SOURCE EMISSION TESTING R M - DTICAL-TR-1992-0004 AD-A248 644 SOURCE EMISSION TESTING OF THE R...

AL-TR-1992-0004 AD-A248 644

SOURCE EMISSION TESTING OF THEMUNITIONS DEACTIVATION FURNACE,

R KADENA AIR BASE, OKINAWA, JAPANMSTR Paul T. Scott, Captain, USAF

N OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL APRIR91HEALTH DIRECTORATE hG Brooks Air Force Base, TX 78235-5000

A March 1992

B Final Technical Report for Period 24-31 September 1991

A Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

T

92-0943492 4 1 02 2 (l1i'ilh;' ~IiI

ARFORCE SYSTEMS COMMAND

~ ~~~~~~~~ r. A[ A A ,,11U!,!11

NOTICES

When Government drawings, specifications, or other data are used forany purpose other than in connection with a definitely Government-relatedprocurement, the United States Government incurs no responsibility or anyobligation whatsoever. The fact that the Government may have formulated orin any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data, is notto be regarded by implication, or otherwise in any manner construed, aslicensing the holder or any other person or corporation; or as conveying anyrights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented inventionthat may in any way be related thereto.

The mention of trade names or commercial products in this publicationis for illustration purposes and does not constitute endorsement orrecommendation for use by the United States Air Force.

The Office of Public Affairs has reviewed this report, and it isreleasable to the National Technical Information Service, where it will beavailable to the general public, including foreign nationals.

This report has been reviewed and is approved for publication.

Government agencies and their contractors registered with DefenseTechnical Information Center (DTIC) should direct requests for copies to:DTIC, Cameron Station, Alexandria VA 22304-6145.

Non-Government agencies may purchase copies of this report from:National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road,Springfield VA 22161

PAUL T. SCOTT, Capt, USAF EDWARD F. MAHER, Col, USAF, BSCChief, Air Quality Function Chief, Bioenvironmental Engineering

Division

Form ApprovedREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 0MB No 0704-0188

Public re~orting burden for this collection of informnation is estimated to average I our der resoorse r' uciro Tte time for reiewinq wstr~.ons scrri no e,,.stifq 0151.5 sourcesgathering and mnstaining the dlato needed. and comoletinig and re~iein the )iiecifon of informnation Sena comments regaro ng this burden, estimate or an,~ *tfer asoect of thiscollection of information, including suggestions for reducing this ourcer, to ivashington tieadoudrters Serioices Direc-orate tor irrtcrinatter, QOeratior' ano Relecrls 1215 jeffersonDavisfHighway,.Suite 1204 Arlington. VA 22202-4302. and to the Office of Management ard Budget Paperncir ffeduc-tion Pr-jezt (0704 0188) V~aShir'dton --C 20503

1, AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)TI2. -!!PORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

IMarch 1992 IFinal 24- 31 Sep 914. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

Source Emission Testing of the Munitions DeactivationFurnace, Kadena Air Base, Okinawa, Japan

6. AUTHOR(S)

Paul T. Scott

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

* Armstrong LaboratoryOccupational and Environmental Health Directorate AL-TR-1992-0004Brooks Air Force Base, TX 78235-5000

9. SPONSORING/ MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING /MONITORINGAGENCY REPORT NUMBER

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.__J_____________

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

Source emission testing for total lead and particulates was conducted on themunitions deactivation furnace located in the 400th Munitions Squadron area ofKadena Air Base, Okinawa, Japan. Test results indicate that if most state or EPAstandards were to apply, the munitions incinerator would exceed these standards.Total lead is also high, but there are no appropriate standards in which tocompare. Recommendations are made as to the munitions furnace operation.

14 SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES50

Kadena Okinawa Lead Source Emission Testing 16. PRICE CODE

Particulates___________

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18 SECURITY CLASSIFKCAlON 19 SELURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACTOF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1

Site Description .............................................. ........ . 1

Applicable Standards and Guidelines ................................... 2

METHODS AND MATERIALS .................................................... 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................. 4

Field Results ....................................................... 4Analysis Results ...................................................... 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 6

REFERENCES ....................................................... ....... . 6

APPENDIXES:

A Personnel .................................................... . 9B Field Data ................................................ .. 13C Calibration Data .............................................. 29D Laboratory Report .......................................... 35

List of Figures

Fig. No. Page

1 View of 400th MMS Munitions Deactivation Furnace ................ 1

2 View of Conveyer into Incinerator ............................... 2

3 View of 400th MMS Incinerator Stack ............................. 3

List of Tables

Table No. Eme

1 Field Data Summary ................................ . ........ . 5

2 Analysis Summary .............................................. . 6

iii

SOURCE EMISSION TESTING OF THE MUNITIONS DEACTIVATION FURNACEKADENA AB, OKINAVA, JAPAN

INTRODUCTION

On 24-31 Sep 91, source emission testing for lead and particulateemissions was conducted on the munitions deactivation facility located inthe 400th Munitions Maintenance Squadron (MMS) area of Kadena AB. Testingwas performed by the Aii Quality Function of Armstrong Laboratory. Thissurvey was requested by the Chief, Bioenvironmental Engineering Services,313th Medical Group (313 Med Gp/SGPB) to gather data necessary to satisfy anEnvironmental Compliance Assessment and Management Plan (ECAMP) deficiency.Personnel involved with on-site testing are listed in Appendix A.

Site Description

The deactivation furnace is a rotating kiln equipped with a smallsecondary burner/chamber at one end of the kiln (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Viev of 400th NMS munitions deactivation furnace.

1

The incinerator is equipped with a continuous-feed conveyer which entersthe incinerator just below the stack (Fig. 2). Emissions exit via a stackwhich extends through the roof and to 20.9 ft (6.38 m) above the ground (Fig.3). Small arms ammunition, that is excess, no longer used, or out of date, isdisposed of on a regular basis. Three different types of ammunition were usedfor the emission test which comprised 3 test runs: 20 mm high-explosiveincendiary, 20 mm target tracer, and 7.62 mm and 5.56 mm ball cartridges.

"I.

S ll lltllllllllllllm.. ,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,.............. ...........

n ,i

Figure 2. View of conveyer into incinerator.

Applicable Standards and Guidelines

There are no particulate or lead standards for this facility; however, inorder to establish a baseline, particulate emission results are compared withEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) new source performance standard (NSPS)for incinerators which is 0.08 grains/dry standard ft (gr/dscf) (1).Emission standards in other itates for existing facilities range froma a highof 0 310 gr/dscf (229.22 mg/m ) in Alaska to a low of 0.04 gr/dscf (ri.69mg/m ) in New York (2). A comparable source standard for lead does riot exist;however, the time weighted average-permissible exposure limit (TWA-PEL) forlead, which is 0.15 mg/m , can be used to determine the relative risk with theappropriate dispersion model.

2

Acces sion For

NTIS GRA&I LDTIC TABUrvnmouncud

Figure 3. View of 400th MM'S incinerator stack. By

W! r iLutJ 0[

:Av-i'L and/orDiPst ssu

METHODS AND MATERIALS

EPA Methods 1 through 5 and 1Z were used for the sampling and analysisduring this project.

Two sampling ports were installed at right angles in the stack. Portswere approximately 4 duct-diameters downstream and 3 duct-diameters upstreamfrom any flow disturbance.

The inside stack diameter at the sampling port location is 23.5 in. (59.7cm). Based on the duct-diameter, port location and type of sampling required(particulate), a total of 24 traverse points were determined for sourceemission evaluation.

Samples were collected using the sampling train of EPA Method 5. Thetrain consisted of a button-hook probe nozzle, heated probe with stainlesssteel liner, a paper filter in a glass fi]ter holder, impingers and pumpingand metering device. Flue gas velocity pressure was measured at the nozzletip using a Type-S pitot tube connected to a 10-in, inclined-verticalmanometer. Type K thermocouples were used to measure flue gas as well assampling train temperatures.

Prior to sampling, cyclonic flow was determined by using the Type S pitottube and measuring the stack gas rotational angle at each traverse point.Flow conditions were considered acceptable since the arithmetic average of therotational angles was less than 200. A preliminary velocity pressure traversewas also accomplished at this time.

The total time for sampling run 1 was 60 min with sampling time for eachtraverse point at 2.5 min. Runs 2 and 3 had sampling times of 72 min with 3min, respectively, for each sampling point.

A grab sample for Orsat analysis (measures oxygen and carbon dioxide forstack gas molecular weight determination) was taken during each sample run(1). Collected emission data and Orsat analysis data are in Appendix B.Calibration data are contained in Appendix C (3).

The emission calculations in Appendix B are made using "Source TestingCalculation and Check Programs for Hewlett-Packard 41 Calculators" developedby the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (4).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Field Results

All 3 sampling runs were accomplished on 27 Sep 91. A summary of thefield data from Appendix C is presented in Table 1.

Th, sanpling time was modified after run 1 to draw a larger samplevolume. A sample volume greater than 30 dscf is desirable and usuallyrequired for NSPS testing.

4

TABLE 1. FIELD DATA SUMMARY

Sampling Meter Stack ParticulateRun Time Volum Flow Rale Isokinetics 02/CO2 Mass# (min.) (dscf) (dscfm) % % (mg)

1 60 28.708 1,041 101.5 13.3/5.6 2,170.3

2 72 35.900 1,130 97.6 13.9/5.2 958.5

3 72 40.042 1,290 95.3 13.2/5.7 1,346.0

dscf 4s defined as dry standard cubic feet (1).

dscfm is defined as dry standard cubic feet per minute (1).

Isokinetics, which is the measure of the ratio sampling rate to the stackflow rate, is nominal for each run (3). The larger departure from 100% inruns two and three are not significant, and can be attributed to theincreasing stack and aalbient temperature as well as the rising atmosphericpressure associated with the departing typhoon Miriella.

Oxygen is slightly higher than required for excess air and may indicatetoo much ventilation or incomplete combustion.

A complete evaluation of the incinerator could not be accomplishedwithout incinerator schematics and ipecifications; however, additionalemission data (i.e., stack temperatures) from Appendix B with visualobservations suggest that emissions are not adequately combusted.

Probe washes, impinger solutions, and blanks (7 samples) were left at Det3, Armstrong Laboratory on 27 Sep 91. Samples were subsequently shipped toArmstrong Laboratory, Brooks AFB. Samples were received on 24 Oct 91 with thesample blank missing and the run 1 probe wash sample broken.

After gravimetric analysis to determine particulate concentrations, thesamples were submitted for lead analysis to the Armzstrong Laboratory,Occupational and Environmental Health Directorate, Analytical ServicesDivision.

Analysis Results

All analyses were completed on 5 Dec 91. A summary of the laboratoryresults is presented in Table 2. The laboratory report iv, in Appendix D.

Particulate concentrations far exceed the allowable !wissions of moststates and those of the EPA's NSPS standard. Lead emissions are also high,but without an emission standard for comparison, the data cannot b% adequatelyassessed. However, the data could be us,:d within a dispersion model todetermine ambient lead concentrations as well as deposition and accu,ulatinsin the surrounding area.

5

3. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems -Volume III, Stationary Source Specific Methods, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, EPA-600/4-77-027-b, Research Triangle Park, NorthCarolina, December 1984.

4. Source Test Calculation and Check Programs for Hewlett-Packard 41Calculators. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-304/1-85-018,Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, May 1987.

7

TABLE 2. ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Particulate LeadRun Emissions Emissions# gr/dscf mg/m3 gr/dscf mg/m3

1* 1.167 2,670 0.0013 2.977

2 0.412 942.9 0.0013 2.931

3 0.519 1,187 0.0008 1.764

Average 0.700 1,600 0.0011 2.557,The particulate emissions of run one have been corrected for the damaged

sample. The lead emissions have not been corrected.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The test results show the munitions incinerator at Kadena AB is not incompliance with the EPA or many states' particulate emission standards.Though there are no lead standards for incinerators, it is expected that newEPA regulations, as well as state regulatory agencies, will soon addressincinerator lead emissions. In addition, the data in this report could beused in conjunction with other sampling which was performed concurrentlyand/or used in a dispersion model to give a more viable result.

Stack temperatures, oxygen values, and visual observations indicateincomplete combustion. Several alternatives exist to reduce these emissions.A secondary burner located at the base of the stack providing a chambertemperature between 1600-1800 *F would ens-re more complete combustion. Inaddition, this approach would affect the exce:zi air since more oxygen would beused for combustion, producing more carbon dic:i.e. It is questionable howmuch this modification would reduce emissions and hIicher t!e refractory couldwithstand these kinds of temperatures. Control equipment such as a wetscrubber is more expensive, but is guaranteed to reduce particulate emissions;a new incinerator is even more expensive, but may be more cost effective inthe long term.

REFERENCES

1. "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources," Title 40, Part60, Code of Federal Regulations, July 1, 1987.

2. "Alaska Air Quality Control Regulations," Title 18, Chapter 50, AlaskaAdministrative Code, June 2, 1988.

6

APPENDIX A

PERSONNEL

PERSONNEL

Armstrong Laboratory Stack Pack

Capt Paul T. Scott, Project OfficerMaj Ramon Cintron-OcasioAL/OEBQBrooks AFB TX 78235-5000

Phone: DSN 240-3305Commercial (512) 536-3305

Det 3, Armstrong Laboratory Personnel

Lt Col Elliot NgTSgt Russell B. KolbeDet 3, Armstrong LaboratoryAPO Sra Francisco 96239-5000

Phone: DSN 315-634-1769

11

APPENDIX B

FIELD DATA

13

PRELIMINARY SURVEY DATA SHEET NI(Stack Geometry)

ASE JiPLANT /

IDATE SAMPLING TEAM

SOURCE TYPE AND MAKE

clxerA /SOURCE NUMBER INSIDE STACK DIAMETERI .2 3 . . ' " c h e sRELATED CAPACITY

I TYPE FUEL

DISTANCE FROM OUTSIDE OF NIPPLE TO INSIDE DIAMETER

3 75" InchesNUMBER OF TRAVERSES NUMS-"R OF POINTS/TRAVERSE

2I 12

LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS ALONG TRAVERSE

PERCENT OF DISTANCE FROM TOTAL DISTANCE FROM OUTSIDEPOINT DIAMETER INSIDE WALL OF NIPPLE TO SAMPLING POINT

(In ch e s) (Inches)

__ __ _ ___ __ _ __ .:?

3 '.5-

r _______ . cCD ______ 2.1/

7 __ _ __ _ __. __ _ __ _ _

Iz 53. 7*

-7t

OEHL 15

15

*-

PRELIMINARY SURVEY DATA SHEET hw. 2(Velocity and Temperature Traverse)

BASE DATE

K 4 JA AMev .77 Je 7 9/~BOILER NUMBER

INSIDE STACK DIAMETER

,. 5= Inches'STA TION PRESSURE

.? 9TAT In HgSTACK STATIC PRESSURE

SAMPLING TEAM

TRAVERSE POINT NUMBER VELOCITY HEAD, Vp IN H20 V V STACK TEMPERATURE (OF

/ c'.o/s c" )79

3 0 oZ _" _ _ _o_ .

9 c 02-r O_ _3 y

_______ _ 001 o' __ 01

6 0oy 0.7_

7 1s/4< /,,) .,, o7 Z

Io.o~s "j-

1o Oco i 6' ' , 5"

4V 0A1A - 123

1?.,e,.g 107 .c00 X/5 2 6 ,

-: : o ¥4 ¢ /,,.? ,,___,_ ___

,! of7V/#: <Ai,/) 625CL.: / 2,.,_______

AVERAGE f

OEHL APR7 16

16

All JLLUTION PARTICULATE ANALYTICt' DATA

BASE DATE / RUN NUMBER

BUILDING NUMBER SOURCE NUMBER

PARTICULATES

ITEM FINAL WEIGHT INITIAL WEIGHT WEIGHT PARTICLES(din) (gin)di

ILTER NUMBER 1,, ,727

ACETONE WASHINGS (Probe, FrontHall Filter )

SACK HALF (it needed)9 t3 (9 7 2

Total Weight of Paricuaiogs Collectedi i.II. ~~~~WATER___________

ITEM FINAL WEIGHT INITIAL WEIGHT WEIGHT WATER(8m) (am) (d9m)

IMPINGE., 1,o 01> 20) 1 "

IMPINGER 2 (1H20) /027 6. I,'2 2

IMPINGER 3 (Dry) .

IM PINGER (S i . .91) C ;

Total W.igh of Waler Collected (/- q -m

III. GASES (Dry)

ITEM ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS AVERAGE1 2 3 4

VOL % CO J-C

VOL % Oz

VOL % CO

VOL % N2

Vol % N2 = (100%. % CO 2 . % 0 2 % CO)

OEHL FORm 20MAY 78

17

00

00

C)L

2 2i

- x m lN0

a. w. w. Z ~i

V) C

zA

-J w .~2 w ILI

.1-

- -

l

0 0I

P,4 - .

w s*w

U 0

-

C4-

-~~~~

W a). ~~

LU 0 K 0

IA w

:2 ILI

0 0

WZ0

-4

tr

CL~ ~0iw N 1n

0 iz mI

0 WU P-

I- a u I L

0~ ( ia

-C m - o~ 'C 'C 0 0 N wI~0a z X .0 w. w ~0

0 I-.

-K z

~an ~ w. -I

0

0. r

'U J

<a 0

.6 u

6Cta

We

-0KH i '

L LL19

Ali OLLUTIUN PARTICULATE ANALYTIC/ 'DATA

BASE DATE RUN NUMBER

BUILDING NUMBER SOURCE NUMBER

PARTICULATES

ITEM FINAL WEIGHT INITIAL WEIGHT WEIGHT PARTICLES(i4m) (ira) (li)

FILTER NUMBER ,37-)

ACETONE WASHINGS (Probe, Front -

Hall Filter)

II. WATER

ITEM FINAL WEIGHT INITIAL WEIGHT WEIGHT WATER(i(m) (9)m)

IMPINGER I (H20)

IMPINGER 2 (H120) L 11

IMPINGER 3 (Dry) .2

IMPINGER 4 (Silica Dil)

Total Weight of Watler Collected Z/ /

III. GASES (Dry)

ITEM ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS AVERAGE

VLC2I123

4 AVERAG

voL5C2 5- 5- a

VOL % 02c

VOL % CO

VOL % N2 -

Voi % N2 m (100%- % CO 2 % 0 2 % CO)

OEHL FORM 20MAY 78

20 .

0 c W-

z

IL I z

w ri 4

z x J

<. < 0~ 0_-_

CE

cj1

C4C 4J WLi 'J

c -

IV

Li

ftf

LU Ii

Or m~

Z<~ n -'.- )

22

0 CLI-

0 \ C.- N I30 m

a.-

1. 2

#A ~ ~ m 1 z ij

I 1 1-u < .1 m I N

(L 0 z a

S m m'< < 05 0. 0~ -'-

L 0Z. Z a

LU IQ

0

ui.

0 rW

u-~'

~~ke

4 n bMi ri

I- -o

0 u 0

~~22

Al. OLLUTION PARTICULATE ANALYTIC/ DATA

BASE DATE RUN NUMBER

,3GuILOINC NUMBER SOURCE NUMBER

PARTICULATES

ITEM FINAL WEIGHT INITIAL WEIGHT WEIGHT PARTICLES(an) (am) (am)

FILTER NUMBER

ACETONE WASHINGS (Probe, FrontHall JIllfor)

BACK HALF (it needed)67

(am) (arn) (am.)

IMPINGER 1 (7 2) /L/ ( 2-

IMPINGER 2 (H120) /0 -oc"

IMPINGER 3 (Dry)______ _____ _____ /0

IMPINGER 4 (Silica Oel)

.212 f; 200 /z

Total Weight of Water Collected 6, oam

II. GASES tDry)

ITEM ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS ANALYSIS AVERAGEI 2 3 4

VOL % CO 7

VOL % 0 2

VOL % CO

VOL % N2

Vol r N2 (100 - % CO2 . % O.% CO)

OEHL FORM 20MAY 7

23

w wV

w ww w

Ix -J w

~wI-

I-K

C 4 W W

+ wI-I

7.- W

--1- ZJ4J2

W I

a..

0 -z 2 w

0 -a it

w w I- J

1w w m ( 0 iIz -. z U) a

U~ r ~9- ~ N C

~ ( o o

I- H -

- 0~---

00

I-L

IA

tu 9

J Xw

u9

N q,

IW W

Z 2)

CD

z n_

xw x(U

0a

.s w w 0 9

20 a 'A" -

25 - I

RUN M SE ht'r1EETq 7 RUNi UNE9 F " h 5 R~fl' NONXXE- ET

IR50 TOO O NE

METER BF ' *.99 P11 ETE: 61X 7'.53TI EE; EQX Y,.37 V

BETA H' .1C U, DELTA ' DEI N? ,, QH . 21 P

BAR PRESS " BA PSS BP 4h 1

METER YVOL. 29It, 9994. 2%O P': 7150 Do 7'20e3.z~ F

UPR TEMP Fn MIT TE-i- ' ; TO'D F

PCJ2h3 F 105,60 c':" @N

STT I C HOi i1 : I ' .;" OTHER 6A;

.1 CC p:" PEMCYEJ BEOPE PEOVE! BEC9;4STE P.- DRY GPI;? IETE9 BP rQ UE; ET

p940@e p'., P LHE l STATCWW h r: HOP Ih

ML P E 1?0 T Y T N ,-.7a -.;-, i'ij S' T P '

494,9999 'j 40 A F-

13.3090 rFo.y "

4.4± WEOY FV'

S071L9 pu: O=10 24

M N NET 06 Mw, W02hi:HE''ME

TIME 7IN7. @N'o F2 SUT PET; " 5F Pr';

HO2,LE DIP 1.5@ FY4937'" 0

STF DI; INCH - IEMTIME Nil>

VO~L MTP 'TD = 40. 9D43 2 ~DI INCH SO D14 N0H

VOL NY GPE = 1j W ST." = 7 * VO L h' 37% '-!T R = :'; "

MOL UFY GAS3 =~ 19,:iFE3 PE3i 23KF? E 2.t :TCCN 3. oVOL HOH G;,: 15s V0, H!> , u

NOL WT BI =29,44 % No:TUP A0 7.NOL WU WE 2'?. 6?NL PFY CIS o= 0, Q7 NBPIt 07

EL 47 F: i H1'' ITPoG'jj , 9X SIAGE j "

VELCIT WE -. N ?L UT7 PPY =2q', 8'il Q W-N'X4rrc - -- E 2r' 2' 0 L W- - .o

S5T3 VE'22,Ty FCCI 0,3:

ErEC7:70 S: Tt SPC E .:V L '., a -7,

XROM "WSSFLO" XROM "MPS5FLO'XROM IMASSFLO"

RUN NUMIBER RUN NUMBEPRUN NUMBER TWO THPEE U!ONE RUN U

RUN;

VOL MTR STD ? VOL MTR STP ?

VOL MTR STD ? 35.90000 PUN 40.042H8 RUN

28.78388 RUN STACK DCFM I STACK DSCFM ?

STACK DSCFM ? 1,138.0000 PUN 11298.880,0 e UN1,041,00000 RUN FRONT /2 Mg I FRONT 1/2 MG I

FRONT I/2 MG ? 958.51880 RUN, I346.800 RUN

2,179,30W RUN BACK 1/2 MG ? BACK 1*2 MG ?

BACK 1/2 MG ? RU RURUN

F GR/DSCF 8.41282 F GR.'D3CP = 0.5275

F GR/DSCF z 1.16665 F MG/MM' 942.85429 F MG/MMM =,17,063,s

F MG/MMM z 2:669.78789 F LB/HP z 3.99e73 F B/HP 5,73l84

F LB/HR a 18.4898 F KGHP2.17.F KG/HR z 4.72192

XROM *MASSFLO' XROM "MASSFLO" XROM "M SSFLO'

RUN NUMIER RUN NUMBER RUN NUMBERONE PB TWO PB THREE PS

RUN RU RU;'

VOL MTR STD 7 VOL MTR STD 7 VOL MTR STD28.78888 RUN 35.98888 RUN 48,8428P RUN

STACK DSCFN I STACK D*JCFM ? STPCK DSCFM I1,84!.88800 PU'lI I138.8888,8 RU! 1,[email protected]@. RIJI,

FRONT 1/2 MG I FRONT I -. PI, FRONT 1,2 MG ?2.42888 RUN; 2.988 RUN 2.@Oe88 RU!;

BACK I'2 MG I BACK 1/2 MG BAC 1.2 MN ?RUN FLI

F GR/ISCF 0.@013e F GR'DSCF z 8.88!2 F GR/D: Cc z 8.0e@77F MG/MM =-.?7 S8 F MG'IMM = 2.93176 F MG/MMM .7670FF LB/HP 8.81161 F LBHF z8.024 F LB, HF .F KG,'HR z 8.00527 F kGP . KG/H ,

27

APPENDIX C

CALIBRATION DATA

29

( NOZZLE CALIBRATION DAT7 _ORM'

Date I___________ Calibrated by__________

Nozzle ---- o zzle Diameter abidentification D , D ,D AD, D C

number mm (In.) fu in.) mm iin.) 1mm (in.) avg

0. 0 0 ro 0 0, 47 U 00

where:-

SDl,2 ,3 three'different nozzles diameter4, num (in.); eachdiameter must be within (0.025 mmir) 0.001 in.

b *AD,= maximum difference between any two; diameters,- m (in.),AD <(0.10 mm) 0.004 in..

c D average of DI, .2,and 3avg D 3

Quality Assurance Hand.~ook 1,5-2 6

-SN' * 31 K

METER BOX CALIBRATION DATA AND CALCULATION FORM

(English units)

Date 13 &s go ,at - Meter box numberQBarometric pressure, Pb -0 12- in. Hg Calibrated by 3cci -9 a .,l

Gas volume Temperature

Orifice Wet test Dry gas Wet test Drv gas metermanometer meter meter meter Inlet Outlet Avgo Timesetting (VW), (Vd), (tw), (td.), (td ), (td), (0),

(i), 3 o Y .@in. H20 ft ft OF min in. H2 0

in. HT ft 02135__4o6 V3__5 5 1 I 0 , 2- 6V97 1,932--

1.0 10 ftq~

2.0 9 2,15q25 W 64560 5Z

3.0 11 -+ 460) (td_10__ 5130_ ___ w5 7 k-610-7 6,113Z /9~

4.0 10_ ___ 64 0 ,$Avg 6,1kO

-__-___-- -. ,_ . j .,) ,, , I-!; 71 " - .- ":d.

AHV P b (d + 460) 0.0317 AJ I(t, + 460) 0]

.o 1.6 i = P [% '-,, _ J

S (Pb+ H6 (t, + 460)( .- .-4 6 - - _

0.5 0.-0368 Y. (3ogz"34

1.0 0.07371 , ._. , , , /

aIf there is only one thermometer on the dry gas meter, record the temperatureunder td.

Quality Assurance Handbook M4-2.3A (front side)

321.5I lII 0 11 I I/

lf1METER BOX CALIBRATION DATA AND CALCULATION FORM

(English units)

Date Pee q/ Meter box number

Barometric pressure, Pb - ,o in. Hg Calibrated by

Gas volume TemperatureOrifice Wet test Dry gas Wet test Dry gas metermanometer meter meter meter Inlet Outlet Avgo Timesetting (VW), (Vd), (t W), , (td ), (td), Ce),(E), 3 o Y

Ae in. H 20 ft3 ft F OF OF min in. H 20

0.5 in 6170 6

_._1.o0_ _Lt.q I, 70.5 7 q .7 $61 70 7 .s., /f C C /,6,.. f 7C , 71 71. 5 /62' /.01)9

71 t 77

fj-2.0 10 5- -ft 71 , q 71 79 8.7S').'' /137 /q__7

3.0 10 + , p , 7 21 '7.'5, /I'15 /1q.

.0 4.0 10 4 S1 7 V 1 ,+L.. . - _____

I.~ Avg 7719~AH, AM V P0b3(td + 460)(t + 460)

i n y w 0 .0 3 7 [ t + .

H.0 13.6 x Vd(P + +460) Lb (td + w .*2 d b 13.6~ +6)

0.5 0.0368 (S)(Z1370)(70S. t960) . ) e-. 'o#46c)b2(.5 0(2i370 )(.v7,, od ) .A l 7 0 6 ,' 6C) F.(

1.0 0.0737 (()(? -I)7e,o) 3 9-V) _ _ 7_2Sr, r ._ 21(_ ?Y_ I_ _/ .3 ZT'1 P") /?2 4 C

1.5 0.110 elo)(Zq. 37r,)(7Sf? dI) A.iiM) 0? j-'7v e/(!ror)?41- -') MI.'rr4.Y7,#, 7- 237/7~r,96 c

2.0 0.14 (14)(7.37)37s76 ) o.c),//2,c __________"_

3.0 0.221 00)(29-370c)Cl'f1 ) ).(3/9 ,t) 0/ 031_V

4.0 0.294 C/C)(29-3 c(I71sqc) 0. e_31________ 2

If there i., only one thermometer on the dry gas meter, record the temperatureunder td'

Quality Assurance Handbook M4-2.3A (front side)

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY REPORT

35

AIR FORCEOCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIRECTORATE

BROOKS AFB, TEXAS, 78235-5000

REPORT OF ANALYSIS

BASE SAMPLE NO: GN910025 OEHL SAMPLE NO: 9!n61451

SAMPLE TYPE: NON-POTABLE WATER

SITE IDENTIFIER: FAMU227 DATE RECEIVED: 911126

DATE COLLECTED: 910928 DATE REPORTED: 911211

DATE REPRINTED: 920102SAMPLE SUBMITTED BY: 18 MEDICAL GROUP/SGPB

RESULTS

.Te11 Results Unit

Lead 9669 ug/L

Analyzed by:

Aaron L. Forrest, Sgt, USAFOccupatio 1 Analysis Technician

Reviewed by:/G. Cornell Long

Chief, Metals Analysis Function

TO: 37

AL/OEBE PAGE 1m ~ ~ ni1C 6C ____r -70m0Im Cmm m to Cnnm i



REPORT OF ANALYSIS

BASE SAMPLE NO: GN910026 OEHL SAMPLE NO: 91061452





RESULTS

In&a Results Un its

Lead 2879 ug/L

Analyzed by: j ,d, / L.

Aaron L. Forrest, Sgt, USAFOccupational Analysis Technician

Reviewed by:

G. Cornell Long


TO: 38

AL/OEBE PAGE 1.. ~ RO K AF. TX 7R 3" _ m m mm uu n uunnnu m nu n nm



REPORT OF ANALYSIS






RESULTS

Lead 1661 ug/L

Analyzed by: e ld.. 9P .


Reviewed by:

G. Cornell LongChief, Metals Analysis Function

TO: 39

AL/OEBE PAGE 1



REPORT OF ANALYSIS






RESULTS

ResuI ts nits

Lead 9059 ug/L

Analyzed by: -


Reviewed by:

G. Cornell LongChief, Metals Analysis Function

TO: 40

AL/OEBE PAGE 1



REPORT OF ANALYSIS

BASE SAMPLE NO: GN910029 OEHL SAMPLE NO: 9i061455





RESULTS

maResults Un its

Lead 6995 ug/L

Analyzed by: A ,I


Reviewed by: W/G. Cornell Long


TO:41

AL/OEBE PAGE 1BROOKS AFB TX 78235-5000

SOURCE EMISSION TESTING R M - DTICAL-TR-1992-0004 AD-A248 644 SOURCE EMISSION TESTING OF THE R...

Documents

Transcript of SOURCE EMISSION TESTING R M - DTICAL-TR-1992-0004 AD-A248 644 SOURCE EMISSION TESTING OF THE R...