I

I
I
I

Municipal Incineration and

Air Pollution Control
.

WILMER JENS

City of Milwaukee

Bureau of Garbage Collection & Disposal

Milwaukee, Wisconsin
FRED R. REHM
County of Milwaukee

Department of Air Pollution Control

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

ballles had to be removed. They then installed two

stages of a plate type steel baffle, each stage consisting
of two rows of flat plates vertically installed. These
plates were eight inches in width, one-quarter inch thick,
and spaced six inches apart across the width of the
breeching. The breeching cross-section dimensions were
seven feet in width and fourteen feet in height. The first
stage of baffles was stationary, rising ten feet from the
floor of the breeching. The second stage of baffles was
adjustable, dropping from the top of the breeching to give
at least ten feet of breeching coverage. Both stages were
designed with six plates in the front row and seven plates
in the back row. These rows were separated by five
inches. The back plates were set to overlap the front
plates by one inch. Each set of baffles had three spray
headers with thirteen spray nozzles in each header. This
gave good water coverage of all plates. A second test
series was conducted and the plant was found to meet
capacity requirements and also the air pollution control
code. The air pollution tests were conducted by the
Milwaukee County Department of Air Pollution Control.
The plant was then turned over to the Disposal
Division of the City of Milwaukee. The Disposal
Division operated the furnaces lor about six months
when a mishap occurred due to a human failure. The
overfire and undcrfire air had been controlled manually in
the original design. Overheating took place in one of the
units causing a blister in the furnace over an area of
about six feet in diameter. To prevent this from recurring,

Abstract

The history and development of municipal incinerator

air pollution control in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is dis
cussed. This community has pioneered in the develop.
ment of effective municipal incinerator air pollution con
trol systems.
Comprehensive performance test data of a municipal
incinerator incorporating three new control concepts are
presented.
The effects of variable burning capacity operation on
air pollution emissions from a municipal incinerator are
detailed and discussed.
Green Bay Avenue Incinerator

'
In 195 3 the City of Milwaukee pl_ced the Green Bay
Avenue Incinerator into operation. The incinerator was
installed by the Nichols Engineering and Research Cor
poration. It consists of two 150 ton-per-day Monohearth
furnaces. Concern over the possibility of air pollution
emissipns resulted in provisions in the design of the
plant lor a wet scrubber type system, including structural
provisions for electrostatic precipitators, should they
later be found necessary.
In 1954 Nichols Engineering and Research Corporation
performed several tests for capacity performance. They
began the first test with a vertical-venetian blind type of
stainless steel baffle. This created too great a pressure
drop across the ballle and the capacity test failed. These
74

I
I
1

1,
il
i

.1

thermalactuated control was

o",,'irc nnd undc rfirc air
and combustion chamber
ce
furna
. .. lIt(1 to regtltute
y
.
nll
tic
Uilf1pt-mture8 nutonm
three months, complaints
."(fcr opcrntillg for only about
near the incinerators.
rhood
neighbo
the
ftf"fC' .tech'cd from
th
emission of pieces
to
regard
in
were
'lJJ.t' romplaints
smoke
emissions. In
nal
occasio
and
')' c;L,Aueo material
aints
were j us
compl
the
that
tf"ft.'igntions disclosed

The water that was used to supply the spray headers

was furnished from the City water main. It had a pressure
of 75 to 80 psi. When the area became more lleavily
populated and the demand for water became greater, the
available water pressure dropped at intervals causing the
spray nozzles on the headers to run dry and the plate type
baffles warped and sagged.
To overcome this problem, a reservoir was installed
and the water spray system was pressurized. At this time,
the cooling water from all dampers was diverted to the
reservoir. During the time that the piping changes were

it'"

to

..

,iIi.d.
AI Ih.t I illle complete baffle coverage of the entire
UOfi!l Hcction of the breeching was tried. These baffles
wrt or the sume plate type design as discussed earlier.
A contributing factor to the fly ash and smoke emissions
et.n hnvc been the increased quantities of combustible
,.bhi.1t then being consumed as compared to the material
fi'cdn'll {luring the tests. Also, the actual test was run
"ilh n 50 per cent garbage and 50 per cent rubbish refuse,
.,.ilh n moisture content of 3 0 per cent by weight, per
tSJt:'cilil'l1tions. In the meantime, the refuse collected
.... found to be considerably drier and more bulky in
,olume.
To eliminate the resulting smoke emission, a photocell
4lftmgl'lIlcnt was interlocked with the thermocouple
lutivRled overfireeunderfire combustion air control. Then,
t"ithcr of two conditions changed the normal underfire
tomhuslion air to overfire air. This change from underfire
to u\'crfire air is made when combustion chamber temperaw
tUtt'S exceed a set limit, or when the photocell detects
'nt 0 smoky condition exists. See Fig. 1 for a schematic
wiring diagram illustrating the automatic overfireeunderfire
nir control. Note that this is a simple "oneof" system.

made, the baffles which had been of a flat plate design

were redesigned so that additional rigidity was added.
This was done by bending the edges back one and one
half inches on each side at a 3 0 degree angle. The
modified baffles were installed with the streamlined side
facing the gas stream in the first row and were reversed

in the second row. An eight inch spacing between the

front row and rear row was used. The front row of baffles
overlapped the edge of the back stage by one and onehalf inches. This modification resulted in doubling the
amount of fly ash collected. At tlds time the fly ash was
flushed into the sanitary sewer.
Lincoln Avenue Incinerator

In 1955 the Lincoln Avenue Incinerator was placed in

operation. It was constructed by the Pittsburgh-Des
Moines Company. The plant's two 150 ton-per-day fur
naces were of rectangular construction with Flynn &
Emrich rocking grates. Separate breechings were

Combustion Chamber
Thermocouple
Photocell Smoke Eye
In flue
Undetfire Position
(Normal)

Temperature Limit
Control

Q, ,

"

Time Deloy
Circuit Breaker
(Normolly Closed)

,0

Conlrol Circuit
Power Circuit

Damper Motor
power Supply

FIG. 1

COMBUSTION AIR CONTROL - SCHEMATIC

75

,'
'.,--...,'

U
======
J:

Overfire Position
(on Demand)

f. D. fan
Damper Control
Molor

(s'--

FIG. 2.

1I

II

0':JliE
3 1]
4
3

.1

--

ORIGINAL DESIGN -CHECKER WALLS FULL WIDTH

AND HEIGHT

FIG.2b REFRACTORY RETENTION CELLS ON FLOOR

18" x 18" k 12"

.:1.;

.::0

-"

.J

FIG. 2. WET BAFFLE -SPRAY ON PLATE

c:=
r

r:::: :::::
-

!J

FIG.2d VARIABLE SPACING OF PLATES

3.

1.

2.

LEGEND
Fir. Cells
"
Combustion Chamber
Breeching

4. Expansion Chamber

[0GGI

'\

6.

5.

Chimney
Fly Ash Settling Tonks

7.

Classifier

9.

Cleor Water Well

S, Primary Well

FIG. 2e REX CHAIN BELT CLASSIFIER SYST EM WITH FLUMES

AND PIPING
.

FIG. 2 LINCOLN AVENUE INCINERATOR MODIFICATIONS

provided f9r each unit. A 175-foot high chimney was

provided
The Lincoln Avenue Incinerator was successively
modified to incorporate five different air pollution con
trol systems in the ensuing eight years. Fig. 2, Lincoln
. Avenue In cinerator Modifications, shows the five different
systems that were evaluated. Fig. 2a represents the
plant's original design in which two full-sized checker.... walls were installed in the breeching of each unit. Air
. , --.collution emission tests disclosed that the plant failed to

76

meet the local requirements. The plant was next modified

as illustrated in Fig. 2b. The modifications consisted of
refractory retention cells, roughly 1 8 inches square by 1 2
inches deep throughout the entire floor of the breeching
section of the plant. This modification not only failed to
meet the air pollution requirements but imposed severe
cleanout problems for the operating personnel.
The plant was next modified to provide a wet-baffle
collector system similar to that which was installed at the
Green Bay Avenue Incinerator and which.is shown in Fig.

wasted due to acidic buildup when recirculation was at

tempte d . At the same time, the spray header and nozzle
system used became plugged and was found to be un
satisfactory. These corrosion and erosion effects were
noted, even with batch-type soda ash neutralization of
the water. Subsequently, an automatic soda ash feeder
system was developed which was used with the recir
eulation system.
At this point, a new tank-type impingement baflle col
lector system evolved. This was of a closed-tank
pressurized design with one-eighth inch weep holes
providing the outlets for the water to flood the impinge
ment surfaces. Plugging of the weep holes with the re
circulated, neutralized water resulted in failure of some
of the baffle elements. The baffle elements were then
changed, as shown in Fig. 4, Detrick-Jens Cas Washer.
The total collection and water classification systems are
as shown in Fig. 2e .. The present gas washer system
uses a water manifold and one inch pipe extending to
within eight inches of the bottom of the individual baffle
tank elements. Fig. 4 shows the details of the final
design which has solved the baffle element wetting
problem. These baffle tank elements have given over two
and one "half years of satisfactory service without any
serious corrosion, erosion or warpage problems. They arc
of mild carbon steel contruction.
Lincoln Avenue Incinerator Tests

During the week of July 18, 1965, an extensive study

FIG.3 BAFFLE AND CATCH PAN

It" AI<o nl Ihis time, a catch basin or pan was installed

h.,II.. h cehings below each bafle section. The water
""J fly Mh collected in the catch pan was piped to two
... ,...... oUldoor settling tanks. Fig. 3, Balfle and
th" PlIn, is nn isometric drawing showing the breech
"l t.!OUI o( this modification. This system permitted
ta4 .tpIAnce o( this plant by the City o( Milwaukee, as
Ii. ail pollulion requirements were met.
cquentlYI modifications were made as shown in
n" "i 10 ,ory Ihe spacing between the (ront and rear
\<."'" <){ I. borne elements in accordance with the draft
.. \'." . .,..... o( Ihe (urnace at various levels of plant
.

"I!..... 13 -Ihe idca being that improved air pollution

f....u(. could b.e achieved at low load periods with a
....A... ",>.clng belween Ihe front and rear rows of baffles.
111" ,yolem worked satisfactorily, it wa planned to
..... '"ute drart controller to modulate the spacing be
wou ,1. b"Ule rows. A water system failure and result
iii" -,.m damng. precluded the air pollution evaluation
.j ,\,. "I'toRch.
1\\ n.. Uti modificntion
involved the installation of the
"U4i.b.lt Inc.
classif
ier system, with attendant
."".iI .04
piping. TIliS
.
. 1'11ustrated'10
' rnod'1f'lCatioo
IS
.'t.'If.
!..hlnlly, the water from the classifier was

FIG.4 DETRICK.JENS GAS WASHER FINAL DESIGN

77

--1 tlOOR TUT

APCA TA- 3 Incinerator Committee Informative Report

No. 2, "Test Methods for Determining Emission Charac
teristics of Incinerators" [ 1] and those reported as early
as 1956 by Rchm[21.
Fig. 5, Solids Iaterial Balance, graphically depicts
the results developed in these tests. From this drawing,
it can be seen that a 8 1.8 per cent reduction by weight
of refuse charged to the furnaces was accomplished. A

"19f6j 10 7n.v6S

I()o SAfflE SPACING

'-- '

1408 To..,
91$ R(JfH Copocity
7510 "'. Yd
2826O,"'9H
23.201"'i4s lit,
37S.lw. Yel

.ill<!<
5.eI) TO<\l (Ortl

).
0.41" Chi'
8.24 ./Ton o....

17S'
SlO<i

BEHIND BAfflE

.....

269M TO<ll (4.8H.O) 5.33 1

(Dry). 1.01 To'" (Ory).
2SM TO<'l' (Oo-y).
c-
c-b.
15..s C-!..
7.' T......
I.e TOtiI'
18.'''io,crgt
27C-!..
27.C-1t.
36-C. 'To" o,aril
o.so.oi"t'
0.10"0."'9'
2.(6./T0<I
1O.38./T0II
.sSlc.".Yd,.
0.....
0....

1.29 TO<II - 54.6!1i H.O

O. r
(Ory) .
Il.l"c-&.
0.0," o.
O,$3./TonO'...,.

.....
...

r ,-_-,O"'-:::;''''"__J

. UAAIFJER

2(,12 1M
7.t,SlIi H.O
6.ISTo<,I(Oty)
16.0"c-!>.
0,"0.01_
'.75'f T""0. ,_

...

FIG.5 SOLIDS MATERIAL BALANCE LINCOLN AVENUE

'INCINERATOR

was conducted of the overall perfonnance of the City of

Milwaukee Lincoln Avenue Incinerator. I t was probably
one of the most comprehensive studies of any municipal
incinerator plant that has ever been made up to this time.
A complete solids material balance on the plant was made
for the full five days of 24 hour per day operation. 'This
involved weighing of all refuse charged, the weighing and
analysis of all residue and solids removed by the system,
and the determination ahd analysis of the stack solids
emitted. In addition, an analysis was made of the water
used in the incinerator fly ash system. This complete
incinerator system analysis was made with a lO-in.
spacing between the front and fear rows of impingement
baffles in the Detrick-Jens Gas Washer system. The
locally designed and developed automatic overfire
underfire air system was in full operation throughout
these tests. The locally developed and designed water
clarification, recirculation and neutralization system was
also operative throughout these tests. City of Milwaukee
Bureau of Garbage Collection and Disposal personnel
performed all normal duties attendant to the operation of
the incinerator plant, as well as taking data on fixing
plant operating conditions, including all ,veight meaHure ..
- ments. )<:mployees of the County of Milwaukee Depart
ment of Air Pollution Control performed all sampling,
analytical and testing services, including the air pollution
emission studies. The air pollution emission studies were
conducted following procedures detailed in the ASME Test
Code PTC 27- 1957 "Determining the Dust Concentration
-Jin a Gas Stream" together with those included in the
78

92.6 per cent reduction by refuse volume was realized in

the furnaces.. The heterogeneous character of municipal
refuse does not readily lend itself to representative
sampling, hence this was not attempted at this time. An
earlier $75,000 study by a private consulting firm had
largely been devoted to the quantitation of the generation
and analyses of City of Milwaukee refuse on seasonal,
district, ethnic and economic level bases. It is interest
ing to note that the average per cent combustible in the
',residue of this batchfeed incinerator was 15.5 per cent.
'{t should further be pointed out that furnace residue, like
refuse, is a very heterogeneous material, and representa
tive sampling is most difficult. No attempt was made to
separate the inerts (metal, glass, etc.) from either the ref
1 .5 per cent combustible residue
use or residue. The 5
figure represents the analyses of the ashed or burned
material. It could be expected that this figure would be
greatly reduced (by 50 to 75 per cent) if the analyses had
reflected the total residue, including inerts.

TABLE 1
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL FACTORS
Collection
Lb OustlTon

Per Cent

Effic loncy

Charge

Charge

Per Cent

30.28

1.51

Fly Ash Removed In System 22.04

1.10

8.24

0.41

Fly Ash Leaving Furnace

Fly Ash Leaving Stack
Comb. Chamber Removo I

72.8
34.2

10.38

0.52

Breeching Removal

2.08

0.10

10.4

Baffle Removal

8.75

0.44

49.1

Behind Baffle Removal

0.83

0.04

9.2

9.58

0.48

53.8

Boffle & Behind BoHle

Removal

Table 1, Air Pollution' Control Factors, summarizes

some of the air pollution control factors with respect to
the solids material balance depicted in Fig. 5. It can be
seen from t4is table tllat the total incinerator system ex
hibited an overall dust collection efficienc), of 72.8 per
cent on the 30.28 Ib dust/ton of charge that left the fur
naces proper. The impingement baffle collector exhibited
a 49. 1 per cent collection efficiency on the fly ash enter

ing the baffle collector. When credited with the fly ash
settled out of the gas stream behind the baffle, which is
not unreasonable since this fly ash contained 45.6 per
cent moisture which was introduced in the baffle col-

.'

y'
,


! --

..

lector,th dust collection eficiency 01 the impingement

.
baWe was lound to be 53.8 per cent.
The 10 inch spacing between the Iront and rear rows
01 the impingementbaWe collector system had been
arrived at arbitrarily because 01 the lear 01 too great a
dralt loss producing a lurther reduction in reluse burning
capacity in an already overloaded incinerator disposal
system. The Iilwaukee County area needs 2100 tons per
day of new incineration capacity to meet this community's
municipal reluse disposal requirements 01 1970. A
markedly greater incineration capacity requirement is im ..
minent if commercially and industrially generated reluse
is accepted lor disposal.
Subsequently,on August 11 through 13,1965,another
series of tests was conducted on the Lincoln Avenue
incinerator to evaluate the elect on capacity and air pol
lution performance 01 an 8 inch spacing between the Iront
and rear rows of the impingement-baWe collector system.
This test series was limited to an accurate determination
01 the reluse charge rate and the stack emission rate.
The composite data Irom the July and August 1965
test series are reported in Table 2,Summary 01 Air Pol
lution Emission Studies at the City 01 Milwaukee Lincoln
Avenue Incinerator. From this table,it can be seen that
the stack emission rate lor the July, 1965 test series
with a 10 inch spacing between the Iront and rear row 01
impingement bames ranged from 6.6 5 to 11.6 6 lb dust/ton
01 charge while the capacity burning rate varied Irom 91
to 151 per cent during these tests. The average stack
emission rate lor the 11 test runs was 8.24 lb dust/ton of
charge at an average capacity burning rate of 121.6 per
cent. The stack exi t dustloadings varied Irom 0.679 to
1.588lb dust/lOOO lb flue gas, corrected to a 50 per cent
excess air basis.
This table lurther shows that the stack emission rate
for the August 1965 test series with an 8 inch spacing
between the front and rear row of impingement bames
ranged from 6.10 to 7.90 lb dust/ton of charge while the
capacity burning rate ranged Irom 91 to 133 per cent
during these tests. The average stack emission rate for
the six test runs was 6.96 lb dust/ton of charge at an
average capacity burning rate 01 122.7 per cent. It can
be seen that there was a 15.5 per cent reduction in the
stack emission rate at approximately the same average
burning rate with the 8 inch bame spacing as opposed to
the 10 inch bame spacing condition. Significantly,the
stringency of an exit dustloading limitation of 0.85 lb
dust/lOoo lb flue gas,corrected to a 12 per cent CO,
basis,is apparent in this table. It can be seen that none
of the tests, with either a 10 inch or 8 inch bame row
spacing,would comply with a 12 per cent CO, corrected
limitation. The high moisture content of the flue gases
in n wet-type fly ash control system (16.65 to 20.65 per
cent) makes correction to a 12 per cent CO, basis a
drastic requirement.
Fig. 6,Dustloading vs. Capacity Operation,is a graph

01 the results showing the stack dustloading rate as a

function 01 the rate 01 incinerator operation lor the two
conditions of bame spacing. The data are very good in
establishing a logarithmic relationship between the stack
exit dustloadings (corrected to a 50 per cent excess air
basis) and the rate 01 incinerator operation lor this plant.
Also seen on this graph is the effect of the 8 inch baWe
spacing in reducing the stack exit dustloadings. It can
be seen that improved dust collection perlormance was
achieved with the 8 inch spacing with little apparent loss
in incineration capacity. The improved air pollution per
formance was achieved with an increased draft loss 01
only -0.08 inches 01 water across the collector bame.
These data are considered very significant in that
they clearly point the way to achieving better incinerator
air pollution perlormance with this type of collection
system by the simple expedient of reducing the spacing
between the rows of bames, or adding additional rows of
baWe elements. It is obvious,of course,that a reduction
in bame spacing,or the addition of more rows of boWes,
must be accompanied by the use of higher stacks and/or
induced dralt fans in order not to suler a reduction in
burning capacity. This collection system lends itsel
well to ready modification as emission limitations are de..
creased in the future. The much-used dustloading limita
tion 01 0.851b dust/lOOO lh flue gas,corrected' to 50 per
cent excess ir,is shown on this graph to point out that
this plant operates below this limitation with a 10 inch
spacing between baffle rows at capacity burning rates
below no per cent. At an 8 inch spacing between the
baffle rows,this plant meets this dustloading limitation
when operated up to 127 per cent of rated burning
capacity. The 0.85 lb dust/lOOO lb flue gas,corrected to
a 50 per cent excess air basis,limitation is in effect in
Milwaukee County.
While it is not the intent 01 the authors to discuss the
matter of dustloading emission limitations, it is con..
sidered significant that not a single citizen complaint
concerning fly ash deposits,attributable to the two City
of Milwaukee incinerator plants embodying full coverage
impingement-baffle collector systems,has been received
in the 10 years 01 operation of these plants. Nor is it
lelt that the approximate one ton 01 fine particulate
matter emitted in a 24-hour day from these plants is like
ly to present any serious atmospheric pollution problem
to this community in the foreseeable future
The lollowing are some of the advantages of this
latest design of wet impingement-bame dust collector
system. The baffle elements are relatively simple to
construct. With a soda ash neutralized recirculation
system,low carbon steel baffles have demonstrated
satisfactory life and performance in over two years of
operation without any serious erosion,corrosion or dis
tortion. The bame arrangement provides a flexible
system where individual elements can be replaced with
out the necessity to take the plant out 01 operation. By

79

04:21

2:21

I ....

1.... 0-1/1000 ,I> Goo.

In. HO

1000....

"1'

STACK MASS

32 F.

29.'12 1ft. Ho

39.5

6.65

116

139

7.59
39.9

<8.'

124

131

1637

,.

59

7.70

104

108

13.48

27.0

45

29.55

'$/

46.,

7.51

87

92

11.52

23..1

19.82

18.45

150.900

41.8

9.63

34.S

11.66

205

49.2

8.20

102

100

148

25.0

45

VOL

5:05PM

8-11-65

TEST 5

OUST

TO

8:43

8-IUS

TEST 15

,...

6.86

II.

133

16.57

33.2

52

29.23

767

51

6.86

133

ISS

17.35

31.2

31.0

6.93

102

118

14.10

23.7

38

18.25

64.70

.16

37.8

6.16

91

119

14.82

23.9

"

20.50

62.89

.16

1SS,800

...

29.36

67fJ

12.79

13.22

38.0

7.73

lOS

108

13.$0

23.1

39.1

7.90

123

108

13.54

23.2

...

19.65

20.6 5

'2

63.S7

.08

141.3)0

29.23

""

...5

6.10

.,

128

15.95

26.S

42

20.65

62.74

.16

3.58
12.87

13.41

29.25

"12

3.29

29.'"

672

'77

.24

138

3.,.

3.66
3.67

679
29.35

'"

LO<S

.775

.751

.163
.39S

.552

L081

....

.235

.323

.169

.0701

1"'7

TO

""

8-13065

.23<

1.518

.80S

.341

.'"

.221

.0935

47

OUST

29.28

...

159.800

10-.55""

8-13-65

VOL

TEST 7

__

TEST 17

.411

.17<

1.075

.571

.242

.3SA

29....
29.45

642

.708

.0797
.188

8-IUS
2:58PM

8-1...,
I'"
TO

vol
T[5T6

OUST
TEST 1 6

b<:'':;:'':'''' ,""",'''''''-'''- ;r.I. _''''''' '':'''"",:_.''':M''_''' ..

(.".e,...,"-''"':.,"if:;'\t;'}:iifly*cfJ'?f'*'ci'..*'{:,'48jKWI&;i''fW]lx '" ld . ." !" 'J)',..
.

45.2

7.54

..

91

11.38

3S

11.60

1.(9

168.800

19.15 .

.24

12.92

3.72

29..45

. 670

.,,,

.'72
1.025

.159

1.029

.SAI

.231

.lOS

.<31

L068

.S36

.Z1

.326

.....
.160

.189

63.97
19.85

.0185
.179

TO

SS

8-1t.6S

.s.c,

.16

19.73

OUST
TEST 14

.233

1.421

.753

.322

,3.40

3.21

29.23

751

1.032

.514

.20'

1.505

.749

.297

....1

....,

.0998
.233

.0195
.200

.24

15.42

141

12:41
TO

8-11.6S

TO

9:14

63.47

19.55

OUST
TEST 13

8-11-65

.16

123

7.22-65
4;05PM

OUST
TEST 12

10:32
10:52
3:33
38
17
----- -------- ----- ----- ----- -----

1:59
TO

7.22-65

VOL
TEST 4

63,63

35.3

.....

29.45

743

OUST
TEST 11

13.38

'.87

29.2 7

737

.761

...,

.163

1.04S

.561

.225

.337

.1$1

.0726

12:55

TO

11:07

7.22-65

OUST

TEST to

12.69

13.28

3.38

29.29

700

.708

30.9

51

'3.43

6<.41

.0'

12.98

29."

72S

1.588

.381

1.001

.539

.218

.281

.151

.0613

10:15

8:43
TO

722-65

.ISA

13.37

49

7-21-65
3:50PM

OUST
TEST ')

.8AS

3.69

.24

VOL
TEST 3

.346

231

1.183

.'"

.685

.'64

.149

3:18

TO

1:41

7-:1:165

3.53

29.52

1.211

.....

.267

OUST
TEST 8

mf1t"tWg,f#feiffI!I"'W,w@wi"etW'f!IiW@'tW'tr:@!i&1jmj'8mrl?1md'@fj!Smr1ilf.}j'i@iiif&,":t'c..:,:<.',..,..;,.;.,v,

AT SCTP

35.7

'O

" Combu.tlbl.

8.00

129

9.20

183

129

Povnd.JTon Chorg.

P"""d.iH.

lSI

16.08

18.87

R_. T on.!H.

Copoclty

17.37

32.2

:g.a"

58
34.8

52

75

29.SO

790

18.10

19.40

17.55

19.42

16.65

19.55

.16
63.65

.25
6<.74

.24
63.75

.16

12.94

3.70

29.SA

738

.'79

.361

.146

1.685

.898

.'41

.371

.264

.109

12:28

10:53
TO

7.21.65

.SO'

65.15

...

OUST
TEST 7

.20'

.16

169.100

ISS

.292

.0628

10:28

TO

8:56

7.21-65

63.66-

13.14

12.74

3.77

'.87

7.20-65
5:00PM

OUST
TEST 6

.17

13.58

12.18

13.68

29.55

29.55

VOL
TEST 2

65.92

3.S6

4.58

29.55

71.

728

:m

730

.'65

.414

.951

.515

.169

.211

1.311

.701

.287

.413

.221

.0903

4:18

TO

OO

720-65

.S06

Rot.- No.!'Hr

P.. c-r

OUST
TEST 5

.""

1.071

.571

1.295

.233

.346

.1"

.0752

1:53

TO

12:13

7.2\).65

.693

3.58

167.soo

DUST
TEST"

, .286

.38<

.20S

.0848

10:55

TO

,,15

7.20-65

29.c?

706

'.19-65

5:00PM

OUST
TEST 3

29.50

..n

.7"

VOL

TEST 1

Totol N....b
.

CHARGE RECORD

P_... .

Temp

Voh, . _ d...

...

TEST RESU!.TS

VOLUMETRIC

HZ

-"
O-"

COz"
0, .
CO .

P,...

... .

T.... . "F

STACK CONDITIONS

1.403

...,

.7S2

Gro'''';c.. F,

1..10 0....1/1000 110 Ga.

.169

.331

Groln';C.. F,

TO fXCSS AIR

OUSTLOADING CORR.

.531

.99'

.221

.AA2

1.00S

.m

(;ooa'''';C" Ft ..

.=

c;.,,;"alC.. Ft.

ceRRo TO 1'% CO2

DUSTt..OAOING.

U. Ov../looo c..

.202

.....,

TO

TO

.132

..

IOO

.m

'.19_65

1.1965

Gr.1".!c" Ft

DUST
TEST 2

DUST

TABLE 2

SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTION EMISSION STUDIES AT THE CITY OF MILWAUKEE LINCOLN AVENUE INC INERATOR

TEST 1

o..o,"slCv Ft

OUSTLOADINC

TEST TIME

TEST DATE

TEST NO.

J"

..---/'

'

addin g additional rows 01 hames, or reducing the

Ie 18 eastl y ac
Wh'h"
.pacin g between haffI c rows nce of the plants
perlorma
n
plished - the air pollutio
operated at a
units
were
(om
(8n he improved. The bame
'
these tests
urmg
d
water rate
12.33 8pm per baffle unit
pumping cost. The
which represents a nominal water
.
on the gas s.de
water
system
flowing
a
s
embodie
)'.Iem
0It

s agnat'IOn and
g pomts

o( the incinerator, e Ilmmotlfl

The baffle units make it un
diment accumulation.
spray header and spray nozzles
water
a
use
to
ssary
nece
water system. Water
pressure
low
a
of
use
permits
And
to be unsuitable
found
were
nozzles
and
henders
tpray
em.
syst
n
atio
rcul
(or n reci
.I 1 her

WET CHEMISTRY ANALYSES

Element

'

Collector
Cotch

phorus

1.460

Stock
Residue

12.3

12.3
.350

1.760

1.390

.620

Phos-

Anions

Effluent
7.7

1.140
5.4

S'"cote

[3]

Phos

I. . ts,the

Stock
Effluent

8.3

pH
Sulphur

Analysis of Sampleel Sollels

The e.mpled particulates from the stack emission

clarifier or dust collector catch, and the furnace
residue (coinciding with Dust Test Run No. 6) were
ashed and were analyzed for various chemical com
ponents and properties. In addition,the sampled stack
particulates from Dust Test Run No. 8 were ashed and
nlso submitted to the same analyses. Two general types
or analyses were conducted - spectrographic and wef
chemistry. The wet chemistry determinations were made
hy.hoth the Milwaukee County Department of Air Pollution
Control Laboratory and a private commercial laboratory.
The results of these analyses are tabulated he low.

Oust Test Run No. 8

Dust Test Run No.6

phates

.88

.77

Nitrates

.62

.64

Sulfates

5.0

Chlorides

.02

2.1
.22

The basicity of all the sampled particulates is con

sidered significant. The high order of hasicity of the
collector catch and residue samples is considered
particularly significant.
'

Particle Size Analyses

The sampled stack particulates from Dust Test Run

. No. 8 were submitted to a sub-sieve particle size anal
ysis and paticle density determination. The Coulter
Counter electronic particle size counter system was used
in these analyses. The results are tabulated helow:
Density: 1.8 5 grams per cubic centimeter
Per Cent by Weight Greater
Microns

SPECTROGRAPHIC ANAL YSES

ELEMENTS REPORTED IN PER CENT ASHED MATERIAL
Dust Test Run No. 6
Element

Stock

Collector

Effluent

Cotch

Silicon
5+
Mongonue . 1 - 1.0

..

Dust Test Run No. 8

Stack

Residue
10+
. 1-1.0

. 1-1.0

.01-.1

. 1 - 1 .0

Chromium

.1- 1.0

Hick.1

.01-.1

1-10

.001-.0 1 .001-.01

Copper

. 1-1.0

.01-.1

. 1-1.0

Vanadium
Iron

.01-.1

.001-.0 1 .01-.1

.01-.1

.001-.01

.5-5.0

1 -10

. 1-1.0

Tin

.5-5.0

.05-.5

.05-.5

.1- 1.0

.001-.01

lOt

Aluminum

1-10

Zinc

1-10

1-10

. 1-1.0

1-10

1-10

. 1-1.0

1-10

1-10

1-10

.5-5.0

.5-5.0

Magnesium 1-10
Titanium .5-5.0
Sliver
Boron
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Sod lum
L.od

1-10
.5-5.0

.001-. 0 1 .001-.01 .0001-.00 1

_.0001

.0 1-.1

.01-.1

.01-.1

.01-.1

. 1 - 1.0

. 1-1.0

.1-1.0

.001-. 0 1 .001-.01 -.00 1

lOt

lOt

lOt

1-10

.5-5.0

. 1-1.0

.01-.1

. 1-1.0

. 1-1.0

31.3

20

52.8

10

79.5

94.0

Table 3 - System Water Balance - is a summary of

the incinerator system water balance for the 120hour
test. From this table, it can be seen that there waS a
14.3 per cent moisture evaporation loss,or a loss of 38.8
gallons per minute for this 300 ton per day incinerator
plant. It can also he seen that the cost of soda ash
neutralization amounted to 85.60 per day. This cost
permitted the recirculation of the water in the wet dust
collection system without serious corrosion problems in
the piping, recirculation pump and collector system. The
neutralization permitted recirculation and reuse of the
water in the system and resulted in marked savings in
fresb water consumption at this plant. The effect on
water savings of the installation of the clarifier and
neutralization system is best illustrated by the following
table which compares 1962 water consumption with 1964

S+

1<)+

10.8

30

System Water Balance

Effluent

.1-1.0

Than the Stated Size

44

. 1-1.0
-.001

lOt

' 1_10
.05-.5

81

.10,0
't.O
.0
7.0
.0

'.0
.c

,.0

&'

g
g
c.!

'"

I .

:!

i,

"

L:

I;i
,
'

2.0

1.0

c.,

--

o.
0.1

- ---

.-

o .

--
-

,.,

(0\.><- --

-- - ---

e
f \.
f
e
ff\.
I>V
1>'

.0
.\1
.
6C) ,,"J.
./j.

0" PUS' 11000, GAS

&;...>'"

I-

o. s
o. 4

o. ,

.
.

o. 2

,,

o. I

80

120

100

180

ISC

"C

PER CENT RATED CAPACITY

FIG. 6 DUSTLOADING VS. CAPACITY OPERATION

water consumption for approximately the same annual ton..

nage of refuse disposed.

1962
1964

Refuse T onnoge Water Consumption

60,015 tons
60,045 tons

A t present water rates, the net annual savings effected

hy the recirculation, clarification, neutralization system,
and new type impingement baffle was $10,980. This water
savings will amortize the cost of the clarification, re
circulation, neutralization and new baffle system in less
than two years.
In conjunction with the evaluation of the water system,
pH readings of the water leaving the No. 2 incinerator
baffle elements, that water draining from the area behind
the baffle and that water in the clarifier tank were taken
hourly. The following tabulation summarizes these
results:

Cost of Soda Ash

16,100,000 eu It
4,600,000 eu It

$1150

TABLE 3
SYSTEM WA TER BALANCE
(120.Hour Test)
Total Fresh Woter Used
Used in Residue Quench &
T ruck Wash
In Fly Ash Leaving
Clarifier
In Fly Ash Behind BoHle

- 285,940 gal
- 1,600

- 4,320
170

Location

6,090
- 279,850 gal
Not Fresh Water Used in Collector
2,325 gph
Net Mo eup Water Rote (120 hr)
38.8 gpm
12.33 gpm
Unit Recirculation Rote per Baffle

Clorillor
Loovlng No.2 BoHlo

Draining Bohlnd Boliles

Looched Fly Ash Irom Clorillor

Total Recirculation Rote (22 Baffles) Evaporation Loss Rote of Baffles

Soda Ash Used to Neutralize
Cost Soda Ash ($0.028/Lb)

16,280 gph
14.3%
1,000 Lb
200 Lb/Ooy
$5.60/00y

Average pH

Range of pH

6.98
6.47

5.20 - 8.65
5.50 - 8.20
3.60 - 6.10

4.62
8.80

7.55 - 9.90

It is clearly evident that the wet scrubber system picks

up acidity in scrubbing the incinerator gases. Since the
solids in the gas stream are all on the alkaline side, it is
apparent that the acid buildup in the water from the baffle
collector is caused by a gas phase absorption. It is be82

lieved that this rise in acidity is due to the removal of

organic acid materials from the gas stream. as well as the
formation of carbonic acid. This aspect is being further
explored.
Summary and Conclu.lon.

Three new concepts in municipal incinerator air pol..

lution control. developed jointly by City and County of
Milwaukee personnel. are described in detail. These
concepts consist of a new impingement-baffle fly ash col
lector system. an automatically controlled underlire
overfire air combustion control system, and a water re
circulation, clarification and neutralization system.
A brief history of the development and evolvement of
these three new municipal incinerator control systems is
presented.
Comprehensive test data are presented on a municipal
A du
B

<"

f,.,i'..

(: .
'"

..

and
e
2