . 0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION.. ......... ............................. 4 - 1

5.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ......................... 5 - 1

APPENDIX A - F I E L D DATA SHEETS

Scott E n v i r o n m e n t a l Techn-y Inc

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

$6;

1.0 INTRODUCTION

T e s t i n g t o de te rm ine p a r t i c u l a t e emiss ions f rom an ammonium s u l f a t e p l a n t was conducted by S c o t t Env i ronmenta l Technology, I n c . f o r t h e

U.S. Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency under C o n t r a c t No. 68-02-2813, Work

Assignment No. 26. a t t h e Chevron Chemical Company ammonium s u l f a t e p l a n t l o c a t e d i n Richmond, Cal i f o r n i a.

Three t e s t s were conducted on December 12 and 13, 1978

P a r t i c u l a t e t e s t s were conducted a t t h e i n l e t and o u t l e t o f a

v e n t u r i sc rubber c o n t r o l l i n g emiss ions i n t h e exhaust gases f r o m an ammonium

s u l f a t e d r i e r u s i n g EPA Method #5. d i s t r i b u t i o n was a l s o performed a t t h e i n l e t t o t h e sc rubber u s i n g an Andersen

2000 Cascade Impactor .

reco rded d u r i n g each t e s t by a smoke r e a d e r .

c r y s t a l s were c o l l e c t e d a t t h e i n l e t and o u t l e t o f t h e d r i e r t o de termine

m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t . A lso , samples o f t h e sc rubber l i q u o r were c o l l e c t e d down-

stream f rom t h e scrubber .

The t e s t arrangements were made t h r o u g h W i l l i a m M o r i a r t y , Manager

One t e s t t o de termine p a r t i c l e s i z e

O p a c i t y o f t h e gas e x i t i n g f r o m t h e sc rubber was

Samples o f t h e ammonium s u l f a t e

o f Opera t ions , Manu fac tu r ing , w i t h Chevron Chemical Company. Dennis Holzschuh

o f t h e EPA was p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e t e s t s as was Marv in Drabk in o f M i t r e

Corpo ra t i on who mon i to red t h e p l a n t p rocess .

Scott Environmental Techno%y IN

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

2.0 SUMNARY OF RESULTS The p a r t i c u l a t e concentrat ion a t the o u t l e t o f the scrubber ranqed

from 0.0516 t o 0.122 grains/scf and averaged 0.084 grains/scf for t h e three runs. p a r t i c u l a t e mass flow r a t e of 3 .0 lbs/hour . averaged 43.8 grains/scf w i t h an average gas flow r a t e of 3803 dscfm and p a r t i c u l a t e mass flow r a t e of 1424 lbs/hour. the scrubber was 99.9% f o r Test R u n No. 2. suinmarized i n Table 2 . 1 .

The average gas flow r a t e was 4038 dscfm resulting i n an average I n l e t p a r t i c u l a t e concentrat ions

The co l l ec t ion e f f i c i ency of Complete Method #5 r e s u l t s a r e

The results of t h e p a r t i c u l a t e s ize d i s t r i b u t i o n sampie a r e shown

The average moisture content of the ammonium s u l f a t e c r y s t a l s was i n t abular and graphical form i n Table 2.2 and Figure 2 . 1 , respec t ive ly .

0.54% a t the d r i e r i n l e t and 0.19% a t t h e d r i e r o u t l e t . a re shown i n Table 2.3.

Complete results

The opaci ty a t the o u t l e t averaged 0% d u r i n g each t e s t .

The f ie ld data sheets a r e included i n Appendix A.

Results o f the opaci ty readings a r e summarized i n Tables 2 .4 t h r o u g h 2.7.

@ Scotr Environmental Tech-y IK.

Avg. Stack Temperature: T, (OR)

Avg.. Meter Temperature: T, (OR)

Volume of Liquid and Silica'Gel Collected: Vlc , (ml. )

Gas Sample Volume @ Std. Cond.: Vm(Std) ( f t 3 ) = 17.64 VmY (Pbar+AH/13.6).

Tin . .

Volume of Water vapor: Vw ( s td ) ( f t ) - 0.04707 Vlc

Moisture Content: BWs

Mlecular Weight of Stack Gas (dry) : Md = 0.44 (% C02) + 0.32 ( X 02) t

3 -

=-* . Ym S t d t Yw S t d

0.28 (% N2+% CO)

638 636 641 ' . 574 57 1 574

550 536 540 537 547 546

73 56 16 166 151 185

43.242 39.904 11.570 98.252 92.599 104.241

3.44 '2 .64 0.753 7:81 '7.11 8.71.

~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~

0.074 0.062 0.061 0.074 0.071 0.077

28.90 28.90 28.90 28.82 28.86 28.86

SET 42632-01-0179 2-3 FINAL REPORT TABLE 2.1, Page 2

.-

Q (acfh/min) = 60 vs A

Weight o f Particulate Collected: mn (mg.)

Concentration o f Particulate rj Std.Cond.(dry): C, (gr/scf) = 0.01542 m,/V, (std) . . 45.48 25.0Z3 42.05 0.0789 0.0516 0.122 Es (g/dscrn) = 0.03529 m,/Vm (std)l n04.1 57.27 96.24 0.181 0.118 0.2797

Mass Flow Rate o f Particulate: Q ( W h r ) = 0.008571 Cs Q,,

Isokinetic Rate:

502.9 310.1 825.1 31554.2

1'7541'4 64757.4

'1408 701.73 1439 2 . 7 1.7 4.5

I ( % I = 13.61 Ts Vm (std)/P v A @ ( I - g ) 97.6 99.4 94.1 9G.5 95.7 96.9 s s n ws -

Control Efficiency, % L--- 99.9 , 99.43

'Average during sampling.

*Average in.entire duct.

Not included i n average due t o leak i n sample train 5

@ Scott Environmental kh-y Inc

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

2-4

TABLE 2 . 2

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRI8UTION

Date: December 13. 1978 P, ~ f i n . Ha.) 30.35 Location : Chevron Sampling Location: I n l e t Traverse P o i n t No. Sampled: 19

Sample Flow Rate ( a t stack condi t ions) : 0 .50 cfm

” . Dar . Stack Temp ( O F ) 178

Sample Volume ( c f ) 0.937 Moisture (% H20) 6 . 1 Meter Temp ( O F ) 76 Flow S e t t i n g , A H

Nozzle Diameter ( i n . } 0.250

Sample Time ( M i n ) 2

( i n . H20) 0.67

P l a t e No.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Net W t .

157.3

0

789.5 1271.6 413.8

71.2 13.2 0 .5 0.0

Cumulative % %

5.8 29.1 46.8 15 .2

2.6 0.5 0.0 0.0

100.0 94.2 65.1 18.3 3 .1 0.5 0.0 0 . 0

0.3. 0.0 0.0 Backup

TOTAL 2717.4

Fi 1 ter

ECD (Microns)

14.73 and larger 9.28 6.15 4.26 2.71 1.40 0.85 0.58

<O. 58

Scott Environmental T e c h w y IIX

.

,

1

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

- Date Time 12-12-78 1442

12-12-78 1440

12-12-78 1712

12-12-78 1716

12-13-78 1119

12-13-78. 1117

TABLE 2.3

AMMONIUM SULFATE CRYSTAL MOISTURE ANALYSIS

Test Sample Run No. Location

1 Inlet 1 Outlet

2 In1 et 2 Outlet

3 In1 e t 3 Outlet

Net Wt. Net Wt. Wet, Gms. Dry, Gms.

361 .O 358.8

344.3 343.7

372.1 370.2

386.6 385.6

409.1 407.0

392.3 391.8

Average a t d r i e r i n l e t

Mo i s t ure %

0.61

0.17

0 -51

0.26

0.51

0.13

- 0.54 Average a t d r i e r o u t l e t - 0.19

Scott Environmental T e c h w y IIX.

8.

SET #2632-01-0179 2-7 FINAL REPORT

TABLE 2.4 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF OPACITY READINGS

Location: Scrubber Outlet Stack Height: 20 f e e t Test R u n No.: 1 Cistance t o Stack: 150 f e e t

Wind Direct ion: Socth Speed: 0-20 MPti Date: 12-12-78

Color of Plume: White Sky Description: Gray Clouds - 75% Note: Readings every 30 seconds; t h e r e f o r e , average opaci ty = sum/l2

Set Nurnber

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

-. I ime

S t a r t . ' E n d

1230 1236 1236 1242 1247 1253 1253 1259 1259 1305 1304 1311 1311 1317 1317 1323 1323 1329 1329 1335 1335 1341 1341 1347 1347 1353 1353 1359 1359 1405 1405 1411 1411 1417 1417 1423 1423 1429

OVERALL AVERAGE: 0

Opacity Sum Averag 5 35 15 15 30 15 10 20 25 10 20 15 35 35 0 15 15 10 5

0

5 0

0

0

0 0 0

0

0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0

Time Opacity S e t 'Sum ' Averaae Number S t a r t End ' '

7 Scott Environmental k h n d q y lrc Q

2-8 SET #2632:01-0179 FINAL REPORT

TABLE 2.5 SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF OPACITY READINGS

Location: Scrubber Outlet Test Run No.: 2

Color of Plume: white Readings taken every 30 sec

S e t TiEe Opacity Number S t a r t ' E n d Sum Averagc

Date: 12-12-78

Note:

1 1540 1546 2 1546 1552 3 1552 1558 4 1558 1604 5 1604 1610

' 6 ' 1610 1616 7 1616 1622 8 1622 1628 9 1628 1634 10 1634 1640

. 11 1640 1646 12 1646 1652 13 1652 1658 14 1658 1704 15 1704 1710

OVERALL AVERAGE: 0

. . .

15 0 10 0 5 0

15 0 10 0 10 0 20 0 15 0

10 0 10 0 5 0 5 0

20 0 5 0 5 . 0

Stack Height: 20 f e e t Distance t o Stack: 150 f e e t Mind Direction: South Speed: 10-20 MPH ~

Sky Description: Gray clouds - 75% Is; therefore , average opacity = sum/l2.

Set Time Opacity Number S t a r t End Sum Averaoe

1

SET X2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

2-9

TABLE 2 .6 'SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF OPACITY READINGS

Location: Scrubber Outlet Test Run No.: 3

Color of Plume: White

Note: Readings taken every 30 seco Set T i me opacityg 1 Number S t a r t :End Sum Avera e

Date: 12-13-78

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10

11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20

0848 0854 0854 0900 0900 0906 0906 0912 0912 0918 0918 0924 0924 0930 0930 0936 0936 0942 0942 0948

0948 0954 0954 1000 1000 1006 1006 1012 1012 1018 1018 1024 1024 1030 1030 1036 1036 1042 1042 1048

5 0

5 5 0 0

5 0

5 0 0 5 0

10 5 0

15 0 5 0

0 0 0

0 0

0 0

0

0 0

0

0 0 0

0 0

0

0 0 .

0

Stack Height: 20 f e e t Distance t o Stack: 150 f e e t

blind Direction: South Speed: 0-10 NPH

Sky Description: White Clouds - 50% Is; t h e r e f o r e , averaqe opaci ty = sum/l2.

S e t Time Opacity Nuniber S ta r t End Sum Averaae

21 1048 1054 0 0 22 1054 1100 5 0 23 1100 1106 0 0 24 1106 1112 0 0 25 1155 1201 0 0 26 1201 1207 5 0

27 1207 1213 5 0 28 1213 1219 0 0

29 1219 1225 ' 5 0

OVERALL AVERAGE: 0

a Scotr Environmental T e c h w y Inc

L

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

2-10

TABLE 2.7 SUMMARY O F RESULTS OF OPACITY READINGS

Location: Scrubber Outlet Test Run No.: 4

Color of Plume: White Note: Readings taken every 30 secoi

Set Time Opacity Number S t a r t End Sum Averaq 1 1437 1443 20 0 2 1443 1449 20 0 3 1449 1455 10 0 4 1455 1501 15 0

Date: 12-13-78

OVERALL AVERAGE: 0

Stack Height: 20 f e e t Distance t o Stack: 150 f e e t Wind Direction: South Sky Description: Clear

; therefore , average opaci ty = sum/l2. Set T i me Opacity Number S t a r t End Sum Averaoe

Speed: 0-15 MPH

rn I@ j Scotr Environmental T e c h w y ix

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

3.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS A 40 inch s tack extension was i n s t a l l e d on the o u t l e t of t h e dropout

chamber i n order t o provide t h e necessary length of s t r a i g h t duct . Due t o the cyclonic flow leaving the dropout chamber, i t was a l s o necessary t o i n s t a l l a flow s t r a igh tene r i n t h e duct.

sample f i l t e r . sample t r a i n due t o clogging of the nozzle and probe by the p a r t i c u l a t e . Clogging of the nozzle and probe was a problem during each t e s t . During Runs No. 2 and 3, sampling was in te r rupted several times t o clean the nozzle and probe. detected i n the i n l e t sample t r a i n i n a f i t t i n g i n an umbilical l i n e . Therefore, an addi t ional t e s t run (Number 4 ) was made a t t h e i n l e t . Sampling was hal ted d u r i n g Run No. 4 a f t e r t h e sampling t raverse was completed f o r t h e center sample por t due t o t h e la rge amount of p a r t i c u l a t e co l lec ted . ve loc i ty t raverse only was performed on the remaining sample points .

P a r t i c l e s i z e sampling was conducted f o r only two minutes. due t o the h i g h concentration of l a r g e p a r t i c l e s i n t h e gas stream, the f i r s t few c o l l e c t i n g p l a t e s were overloaded w i t h p a r t i c u l a t e . Using a cyclone pre- separa tor , perhaps i n an out-of-stack configurat ion, may have improved the sampling. were sealed i n individual containers t o avoid t h e loss of any sample. P a r t i c u l a t e co l lec ted i n the sample nozzle and sample head was included a s par t of P la te No. 1.

Run No. 1 a t the scrubber in le t was aborted due t o a ruptured The rupture was apparently caused by pressure surges in the

A t the completion of sampling d u r i n g Run No. 3 , a leak was

A

However,

Immediately a f t e r the sampling was completed, t h e co l lec t ion p l a t e s

Scott Environmental T e c h m y IN.

,., , . ,

( . I #

i.

4.0 PRdCESS DESCRIPTION AEiD OPERATION

The Chevron Chemical p lan t i s designed ' t o produce 220 TPI) O F aii;iiior!ium

s u l f a t c (AS) frorii ainnionia and sulfur- ic ac id . All o f the AS produced i s

s c l d f o r use as f e r t i l i z e r . The plant opera tes continuously 24 hours a

day f o r periods. up t o 5 t o 6 weeks between s h o r t periods o f i;iain.tenaiice.

Varying AS market condi t ions during t h e year a l s o a f f e c t the length of

p lan t sh::t-down periods.

A. Process Descr ipt ion

Figure 4.1 shows a s impl i f ied diagram of t h e AS process and t h i .

sampling loca t ions . S u l f u r i c acid (98 percent ) and anhydrous aniinoii'iii a re

combiwd i n a r e a c t o r o r "sa tura tor . " The heat of r eac t ion provides t h e

energy fs evaporat ion. As the concentrat ion increases , t h e AS so lu t ion

. . .

. . - . . I. . ., . bzcoiiles sa tura ted .

T h e c r y s t a l s l u r r y i s fed t o a c w t r i f u g e , which separa ' ies most o f the

l i q u i d ir,m t h 2 c r y s t a l s .

,AS c r y s t a l s then form and a r e allowed t o gro'w i n s i z e .

The wet c r y s t a l s a r e then passed tnrough a

g a s - f i r d ro t a ry drum d r y e r , screened, and conveyed t o a s to rage ruare-

house. fi ven-iuri scrubber w i t h a l iquid- to-gas r a t i o of 2G ga1/1000 acf

and a przssure drop of 13 inches of water i s used t o con.tro1 d rye r

emissisns .

B . Process Operation

The purpose of t h e t e s t program \:vas t o measure emission l e v e l s .froin

t h e ventur i scrubber control 1 i n g dryer emissions. Process conditiorls were

c a r e f u l l y observed, and t e s t i n g was performed ciily during periods $;:hen the

p l an t production r a t e was normal. D u r i n g t h e t es t s , p e r t i n e n t operat ing .

.

, :

...

condi t ions were monitored and recorded on process data shee ts . These

shee t s a r e included i n Appmdix 8.

A s shown by Table 1 of Appendix B , t h e p lan t operated a t a production

r a t e very near the design capac i ty o f 220 TPD during tlie eriiission tests.

No cal i b r s t e d weigh b e l t s were used.

was ca;c!i!ated f r o 3 b o t h the s u l f u r i c ac id and ammonia f l o w r a t e s .

According t o p lan t personnel, the s u l f u r i c acid f1ow r a t e i s a more

accura te basis f o r computing the production r a t e than t h e amnionia flow

rate . The accuracy of t h e AS production r a t e based on acid floi.: i s

es t imated t o be wi th in - + 5 percent .

The ammoniuin s u l f a t e production r a t e

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The -follo:i ing parameters were monitored d u r i n g t h e t e s t s t o veri.Fy

... -. . .... t h a t t h e d r y s r was opera t ing normally:

1. S u l f u r i c acid f l o w r a t e . .

2. P m m n i a flo~w r a t e

3.

4. Dryer opera t ing temperatures

5. Cent r i fuge zinperage

6. C r y s t a l l i z e r l i quor l e v e l , temperature, vacuum

7. Percent f r e e acid i n c r y s t a l l i z e r e l u t r i a t i o n l e g

8. AS s l u r r y surge tank level

9. AS s p e c i f i c g rav i ty of s l u r r y

Proc;ss monitoring began approximately 1 hour before t h e s t a r t o f

AS p r o d u c t weigh b e l t reading (unca l ibra ted)

eniission TestNumber 1 on t h e morning o f December 1 2 , 1978. Actual

emission t e s t i n g began a t 12:45 p.m. f o r t h e scrubber i n l e t and 1:40 p.m.

.

. .

.

For t h e scrubber o u t l e t .

(120 minutes n e t ) ; t h e o u t l e t t e s t ended a.t 4 : l O p.m. (120 ininutzs n e t ) .

The process operat ion appeared t o opera te a t steady s t a t e without

i n t e r r u p t i o n during t h i s period.

The scrubber i n l e t t e s t terminated a t 3:tiO p.ni.

Ronitoring f o r Test ?lumber 2 began a t 3:30 p.m. ( sc rubber i n l e t ) arid

4:54 p.m. ( scrubber o u t l e t ) .

t e rn inz ted a t 5:15 p.n., arid the o u t l e t t e s t ended a t 7:18 p.m.

In t h i s r u n , t he scrubber in1e.t t e s t

Approximately half-way . t h r o u g h t h e second t e s t , i t became apparent

from t h e ,wig!- b e l t readings t h a t t h e AS production r a t e h a d dropped of f

s ignif ican: : iy (even though s u l f u r i c acid and mnonia flows remained

constant! . According t o p l a n t personnel, t h e flow o i oxa l i c acid ( a -_.. .: c r y s t z l q w t h pronoter) t o t he c r y s t a l l i z e r had been stopped, a n d t h e . .

,. . p e r c e n t a y o f f i n e s in the AS s l u r r y leaving t h i s un i t had increased. In '

orde r t o d2crease t h 2 f i n e s percentage in t h e product, t he hold-up t. i l i ie in

t h e c r y s t a l l i z e r was increased by reducing t h e AS s l u r r y flow t o t h e

cen t r i fuge .

AS pzssing t h r o u g h t h e dryer during a b r i e f port ion o f t h e t e s t period.

This d r o p i n AS drye r t h r o u g h p u t i s n o t believed t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y

a f f ec t ed t h e tes . t r e s u l t s .

This r e su l t ed i n about a 10 t n 15 percent d r o p i n the r a t e of

Test Number 3 began a t 9 : 0 0 a.m. ( sc rubber o u t l e t ) and ended a t

11:15 2.n. ( sc rubber o u t l e t ) on December 13 , 1978. The scrubber i n l e t

port ion o f t h e t e s t was aborted due t o problems of cont inual AS blockage

i n the equipment. I t was decided t h a t t h e 2 scrubber i n l e t t e s t s

completed on December 12 were adequate. A p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n t e s t

.. .

I.,

,.#

was . _ . a t the

!

scrubber inlet , 1io:ever. The AS

norm1 c l u r i n y the t e s t period a l t h o u g h

h a d n o t completely returned t o nornul.

i

producti o i l

the AS crystal s ize

ra te Vi?! S

distribution

.

SET #2632-01-0179 FINAL REPORT

c 0

+I m V * o

aJ-l

.r

I I I I I

'. I 1

. . I 1 I I

I. . 1 I .

: I. . ' .I. , ' I

I .

SET $2632-01-0179 FINAL R E P O R T

5 .0 SAMPLING AN0 ANALYTICAL P R O C E D U R E S Gas sampling f o r t o t a l particlulate content. was ccnducted a t the

i n l e t and o u t l e t o f t h e scrubber i n accordance with EPA Reference Method $5. T h i s method involves t n e i s o k i n e t i c ex t r ac t ion of a sample fi-am the gas stream and co l lec t ion of t h e p a r t i c u l a t e on a heated out-of-stack f i l t e r . meter iiieasures the volurne of t h e gas sample. measured during the sampling with a P i t o t tube and incl ined manometer. stack gas temperature i s measured w i t h a chromel-alumel thermocouple. The quant i ty of p a r t i c u l a t e co l lec ted i s determined gravirnetrically with r e s u l t s reported as grains o f p a r t i c u l a t e per standard cubic foot of gas and grams per cubic meter.

The sample f o r p a r t i c l e s ize d i s t r i b u t i o n was co l lec ted using an Andersen 2000 In-Stack Cascade Impactor. impaction on a s e r i e s of p l a t e s . so t h a t the veloci ty of the p a r t i c l e s i s increased from p l a t e t o p l a t e and smaller and smaller p a r t i c l e s ? r e impacted. on each p l a t e i s determined gravimet r ica l ly . i s based on t h e equivalent aerodynamic s i z e of the p a r t i c l e s baced on cpherical p a r t i c l e s of 1 gram/cc dens i ty .

Opacity readings of the scrubber o u t l e t gases were made i n accordance w i t h EPA Method #9. The moisture content of t h e ammonium s u l f a t e samples from the d r i e r i n l e t and o u t l e t was de t emined .by weighing the samples before and a f t e r drying.

A dry gas The gas veloci.ty i n the duct i s

?he

The p a r t i c l e s a re co l l ec t ed b i The p l a t e s have increasingly smaller holes

The p a r t i c u l a t e w i g h t co l lec ted The p a r t i c l e . s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n

I

Scott Environmental T e c h n o b y I K .

SET #2632-01-0179 F I N A L REPORT

A P P E N D I X A

F I E L D DATA S H E E T S

Scott Environmental T e c h w y IK

m I - vl + 2 U Z N u o W I-

C L N + o u v

-

I !

e i !

!

!

I

1 !

i I

I j

i

i I

i I !

I i

i

i I

i I

i !

1, .! , i

j

j

I

!

1

! I 6

I I !

i

- i

I - I

.. . . 5 . .

6 . . ;.. . . . . . 7 ; , ;. .. ... . .

I .. 8 , . , . . -

I I

34 3s

36

DIAGFS:' O i S T A C K , POQTS, & TRA1!E?.SF P O I H T S ( i i i d i c z t c d i x i o r i r f l c \ r )

I N S I D E D I b l E N S I O N S OF SAJIPI-E PLANE // /<.T ('?;,.w:),/ /1,(..

. / + I ,STACK GAUGE P R E S S U R E i n . H20 /, 27

NEAREST UPSTREAI.1 DISTUREANCE NEAREST DOldNSTREhl DISTURBANCE - P R O C E S S CONTROL EQUIPMENT D E S C R I P T I O N

40 1 I I I I 41 I 42 I I I I I ~1 4 3 I 4 4

Ifl SCOTT ENVIRONMEKTAL TECHbIOLOGY. INC.

1

n.= n.!

c; - 1 P '

C E : m c

E E

x U

2 -1 a

L!3 zl-

I- W z

l- W z

0 E

c v-

i&

* m

U I- U n

i * i

!

i ,

I I I. I

i

I I I L

! 1. I / i I

i j.

I ! ! I

i 1, I !

1: i i !

i I

! 4

i !

I

I I

i !

I I !

!TACK

bp,l. ih.HiO IT$!, 'i - -- -

2 1

3 1 I I I I i

12

13

14

15

16 17

18

19 -

20 I I I I I 21

24 I 25 26 27

30 31

32

34 I 3s I

' 36

40 < (1 1

DIAGRP.': OF ST.\CK, - _ _ P C R T S , !, TPJV:kSE- POI::TS (icaicarc direction G f f l w j

I N S I D E DII4ENSIOPiS OF S N W L E P L A N 1

S T A C K W U G E P R E S S U R E i n . H20

N E A R E S T UPSTREAM D!STURBANCE N E A R E S T DOI,!NSTREAFl D I S T U R B A N C E __

P R O C E S S 6. CONTROL EQUIPI-IENT D E S C R I P T I O N

SCOll ENVI%ONMEblTAL TECHNOLOGY. INC.

E

- - - A# Q?J<

m c

--K

E m E

C E E E

W d x z * O w - m

5 W a c 0-n A <

w -1 a $

.*i ' l! '

'D

, . . t . .. .< , .. I . , . :,,\ 4

' 0

; - d

-4-

I

' \

-i- d

* j

i i

i j ! i

t

3.

i j r? j ~

I !

j

I I ! !

i

i I

i !

j

! ,

j ! I

... !

I I

!

I i I

1

!

i i I 1

I ! 1-

! I

I i

i

i I

I i

j

j i I I I , i I

I I I

!

1 I

!

i

;

;

1 1 1 ' I I I I 4 1 I I I I I

7 1 I I I I i 8 1 I I i I I 9 1 I I I I I 10 I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I 12 I I I I I I

14

15 16

1 7 I I I I I I 18 I I I I I I 19 I I I I I 20

21 I I I I - 22

21

2 4

25

2 6

I N S I D E D I f I E N S I O N S OF S A N L E PLANE 2 7 I I I I I - 1

S T A C K GAUGE P R E S S U R E i n . H10 -i- J , i3

N E A R E S T UPSTREAI.1 D I S T U R B A N C E N E A R E S T DOkJiiSTREW D I S T U R B A N C E -

31 I I I I I I 32 I I I I I I 33 I I I I i I 34 I I I I I I P R O C E S S & CONTROL EQUIPMEEIT

D E S C R I P T I O N 35 I I I I I I 36 I I I I I I 17 38

19 40

4 1 I I I I I I

41 I 4 4

I 4 8 1 AVERAGE I-

SCOl? EliVI2ONMENIAL TECHNCLOGY. INC.

r -

9 \ - 2 -

w = 3 -1 0 w > m

9 t; w a

n 4 u r Y e ? 5 Y c E Y U e Y D -

0-

i d - w c Y E

n -1 N N 0 E 0 Y c ? U -1 4 "

5

5

-

Y V

2 2 l - c

-I U

< w o c z c

C [:

m E

-1 < w z o i c - u w u t - - I

c W z

.. L..

,,

i I.. .. ,-. ... c.1 1 . ?.

I ' I l l

r I l l <

I I

I 1 I j

I

i

i

;

i

!

I 1

i

i !

i

j

I 1 j i 1

t j

i i

;

! I !

,

; ! -

I ! t

~ --__ . . - -

TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIO!! & VFLOCITY DATA BY

I I I I

24 I 2s I I

I I DIAGRAM OF STACK, PORTS, & TRAVERSE POINTS ( i n d m d i r e c t i o n offm

INSIDE DIMENSIONS OF SAMPLE PLANE

STACK GAUGE PRESSURE in . H20

NEAREST UPSTREAM DISTURBANCE NEAREST DOWNSTREAI4 DISTURBANCE - PROCESS & CONTROL EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION

SCOn ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY. INC. D l

E E

" '

* m .. I I

I j -.

I

M C E

C E

m c E €

Y V

2 -1 4: I- O I-

t; z

m m E, E, z z m E .

m E

t- z 0 lx U

-_ .. - ' I - , F . c _.- .'- ;,I

'_1 . r

.- ; ...

W rz ;r c W z

W ,x 4 I-

t; z + W z

c L

\ ' . I.

I l l 1 1 . 1 I l l

! "I

I

!

I 1

i

I f

I

I

I i I t

i I

i I

i

I I i !

1 .

j

, i . .

!

1

!

, i

,

I . -

t 0 ,

I

.

r c

. . L

L

--. .

E

i

-, > c. ,

.>--. ..... , . ..

' j . TRqVERSE POINT LOCATIOI! & VELOCITY DATA BY ?,,YEHIE A=FFACTIOh b A X I .D. C=BtNIPPLE VELOCiTY STACK

POINT OF 1.0. IO= NIPPLE= H E N TEIWEIIIITURE :iU:CBER L4v11. in.1120 (Tsl, 'F

1 .

7

0 I

10

11

I I 12

16 1 17

18 I I I I I I 19

D I A G W I OF STACK, PORTS, & TRAVERSE POINTS (indicate direction oflx I N S I D E DINENSIONS OF S M P L E PLANE

STACK GAUGE PRESSURE i n . H20

NEAREST UPSTREAM DISTURBANCE NEAREST DOWNSTREAM DISTURBANCE

PROCESS & CONTROL EQUIPI4ENT DESCRIPTION

SCOn ENViPOIIMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC. m

I ! -

L"

G w n h

E 0, c' .-

E - -:

I j

m u E E

Y V

2 -I

0 I-

2 :& u w I - z

t; z I

o l l n E E

I I- z 0 PI LL

01 E

>- m

4

2 n

L z W CY U I-

1 I

i i

I I

j

j

i 1 I !

I

i ! i I

! I I

i I I I !

j

I ,

!

! 4

!

! I

? U P

rr

TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIOI! & VELOCITY DATA BY - :~ ,vEA~EI A=FRACTIOH E'AXI .D. C = E t f l l P P L E VELOCITY STACK rain' OF 1.0. I D = NIPPLE. HEAU TEI?CRkTURE liUE3E (IP~). in.HZO IT& 'F -

I L I I I I I

6

12 a

I 1 15 16 I 1 7

18

D1AGPPJ.I OF STACK, POETS, & TRAVERSE POINTS ( i n d m d m i o n

I N S I D E DIMENSIONS OF SPNPLE PLANE

STACK GAUGE PRESSURE i n . H20

NEAREST UPSTREAM DISTURBANCE NEAREST DOWNSTREAM DISTURBANCE

PROCESS & CONTROL EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION

SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.

- ..

...,

- .

> m

I

m < E t

< f / 3:

-1 4: b- 0 + t; z

m c l

€ 1 E

m m o

> m

I C E - - -

S E E

-I U 0 i=

t L

.

Nozzle S i z e . z m - Grain Loading From Ti 5 gr'dscf E s t . Sampling Time 2.5- min. Sampling Locat ion b Poin t Number: Outlet- Po in t 19 (7.c \ z ;. c=,(.- p--c ;ccJPa-{~ '

Average Veloc i ty Head ' . . . . . Average Stack Temp.

Flow S e t t i n g From Nomograph, AH Reference hP .s-8

.2r From.72 Traverse, Ts 118 From P2 Traverse, APs

9 Elapsed S t a r t

2 . 0 m i n . Time: '

.In - o u t Avg. - Gas Volurce: F i n a l gr2,162 cf. Meter Temp: F i n a l 7 8

I n i t i a l 8 5 1 . \8s' c f . I n i t i a l 77 -- . / T o t a l ' , 991 cf.Y.&\ ,917 ' /5<

Stack Veloci ty Head, APs .%T Flow Rate, AH . .67 Stack Temp, T, T J

Moisture From Ti4 (%) . z 8.47-

Corrected Volume dscf Corrected Flow Rate

Temperature Correc t ion Fac tor f o r Aerodynamic S i z e of P a r t i c l e s fi~\c.

Gas Densi ty From Ti3 Ma ' Ib'lb-mole dscf lmin

L . b - b \ T q A L \?.

Taken From Andersen Nanual, Figure 3

0' '31. 1 6 ' J t 31.1337 R41Z f fil.,W:,\! 'o& ~ ~ ~ " ' ~ / [ f ' ' ECD F i n a l (a) Net (mg). . 4 , urn. % (Pficrons) - P l a t e Tare (8)

1 20.46 2 0 'LO.91 I O . '.I21 i f . ; . \ z 1 . 4 ' 1 . 5 i 2 1 , Y -- I5-l.T

2 21. 8752. 21.8993 ,78958 If?.?

2 2 . 4 2 2 3 s 22.4531 1.271 55 4 I Z l I * ( Y

3 6 6 ' 7 5 15.31~11 . :. .$-I385 4 L\ \1 , fS

. *o-J1>n ' 1 , i

1 I , 2 I395 I I . 221.5 '. .013\5 'k l - l l i

7 I I.. 2990 11.7355 .000'5- 3,s

3

4

5 II,,o634 il..Obrj?

6

SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC. D

I

. . . . . 1

2: i u

' 0 z

4

.., L r,

P!. 5

T.

. . 1 .. ..

~~

. . . .

.. . ..

' :.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . .

. .

. . . .

._ . ..

. .

:. .. .

W aJ a cn n

V c c 3:

6 c n

5 E l U c ro Y n

c

c n

c a in.

. - . . .

. . -. ., ) , .

. .

... . . __

. . . .

n-l h i 4 w

3

. .

. . . . . . .. .

. . :

. .. . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . .

. . r I .

.. . . ,

. . . . .

. .

- . - :

. ' ,

.

I

li R ! [

, . .,

z s H w

' 0

!3

. . . . . .

. . . . .

' . '. . . . .

. . . . . -

. .

. . .... ., . . . ,

4

'.. '

. . .. . . . . . . .. . . t I

. . ..

'41' . .

." .

. . , 1' ,

. . E!

a. 0

. -2' W

. .

. .. . _ . . I

. .

3

. . . . . . . . ... ., . . . .

.5 L c c 0

u U w L

c

.- P

4A c 0 P L

c 0 c u

L ai YI

0

2 n

c 0 a z 3 0 c 0 Y V < a . . . .

U u, z* 0. L.4

. . .. .. . . . . .. . . i I . . . . '.

I

. . . - . - :

. . . .

. . . .

APPENDIX 8

FIELD DATA SHEETS

. . TABLE 1

SlJK'mY O F N.li~!ONIU>l SULFATE PP.ODUCTTON RATE DATA

Tes t No.

1 2 3

Avi rege S u l f u r i c Acid Consumption 15.1 1.5. I 15

Average Axmnia Consuapt ion Lb/Hr 3950 3900 3850

AS P r o d u c t i o n Based on S u l f u r i c A c i d Consumption, TPD ( g g x 1 4 . 7 )

AS P r o d r c t i o n Besed on Avmonia Consumption, TPD ( L 3 / 2 r x .0465)

222 222 222

184 181 177 . . No=i-.ial P l a n t AS C a p a c i t y , TPD 220 220 220 . .

--

.

i (. . .

TABLE 2

PROCESS PARMETERS HONITORED D U R I N G TEST K O . 1

--

.E l apsed T i m e , Min 0 30 60 90 120 1.50

S u l f u r i c Acid F l o w , gpn 15.i 15.3 15.0 15.0

h o n i a i l o v , Lb/Hr 4000 4000 4000 4000

Centrirugge Amperes

Crystallizer Operat ioi l :

2 1 2 1 21 20.5 . -

P!2c;” Level (s ca1.e r e a d i n g ) 5 5 5 5 Vacuum, p s i a 7 7 7 7 liagsa t e m p s i a t u r e (OF) . I43 142 140 135

A2 S l u r r j - Sp. G r . Leaving C r y s t a l l i z e r (ne:er) 1.445 1.443 1 .442 ’ 1.440

P e r c e n t F r e e Acid i n

s l u t r i a t i o n Leg

Rotary Eryy Temperatures:

cr.-- ,vaLa~lizer - .265 .257 .190 .190 -

I n l e t 23s (OF) 515 510 520 500 0 : i t l e t Gas ( O F ) 167 167 187 165 AS Produc t (IF) 185 165 165 164

S l u r r y S ~ i r g e Tank Leve l , f t . 5 . 6 5.6 5.6 5.1,

AS Prodcct Iqeig’n Belt Rate 5.8 5 . 8 5.8 5.5 ,-. LPZ

1 5 . 0

3900

20.2

5 7

135

1.440

.lo0

500 188 165

5.5

5.0

1.5.0

39’20

20 .0

5 7

136

. . .

.119

500 189 186

5.6

4 . 3

.

i

N N c .a U N

rl 0 m h m N .*

ri

- 0 . . m m

m o r . m . .

ro o r- m . .

r- m . . h N

- u- m- . . h N

m o . . \ o m

u r l \ o m . .

4 0

a - 3 . .

0 0 0 c

0 0 m m

0 0 rn m

0 0 m m

u m U 0 U N

0 tn c. \L) N U

d

m CO U N u . C-J

rl

I-. 0 D 0

C U U

rl 0 m p l q N U

.-I

u . ..c

H s El

.- . . r . .

a

. . . . .

0; d

m 4

m rl

N

0 N

VI U U w c c < @J 00 3

VI ‘rl U u C U U

ul h \- U 4

O h m U d r + m o m

o o m m CA z f r l r l

m r . 0 U rl

..

C> x i 4 U

TABLE 4

PROCESS PARMETERS I.lONITORED DUP.I:X TEST NO. 3

-___ .--

Elapsed T i c i s , Min 0 30 60 90 120 150

" .-

S u l f u r i c Acid F l o ; ~ , spa 1 5 15 1 5 1 5 I. 5 15

' il;onon?.i Flo:?, Lb/hr 3700 3800 3800 3800 3700 3700

C e n t r i i c g e i?mperes 2 1 21 20.5 20.5 20.5 20.5

C r y s : d l i z e r Opera t ion : Magic2 L e v e l ( s c a l e r e a d i n g ) 5 5 5 5 5 5

7 7 7 Xap..a Temperature , "F 146 148 149 150 152 1 4 7 Vzcuum, p s i a . ... 7 7 :. 7 -:

.. -. AS Slu rzy Sp. C r . L i a v i n g Cr3-s t a l l i z e r (osier) 1.470 1.465 1.462 1.460 1.457 1. 44.5

P e r c e r t F r e e Acid i n C r y s t a l . l i z e r G L u t r i a t i o n Leg

Rotary Dryer T e a p e r a t u r e s :

.138 .162 * 11t2 .11.9 .150 .190 - 7

I n l e t Gas (OF) 510 520 515 510 500 490 C u t i e i Gas (OF) 185 185 190 I.8d 1.85 167 A S F r o d u c t ( O F ) 185 185 190 1 8 7 185 186

S l u r r y Ssrge Tank Le-vel F t . ' 8 . 9 8.8 8.6 8.2 7.7 7 . 1

AS P r o d c c t Veigh B e l t Ra te , TPH 5.6 5 . 7 5 .7 5 . 7 5 . 7 5 . 3

. .

--

I F I T .

. C . .I