TRANSPORTABLE VOC EMISSIONS ANALYSER SUBMITTED FOR QAL1 CERTIFICATION
As a British developer and manufacturer of gas analysers, Signal Group follows the emergence of international Standards very closely. This is because Standards ensure that monitors are fi t for purpose, and also because regulators require operators to employ suitably certifi ed equipment. Signal Group is therefore delighted to confi rm that the latest version of its portable FID analyser, the 3010 MINIFID PURE is being submitted to TÜV for QAL1 testing. This is a procedure to demonstrate that the instrument is suitable for its intended purpose, and meets required performance standards and the uncertainty allowances specifi ed in EU Directives.
Previous versions of this instrument were certifi ed in the UK according to the MCERTS requirements. However, performance requirements have since been unifi ed in Europe, and at the same time product development work has enhanced the capabilities of this product line, so the time has come for us to seek certifi cation to the latest Standards.
Which Standards apply to the discontinuous measurement of TOC emissions?
There are two European standards that apply to the use of portable FID analysers. BS EN 15267-4:2017 specifi es the performance levels and test procedures for automated measuring systems used for discontinuous (periodic) measurements of stationary source emissions. It applies to testing based on techniques specifi ed by a standard reference method (SRM) or an alternative method.
BS EN 12619:2013 specifi es the fl ame ionisation detector (FID) method, and is intended for use as a SRM for the measurement of the mass concentration of gaseous and vaporous organic substances in stationary source emissions up to 1,000 mg/m³. This Standard specifi es the requirements for a FID instrument with results expressed in mg/m³ as total carbon (TVOC).
Why monitor the emissions of organic compounds?
A wide variety of industrial processes produce emissions that contain organic carbon. For example, volatile organic carbon compounds (VOCs) are a common constituent in the emissions of processes that involve petrochemicals, paints, coatings, adhesives and cleaning chemicals. In many of these processes, solvents play a major role and the release of VOCs represents a risk to health and the environment. Similarly, combustion processes give rise to VOC emissions, particularly where combustion involves the use of an organic fuel. This includes fossil fuels such as petrol, diesel and oil, as well as wastes and biofuels. Organic carbon can exist in emissions as a gas or a vapour; the latter being characterised as a substance that is a mixture of two phases - gaseous and liquid.
By monitoring total organic carbon (TOC) concentration in emissions, process operators can demonstrate compliance with relevant legislation, as well as provide insights for process optimisation, because the presence of organic compounds is an indicator of incomplete combustion. In addition, it is common practice to monitor TOC in order to measure the effectiveness of abatement processes.
Transportable Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (T-CEMs) are generally employed for regulatory monitoring; verifying and calibrating installed CEMs, according to the requirements of BS EN 14181, and for providing temporary back-up when permanent CEMs are not operating.
How to monitor TOC emissions
As a Standard Reference Method, TOC measurement with a FID is generally preferred. However, where there is a potential for the emission of particularly toxic VOCs, the site permit may include a requirement for the monitoring of individual organic compounds, which means that a monitoring technology capable of speciation will be necessary. Alternatively, it may be necessary for the monitoring activity to distinguish between methane and non-methane VOCs. Where speciation is required, technology such as Gas Chromatography, FTIR or Mass Spectrometry may be necessary. However, if speciation is required, a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) will almost always be necessary.
Choosing the right instrument
If monitoring is being undertaken for compliance purposes, the environmental permit will indicate the certifi cation required for the emissions monitoring equipment. This will limit the number of suitable suppliers, but a number of other issues will need to be addressed when choosing the most appropriate instrument.
If a transportable instrument is required: is it suitably robust? and has it been designed for portability? Keep in mind that it may be necessary to transport the equipment from site to site, and to carry the instrument up ladders in potentially inclement weather.
Author Contact Details James Clements, Managing Director, Signal Group • 12 Doman Road, Camberley, Surrey, GU15 3DF • Tel: +44 (0) 1276 682841• Email:
sales@signal-group.com • Web:
www.signal-group.com
IET Annual Buyers’ Guide 2020/21
WWW.ENVIROTECH-ONLINE.COM
Price is of course a major consideration, but it is best to compare lifetime costs that take operational costs into account as well as the purchase price. So, issues such as calibration and service requirements will need to be addressed. It is also advisable to examine the supplier’s reputation – do they have support capability? do they have longstanding experience in the supply of portable FIDs? and what has been the experience of previous users?
With over 40 years of experience in the development and manufacture of FIDs, Signal Group can claim to score very highly in such comparisons with the well proven and competitively priced Model 3010 MiniFid. Once this transportable FID has passed through the QAL1 process, Signal’s SOLAR Series IV permanently installed FID will also be submitted for certifi cation.
The prospect of the latest FID technology with TÜV certifi cation for QAL 1 of EN 14181 will be of major interest to stack testers and process operators with a requirement to monitor TOC emissions.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116
