Page 404 - Air Pollution Control Engineering
P. 404

09_chap_wang.qxd  05/05/2004  5:01 pm  Page 378
                    378                                                    Lawrence K. Wang et al.

                    Table 3 (continued)

                    Compounds                 Molecular weight      LEL(% vol)        UEL(% vol)
                    Methyl alcohol                 32.04                6.7               36.0
                    Ethyl alcohol                  46.07                3.3               19.0
                    Ethyl alcohol                  46.07                3.3               19.0
                    n-Propyl alcohol               60.09                2.2               14.0
                    n-Butyl alcohol                74.12                1.7               12.0
                    n-Amyl alcohol                 88.15                1.2               10.0
                    n-Hexyl alcohol               102.17                1.2                7.9
                    Dimethyl ether                 46.07                3.4               27.0
                    Diethyl ether                  74.12                1.9               36.0
                    Ethyl propyl ether             88.15                1.7                9.0
                    Dilsopropyl ether             102.17                1.4                7.9
                    Acetaldehyde                   44.05                4.0               36.0
                    Propionaldehyde                58.08                2.9               14.0
                    Acetone                        58.08                2.6               13.0
                    Methyl ethyl ketone            72.10                1.9               10.0
                    Methyl propyl ketone           86.13                1.6                8.2
                    Diethyl ketone                 86.13                1.6
                    Methyl butyl ketone           100.16                1.4                8.0
                       Source: US EPA.



                    serves as an indication of the volume of catalyst present. The pressure drop decreases
                    over time as bits of catalyst become entrained in the gas stream. To ensure proper perfor-
                    mance of the system, it is recommended that both the temperature rise across the catalyst
                    bed and the pressure drop across the catalyst bed be monitored continuously. Currently,
                    most vendors routinely include continuous monitoring of these parameters as part of
                    catalytic incinerator system package (8). However, some older units  may  not  be  so
                    equipped; in this case, the reviewer should ensure that the incinerator is equipped with
                    both continuous-monitoring systems.
                       In addition to catalyst loss, catalyst deactivation and blinding occur over time and
                    limit performance. Catalyst deactivation is caused by the presence of materials that
                    react with the catalyst bed. Blinding is caused by the accumulation of particulate mat-
                    ter on the catalyst bed surface decreasing the effective surface area of the catalyst
                    (7,10). For these reasons, vendors recommend replacing the catalyst every 2–3 yr.
                    Symptoms of catalyst loss include a decrease in pressure drop across the catalyst bed
                    and a decrease in the temperature rise across the catalyst bed. Symptoms of deactiva-
                    tion and blinding include a decrease in the temperature rise across the catalyst bed. If a
                    catalytic incinerator system exhibits these symptoms, the facility should take immediate
                    action to correct these operational problems.
                       In a permit evaluation, determine if the reported values for T , T , and SV are
                                                                                ci  co
                    appropriate to achieve the DE by comparing applicant’s values with the values in Table
                    4. However, it is important to keep in mind that the values given in Table 4 are approx-
                    imate and a given permit may differ slightly from these values. The reported value for
                    T should equal or exceed 600ºF in order to obtain an adequate initial reaction rate. To
                     ci
   399   400   401   402   403   404   405   406   407   408   409