reduction of voc emissions from paint-booth operations using dielectric barrier discharge reduction...

33
Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-Booth Operations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-Booth Operations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge 30 th Environmental and Energy Symposium & Exhibition San Diego, CA April 7, 2004 Gregory D. Holland John N. Veenstra Arland H. Johannes Gary L. Foutch Freddie Hall

Upload: madison-jackson

Post on 23-Dec-2015

219 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-

Booth Operations Using Dielectric Barrier

Discharge  

30th Environmental and EnergySymposium & Exhibition

San Diego, CAApril 7, 2004

 Gregory D. HollandJohn N. Veenstra

Arland H. JohannesGary L. FoutchFreddie Hall

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Background

• The Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center (OC-ALC) conducts surface coating as regulated by 40 CFR 63.741 in maintenance paint booths at the facility. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are emitted as a result. While the emissions rate is currently well below the stationary major source threshold of 10 tons per year, these low emissions are the result of using low-VOC/low-solids paints.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Background

• The low-VOC/low-solids paint has performed and weathered poorly, and as a result, the planes require more frequent painting as well as constant touch-ups. An efficient method of emission treatment is desired to enable renewed use of the better performing high-VOC/high-solids paints.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Background

• The typical emissions control technique for surface coating spray booths is carbon absorption (average control efficiency = 90%). Carbon absorption has a fire potential in the carbon bed when high concentrations of ketones and alcohols are present as at TAFB. Furthermore, the painting operations at TAFB are not continuous but are of short duration. Due to this operational pattern, a technology with an “instant-on”, ”instant off” capability without a concurrent step-up in emissions would be the most efficient treatment for TAFB.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Background

• TAFB has commissioned the investigation of an innovative technology to meet plant and regulatory requirements. A Gas Phase Corona Reactor (GPCR), also known as a dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) or non-thermal plasma (NTP) reactor, is being designed to reduce VOC emissions from painting operations.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Project Goals

• Establish optimum operating conditions using bench-scale studies.

• Test capacity limits for design and cost of full-scale equipment.

• Collect statistically significant data to verify VOC destruction and determine operating costs.

• Two week operation test at Tinker AFB with greater than 90% removal of VOCs from stack exhaust.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Project Phases

• Phase I: Investigate operation of different reactor geometries. Verify destruction capabilities. Investigate operating variables using single-tube, bench-scale reactors.

• Phase II: Design pilot-scale reactor for 1,000 scfm (multi-tube design) and demonstrate unit at TAFB. Develop technology demonstration plan.

• Phase III: Test 1,000 scfm unit. Determine economic and scale-up factors for the plasma unit. Design full-scale reactor for 20,000 cfm.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Plasma Discharge Process

• High electric fields are used to generate high energy electrons (up to 10 eV) which collide with the gas molecules to create highly reactive ions and/or free-radicals.

• The dielectric barrier prevents the direct flow of current and prevents excess heating.

• Essentially no warm-up period required, allowing “instant on” capability.

• “On-the-fly” adjustment of power to handle variation in VOC loading

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Dielectric Barrier DischargeOuter Electrode Dielectric Barrier

Inner Electrode Plasma Zone

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Phase I

• Investigate operation of different reactor geometries.

• Verify destruction capabilities.

• Investigate operating variables using single plasma zone, bench-scale reactors.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Target components:– Toluene– Methyl Isobutyl Ketone– Butyl Acetate– Sec-Butyl Alcohol

– Methyl Propyl Ketone– Ethyl 3-Ethoxypropionate– 1,6-Hexamethylene

Diisocyanate

– Gas Mixture– Actual Stack Gas

Operating variables:– Reactor geometry

• Round, square, plate– Electric field strength

• 16-18 kV– Discharge frequency

• 200-400 Hz– Residence time

• 0.05-0.2 seconds– VOC concentration

• 35-250 ppm– Humidity

• 0-80% relative humidity

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

F T P

F T P

Air

Cyl

ind

er

FlowController

Tolueneand Heater

Thermocouple

PressureTransducer

FlowController

Thermocouple

PressureTransducer

Gas Chromatograph

AC Power SupplyVariable Potential &

FrequencyGround

Step-UpTransformer

Vent

Pla

sma

Rea

cto

r

Process Flow Diagram

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

AC

Ground

Reactor

IsolationAmplifierR3

Z1

R1

R2

DAC

112V

60

Hz

Tra

nsfo

rmer

Circuit Schematic for MeasuringPlasma Electrical Characteristics

10V

15k

V

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Flat Plate Reactor

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Square Tube Reactor

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Single Tube Reactor

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Single Tube Reactor

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Rea

ctor

Tur

ned

Off

Rea

ctor

Tur

ned

On

Initial Total Effluent Concentration

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Sample time (minutes)

PP

M

Sec-Butanol MIBK Toluene Butyl Acetate total effluent

Figure 3. Plot of destruction data (as concentration) for V” = 17 kVrms, f =

300 Hz, tres = 0.1 second, and rh = 0% (Run #04).

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Rea

ctor

Tur

ned

Off

Rea

ctor

Tur

ned

On

90% of Initial Concentration

Initial Concentration

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Sample time (minutes)

Fra

ctio

n of

inle

t co

ncen

trat

ion

Sec-Butanol MIBK Toluene Butyl Acetate total effluent

Figure 4. Plot of destruction data (as a fraction of inlet conc.) for V” = 17 kVrms, f = 300 Hz, tres = 0.2 second, and rh = 70-80% (Run #40).

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Phase I Results

• Reactor geometry: Single dielectric barrier, annular gap.• Electric field strength: Greater destruction at higher electric

field strengths. • Discharge frequency: Greater destruction at higher discharge

frequencies.• Residence time: Greater destruction efficiency at higher

residence times.• VOC concentration: Greater destruction efficiency at higher

concentrations.• Humidity: Improves destruction efficiency of some components,

reduces destruction efficiency of others. Humid conditions improve overall destruction efficiency. May increase energy requirements.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Phase II

• Design pilot-scale reactor for treating 1,000 cfm (multi-tube design) and demonstrate unit at TAFB.

• Determine economic and scale-up factors for the plasma unit.

• Develop technology demonstration plan.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Phase II – Current Status

• Comparing energy consumption parameters of different size reactors to determine scaling factors:– Single-tube reactor with a 1 to 50 cm plasma zone.– 10-tube reactors with 1-cm or 5-cm plasma zones in each

tube.

• Difficulties measuring the secondary current – require customized circuitry.

• Economics will depend on energy requirements and final size.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

10-Tube Reactor

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Acknowledgments

• Oklahoma City – Air Logistics Center

• Center for Aircraft andSystems/Support Infrastructure

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Acknowledgments

• Vijay Kalpathi – Ph.D. student, Chemical Engineering

• Visalakshi Annamalai – M.S. student, Electrical Engineering

• Rajbarath.P – M.S. student, Environmental Engineering

• Elangovan Karuppasamy – M.S. student, Environmental Engineering

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Questions

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Run #Sec. Volt.

(kV) Freq. (Hz)Residence Time (sec) RH (%)

Total Influent Conc. (ppm) Destr. (%)

Ave. Dest. (%)

1 17.0 300 0.2 0 77.3 92.0%2 17.0 300 0.2 0 76.2 91.2% 91%3 17.0 300 0.2 0 82.6 89.9%4 17.0 300 0.1 0 90.8 82.3%5 17.0 300 0.1 0 83.1 84.6% 83%6 17.0 300 0.1 0 81.6 82.3%7 17.0 300 0.05 0 89.6 73.4%8 17.0 300 0.05 0 88.3 69.2% 70%9 17.0 300 0.05 0 76.9 66.4%

Table 1. Summary of destruction data for residence time comparisons.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Run #Sec. Volt.

(kV) Freq. (Hz)Residence Time (sec) RH (%)

Total Influent Conc. (ppm) Destr. (%)

Ave. Dest. (%)

28 13.6 200 0.05 0 79.8 51.9%29 13.6 200 0.05 0 81.2 57.2% 56%30 13.6 200 0.05 0 79.2 59.2%7 17.0 300 0.05 0 89.6 73.4%8 17.0 300 0.05 0 88.3 69.2% 70%9 17.0 300 0.05 0 76.9 66.4%31 17.0 400 0.05 0 90.4 85.3%32 17.0 400 0.05 0 81.3 81.4% 83%33 17.0 400 0.05 0 88.4 82.9%

Table 2. Summary of destruction data for line operating frequency comparisons.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Run #Sec. Volt.

(kV) Freq. (Hz)Residence Time (sec) RH (%)

Total Influent Conc. (ppm) Destr. (%)

Ave. Dest. (%)

16 16.0 300 0.05 0 77.8 50.9%17 16.0 300 0.05 0 88.7 72.6% 64%18 16.0 300 0.05 0 89.9 69.8%7 17.0 300 0.05 0 89.6 73.4%8 17.0 300 0.05 0 88.3 69.2% 70%9 17.0 300 0.05 0 76.9 66.4%25 18.0 300 0.05 0 92.6 77.5%26 18.0 300 0.05 0 90.6 75.7% 76%27 18.0 300 0.05 0 91.5 75.5%

Table 3. Summary of destruction data for applied electric potential comparisons.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Run #Sec. Volt.

(kV) Freq. (Hz)Residence Time (sec) RH (%)

Total Influent Conc. (ppm) Destr. (%)

Ave. Dest. (%)

43 13.6 200 0.2 0 256.6 47.0% 47%46 13.6 200 0.2 0 157.3 57.3% 57%49 13.6 200 0.2 0 37.5 67.1% 67%

Table 4. Summary of destruction data for VOC concentration comparisons.

Reduction of VOC Emissions from Paint-BoothOperations Using Dielectric Barrier Discharge

Run #Sec. Volt.

(kV) Freq. (Hz)Residence Time (sec) RH (%)

Total Influent Conc. (ppm) Destr. (%)

Ave. Dest. (%)

1 17.0 300 0.2 0 77.3 92.0%2 17.0 300 0.2 0 76.2 91.2% 91%3 17.0 300 0.2 0 82.6 89.9%34 17.0 300 0.2 30-45 96.0 97.2%35 17.0 300 0.2 30-45 88.1 97.2% 97%36 17.0 300 0.2 30-45 81.6 97.3%40 17.0 300 0.2 65-80 91.1 97.4%41 17.0 300 0.2 65-80 87.9 96.0% 97%42 17.0 300 0.2 65-80 92.5 96.2%

Table 5. Summary of destruction data for relative humidity comparisons.