Zero and negative SO2 measurement readings Zero and negative SO2 readings do not necessarily
indicate a failure of the analyzer. Given the allowable calibration accuracy tolerance of +/-2% of the lowest measurement range used, negative readings may still be considered within the acceptable range of the analyzer’s zero setting. Thus, also very low concentrations at in-service measurements may be displayed as zero or even negative.
The following operating conditions typically support high scrubber cleaning efficiencies, resulting in low SO2 levels in the cleaned exhaust gas:
• Low sulphur content of the fuel used • Low engine load • High wash water flow rates in the scrubber
Identifying false readings
Despite the above, zero or negative readings are not always plausible measurement results. It is highly recommended to stay alert whenever this is observed. The most effective fault finder is the observer’s experience, which enables a quick assessment of whether the monitored scenario is realistic.
In addition, any of the below observations is a strong indicator for inaccurate zero readings:
• Irritating odour in the exhaust plume, sometimes with eye irritation.
• No or very little fluctuations in the measurement readings even after adjusting the wash water flow; measurement readings may drop even further into the negative range after increasing the wash water flow.
• CO2 readings below 5%.
The use of fuel with a high sulphur content should also result in noticeable SO2 concentrations in the cleaned gas. Usually, the gas analyzers perform regular self-checks which identify system malfunctions or irregularities. However, it is important to frequently check the device’s error messages.
Fault finding
If the analyzer is suspected of showing false readings, follow the manufacturer’s recommended corrective actions to identify any malfunctions.
When performing a leakage check, ensure it covers the entire measuring system, including the sampling probe and sampling line. Ingress air could significantly dilute the sample and reduce SO2 concentrations to very low levels.
Other systematic mistakes could occur during the calibration process. Potential pitfalls range from deviations from the described procedure to the use of calibration gases with component concentrations that differ from pre-settings in the analyzer’s calibration routine. Also, repeated forced zero adjustment during the zero-point setting with low SO2 readings can shift the zero reference over time, reducing measurement sensitivity in the low concentration ranges.
Recorded values may also differ from local display readings if the sensor signal is not aligned with the specified measurement range setting in the control and monitoring system.
The removal of SO2 in the emissions monitoring system may be caused by the cooler. If measures to prevent SO2 losses are not correctly applied, this can result in false lower readings.
Recommendations
• Always be alerted if zero or negative values occur over a longer period, and perform quick plausibility checks.
• Perform a simple validation test: increase the engine load and decrease the wash water flow. If the SO2 measurement signal does not increase, the analyzer likely needs servicing.
• Minimize analyzer malfunctions by strictly following the service, maintenance and calibration intervals and procedures.
We thank DNV for permitting us to share this information with our readers.
SO2 CO2
THE REPORT | MAR 2025 | ISSUE 111 | 71
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 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
