This article was downloaded by: [86.154.179.

34]
On: 19 April 2015, At: 11:51
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

Estimating Minimum Stack Height A Simplified

Procedure
Yngvar Gotaas

Norwegian Institute for Air Research Lillestr0m , Norway , USA

Published online: 13 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Yngvar Gotaas (1977) Estimating Minimum Stack Height A Simplified Procedure, Journal of the Air
Pollution Control Association, 27:12, 1205-1206, DOI: 10.1080/00022470.1977.10470548
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1977.10470548

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose
of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the
authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not
be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis
shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and
other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation
to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Conclusions

The statistical study technique used

proved to be simple, powerful, and cost
effective when applied to a sensitivity
study of a large computer program. Not
only were the quantitative effects of the
ten input variables on O3 obtained, but
also, multifactor interactions were found
that would not have been obtained with

other standard techniques.

The method also allowed the formation of a polynomial equation that
modeled the emission portion of the
DEPICT program.
It was determined that the DEPICT
program is insensitive to gas turbines
emissions up to 1250 Mw. The CARB
has since verified this finding and is
taking remedial action.

References
1. A. J. Ranzieri and J. W. Tilden, "An Application of DEPICT (Detailed Examination of Pollution Impact in Complex
Terrain . . . ) , " State of California Air Resources Board, Research Division, Air
Quality Modeling Section, undated draft
report, 1977.
2. C. Chatfield, Statistics for Technology,
Chapman and Hall, London, 1975.

Estimating Minimum Stack Height

A Simplified Procedure

Downloaded by [86.154.179.34] at 11:51 19 April 2015

Yngvar Gotaas
Norwegian Institute for Air Research
Lillestr0m, Norway

In many practical problems it is desirable to have a simple

formula to estimate the minimum stack heights required to
meet regulations of maximum ground level concentrations.
In what follows one such formula is derived, which shows directly the influences of the various parameters involved.
According to the Gaussian dispersion formulae, the maximum ground level concentration, C, in a Cartesian coordinate
system with the source at (0,0, H) and the wind blowing along
the x -axis, is:
C
Tr<TyGzU

exp (-#2/2<rz2)

(1)

Here Q is the source strength and <ry and az the standard deviations of the concentration distributions in the horizontal
and vertical crosswind direction. H is the effective plume
height and u is the mean wind speed.
oy and az may be assumed to be power functions of x, i.e.
(Ty = axP and az = bx?, where a, b, p, and q are constants.
An expression for the maximum ground level concentration,
Cm, is then easily obtained by first differentiating Eq. (1) with
respect to x. This gives, for dC/dx = 0

which gives:
_ (p q)A
(5)
~
qH
Estimation of several plume rise models suggests, that the
above expression can be further simplified by expressing the
effective stack height as:
Uc

H-hs
u{H -hs)

= A/u
=A

where hs is the physical stack height. The constant A numerically equals the plume rise in a one m/s wind and is a
function of the gas exit and buoyancy, as well as of the thermal
stability of the air. At the distance of interest, the plume has
for all practical purposes reached its final height and A need
not be considered as dependent on x. different formulae of (H
hs)/u have been summarized by Pasquill.4
With A a constant and p = q the very simple relationship
results:
Hc = 2hq and us =

Xm =

q)

where xm is the distance at which the maximum ground level

concentration occurs. Eq. (1) then gives:
C

(3)

Kuab

(6)

(7)

h
where Hc is the corresponding critical plume height.
The required physical stack height in terms of the maximum allowable ground level concentration, Cm, is then:
Q
2ireACm a

(8)

Published literature gives various values of p and q.u3

According to Cramer1 and Singer2 they are equal, regardless
of the thermal stability, and according to Klug3 they are almost equal for near neutral stability conditions. The assumption of p = q reduces Eq. (3) to:

In near neutral stability conditions, normally assumed in

simple stack height estimations, the ratio b/a is close to 0.7.
When Q has the units of kg /i" 1 and Cm is in mg m - 3

(
(4)
b \2b
nuabe
\2bV
For the critical mean wind speed, uc, at which the maximum
ground level concentration occurs, dCm/du = 0,

where hs is in meters.
Eq. (9) allows the simple calculation of the minimum
physical stack height in terms of Cm and parameters that can
be estimated directly. It gives the additional advantage that

December 1977

Volume 27, No. 12

(9)

1205

APCA NOTE-BOOK

the wind speed does not need to be specified at all. For large
heat content buoyancy dominates, and is therefore the only
effect considered in some of the formulae.

3. W. Klug, "Ein Verfahren zur Bestimmung der Ausbreitungsbedingungen aus synoptischen Beobachtungen," Staub 29: 143
(1969).
4. F. Pasquill, Atmospheric Diffusion, 2nd ed., Halsted Press, John
Wiley & Sons, London, 1974. pp. 240-251.

References

Downloaded by [86.154.179.34] at 11:51 19 April 2015

1. H. E. Cramer, "Engineering estimates of atmospheric dispersal

capacity," Amer. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 20:183 (1959).
2. M. E. Smith and I. A. Singer, "An improved method of estimating
concentrations and related phenomena from a point source emission," J. Appl. Meteorol. 5:631 (1966).

Mr. Gotaas is a senior scientist with the Norwegian Institute for Air Research, P.O. Box 130, 2001 Lillestr0m, Norway.

Automatic Control System for

Fabric Filter Bag Cleaning

Harry E. Hoon
Flex-Kleen Corporation
Division of Research-Cottrell, Inc.

The first installation of an advanced system for control of

fabric filter bag cleaning has been made in Canada on a lime
kiln baghouse cleaned by reverse air. The concept, however,
is applicable to filters employing any cleaning method, and
to any application for baghouses of substantial size including
chemical processes, ferrous and nonferrous metals processes,
kilns, and fly ash collection from utility and industrial boilers.
Automatic bag cleaning is intended to initiate removal of
collected dust from bags before it builds to a thickness that
would cause excessive, pressure drop between the dusty and
clean sides of the system. It is desirable to clean as infrequently as is practicalonly when the maximum allowable
pressure drop has been reachedbecause the major factor in
fabric wear and therefore, bag life, is the action that shakes
or blows dust free or otherwise dislodges it.
When the cleaning cycle is initiated by a timer, its setting
is determined by calculation or measurement of the rate of
dust accumulation. Since the rate is not likely to be constant,
this method only approximates the ideal period between
cleaning cycles. A more sophisticated control approach utilizes
a sensor to measure pressure drop across the collector, and
only initiates cleaning when this average of the drop across
individual bags, reaches a predetermined limit.
In either system, once the cleaning cycle has been initiated
it proceeds to clean all modules or compartments of the collector whether they all need it or not. Since the rate of dust
accumulation is not necessarily uniform throughout a large
collector this means that some bags are cleaned before they
need it. The greater the number of bags under such automatic
control the greater the degree of unnecessary bag cleaning will
be.
1206

Now, automatic bag cleaning control has been carried a step

further in the installation at Steetley of Canada (Holdings)
Limited, a major producer of dolomitic lime and basic
refractories. The cleaning cycle is not triggered by pressure
drop across the entire collector, but across a single compartment or module, and no module is cleaned unless the sensor
determines that it needs it. In the Steetley installation there
are 360 bags per module and a total of ten modules. Thus to
whatever extent there is cleaning of bags that do not need it,
it is due to whatever inequality of accumulation occurs between 360 bags in the space of one module, rather than between 3600 bags across the entire installation.
The control continuously scans an installation's modules
in sequence, spending five seconds checking pressure drop
across each one before moving on. When a module is found to
have reached the specified pressure drop the cleaning cycle
is initiated for that module only, while scanning proceeds.
When another module is found that needs cleaning it is put
on "hold" until the cycle already in progress has ended. Then
cleaning begins for the module that was on hold, and the
scanner moves on to look for the next candidate.
The accompanying figure describes the cycle for a large,
36-module reverse-air installation. Times for Steps 2,4, and
6 are adjustable to suit field conditions; the values given are
maximum for this particular installation. Step 5 begins when
a pressure sensor in the reverse air circuit signals that resistance to reverse air flow has dropped to a selected level, typically 1 psi, or after a time delay relay has timed out at, typically, 30 secondswhichever occurs first.
The control can be programmed so that if the timer, rather
than achievement of low pressure drop, has initiated Step 5,
Steps 3,4, and 5 will automatically repeat once or twice more.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association