Aerial Pollutant Emissions from Confinement Animal Buildings (APECAB) Funding Agency USDA-IFAFS (Initiative for Future Agricultural and Food Systems)

7/16/2002 02:27:00 AM Quality Assurance Project Plan Project: Aerial Pollutant Emissions from Confinement Animal Buildings (APECAB) Funding Agency: USDA-IFAFS (Initiative for Future Agricultural and Food Systems) Larry D Jacobson, Overall Project Manager, University of Minnesota Albert J Heber, Technical Director and QA Manager, Purdue University Gerald R Baughman, North Carolina State University Steven J Hoff, Iowa State University John M Sweeten, Texas A&M University Yuanhui Zhang, University of Illinois Quality Assurance Project Plan for Air Sampling & Measurement Methodology for Confined Animal Housing Systems (APECAB) (A Six-State Emission Measurement Project) Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1146 July 15, 2002 APPROVALS EPA Project Advisor: Bruce Harris _ Date EPA Project Advisor: Cary Secrest _ Date: EPA QA Advisor: Don Olson _ Date: Principal Author: A.J Heber, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1146 Table of Contents Project Management 1.1 Project/Task Organization and Schedule 1.1.1 Personnel and Agencies Involved 1.1.2 Personnel Responsibilities/Project Organization 1.1.3 Project Schedule .6 1.2 Problem Definition/Background .9 1.3 Project/Task Description 1.3.1 Project Objectives 1.3.2 Project Description 1.4 Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data .10 1.5 Special Training/Certification .11 1.6 Documents and Records .11 Measurement Data Acquisition 12 2.1 Experimental Design 12 2.1.1 Gas Concentration Sampling and Measurement 13 2.1.2 PM10 Sampling 14 2.1.3 Temperature and Relative Humidity Measurement 15 2.1.4 Pressure Measurement 15 2.1.5 Ventilation Fan Monitoring 16 2.2 Sampling Methods 17 2.3 Sample Handling and Custody .17 2.4 Analytical Methods 18 2.5 Quality Control 18 2.6 Instrument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, and Maintenance 20 2.7 Instrument/Equipment Calibration and Frequency 20 2.8 Inspection/Acceptance of Supplies and Consumables 22 2.9 Data Acquisition Requirements (Non-Direct Measurement) 22 2.10 Data Management 22 Assessment/Oversight 24 3.1 Assessments and Response Actions 24 3.2 Reports to Management .25 Data Validation and Usability 25 4.1 Data Review, Verification, and Validation 25 4.2 Validation and Verification Methods 26 4.3 Reconciliation with User Requirements 26 QAPP Distribution List Richard Hegg Larry Jacobson Albert Heber Gerald Baughman Yuanhui Zhang Steven Hoff John Sweeten Cary Secrest Bruce Harris Don Olson (EPA/HQ) Indiana Producer Contact* Iowa Producer Contact* Minnesota Producer Contact* North Carolina Producer Contact* Illinois Producer Contact* Texas Producer Contact* USDA University of Minnesota Purdue University North Carolina State University University of Illinois Iowa State University Texas A&M University U.S EPA Enforcement Division U.S EPA Research Triangle Park U.S EPA OECA Indiana Producer Iowa Producer Minnesota Producer North Carolina Producer Illinois Producer Texas Producer *PI’s will distribute QAPP to producers to maintain confidentiality Project Management 1.1 Project/Task Organization and Schedule Larry Jacobson, University of Minnesota, is responsible for overall project management and for coordinating administrative logistics, including implementing sub-contracts, filing of project reports, and management of financial resources Albert Heber, Purdue University, is responsible for directing the technical aspects of the project including creating, updating, distributing and implementing the quality assurance project plan, specifying instrumentation and equipment, designing, constructing and delivering the gas sampling systems, developing and distributing the data acquisition program, and analyzing the data Each University PI is responsible for selecting test sites, for installing and operating the equipment and instrumentation, and for assuring and controlling data quality The end users of the data will be scientists, consultants, and state and federal regulators 1.1.1 Personnel and Agencies Involved Name Larry Jacobson Dick Nicolai Verlyn Johnson Phil Goodrich Affiliation University of Minnesota University of Minnesota University of Minnesota University of Minnesota David Schmidt University of Minnesota Albert Heber Purdue University Jiqin Ni Teng Lim Ping Shao Purdue University Purdue University Purdue University Yuanhui Zhang University of Illinois Matt Robert Joshua McClure University of Illinois University of Illinois Steven Hoff Iowa State University Dwaine Bundy Iowa State University David Beasley North Carolina State Univ Gerald Baughman North Carolina State Univ Jodi Pace North Carolina State University Roberto Munillo North Carolina State University Jacek Koziel Texas A&M University Bok-Haeng Baek Texas A&M University John M Sweeten Texas A&M University Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Dick Hegg Indiana Producer Iowa Producer Minnesota Producer North Carolina Producer Illinois Producer Texas Producer USDA Bruce Harris U.S EPA Res Triangle Park Cary Secrest Don Olson U.S EPA Enforcement Div U.S EPA OECA Phone 612-625-8288 612-625-3701 612-625-2720 612-6254215 612-6254562 765-4941214 765-494-1195 765-494-1195 765-4941215 217-3332693 217-333-2611 217-2446316 515-2946180 515-2941450 919-5156795 919-5156756 919-5134668 919-5156747 806-3595401 806-3595401 806-3595401 Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential 202-4016550 919-5417807 202-564-8661 202-5645558 E-mail jacob007@maroon.tc.umn.edu nicol009@tc.umn.edu Johns357@tc.umn.edu Goodrich@tc.umn.edu schmi071@tc.umn.edu heber@purdue.edu jiqin@ecn.purdue.edu limt@purdue.edu shaop@purdue.edu yhz@sugar.age.uiuc.edu m-robert@age.uiuc.edu Jwm3941@age.uiuc.edu hoffer@iastate.edu Dsbundy@iastate.edu David_beasley@ncsu.edu baughman@eos.ncsu.edu jpace@eos.ncsu.edu munilla@unity.ncsu.edu ja-koziel@tamu.edu bbaek@ag.tamu.edu j-sweeten@tamu.edu Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential Confidential rhegg@reeusda.gov harris.bruce@epa.gov secrest.cary@epamail.epa.gov olson.don@epa.gov 1.1.2 Personnel Responsibilities/Project Organization Project Leaders Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) QAPP Review/Approval Field Support Obtain Access Agreements Internal QA/QC Audits of Field Tests External Field Oversight Media Inquiries Field Data Analysis NH3 Data Reporting H2S Data Reporting PM Data Reporting Data Compilation/Final Report Final Report Review & Approval Jacobson and Heber Heber Jacobson, PIs, EPA advisors Producer collaborators PIs PIs Heber, PIs Jacobson, PIs Heber, PIs PIs PIs PIs PIs Jacobson/Heber/Hegg 1.1.3 Project Schedule (October, 2001 to September, 2004) Month Set up labs QAPP, SOP Install labs Collect data Analyze data Publish data 2001 2002 O N D J F M A M J J A S x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 2003 O N D J F M A M J J x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x A S 2004 J-S O N D x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Measurement Sites Swine Poultry Figure Locations of measurement sites Bypass pumping circuit M1 3/8” NPT 1/8” NPT P1 Gas analyzers from barns 1/4” NPT S1 1/8” NPT M2 3/8” NPT P3 F3 Sampling manifold NH3 M3 F4 1/4” NPT H2S Bag port 1/8” NPT 1/4” NPT S12 #7 (1) P2 p PS flow orifice restricting orifice 1/8” NPT Pump S13 3/8” NPT MFM: mass flow meter PS: pressure sensor CO2 2K MFM 1/8” NPT F: filter M: manifold P: pump S: solenoid CO2 10K f M6 6-way manifold 5/16”or 7.9 mm OD, 3/16”or 4.8 mm ID vinyl tubing 7/8”or 22.2 mm OD, 5/8”or 15.9 mm ID vinyl tubing 1/4”or 6.4 mm OD, 1/8”or 3.2 mm ID vinyl tubing S18 P4 from TEOMs P5 CO2 low in barns CO2 high Zero H2 S NH3 NO Calibration gases 3/8”or 9.5 mm OD, ¼”ID or 6.4 mm Teflon tubing 1/4”or 6.4 mm OD, 1/8”or 3.2 mm ID Teflon tubing 1/8”or 3.2 mm OD, 1/16”or 1.6 mm ID Teflon tubing Figure Schematic of instrument configuration Note: F, Teflon filter (also installed at all sampling locations); H2S and CO2 analyzers have internal pumps and CO2 analyzers have internal filters 1.2 Problem Definition/Background Air pollutants in livestock buildings represent a risk to the health and well-being of livestock and of workers These air pollutants may also represent a risk of pollution to the wider environment Aerial pollutants of particular interest in livestock buildings are ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and particulate matter (PM10 and TSP) Odor emitted from livestock buildings contribute to nuisance experienced in areas surrounding livestock production Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are thought to be an important greenhouse gas but vegetation provides a substantial sink and the primary reason for measurement of CO2 is for the assessment of building ventilation 1.3 Project/Task Description 1.3.1 Project Objectives The objectives of this study are to: 1.3.2 Quantify aerial pollutant emissions from confined animal buildings Provide valid baseline data on aerial emissions from typical U.S livestock and poultry buildings to regulators, producers, researchers, students, and other stakeholders Determine long-term characteristics of odor, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and particulate matter emissions from representative types of livestock and poultry buildings Study trends of ventilation rate, animal weight, humidity, temperature, and manure management on aerial pollutant emissions Project Description This emission measurement campaign at livestock and poultry buildings will be conducted collaboratively by six states including Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, North Carolina, and Texas The descriptions of the production barns and the monitoring plans for each state are described in Appendices A-F, respectively Mobile laboratories or trailers will be used by each state to collect aerial pollutant emissions from barns for six different animal (swine and poultry) types, one type per participating state Each state’s mobile lab, stationed between two identical confined animal production buildings, will house the gas sampling system (GSS), gas analyzers, environmental instrumentation, a computer, data acquisition system, controls units for TEOMS (tapered element oscillating microbalances) calibration gas cylinders, and other equipment needed for the study Each building pair will be sampled continuously for fifteen (15) months, starting in summer/fall 2002 The 15-month duration assures this project will meet the objectives of characterizing long-term emissions and to respond accurately to the need for annual emission factors from animal facilities by regulatory agencies and others Long-term measurements allow the recording of variations in emissions due to seasonal effects, animal growth cycles, and diurnal variations Aerial pollutant emissions will be measured directly at the source, e.g the exhaust Each lab will have a continuous emission measurement (CEM) system, gas analyzers, and a TEOM for 10 contaminating the pump or the sample The Vac-U-Chamber has rigid walls which will not collapse under vacuum conditions, thus eliminating possible errors All surfaces in contact with the sample are constructed of stainless steel, Teflon or Tedlar 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Place bag inside VAC-U-Chamber with the fitting on the right hand side Connect the valve on the bag to the Teflon tubing inside chamber Set pump to a flow rate of L/min Connect pump tubing to chamber vacuum valve via male quick disconnect Open the valve on the Tedlar bag two turns counterclockwise Close and latch chamber Close decompression valve Secure sample tube at sampling location Turn on pump for approximately one minute to fill the bag 1/3 full Disconnect sampling tube from sampling location Open decompression valve, latches and chamber lid Remove pump tubing from vacuum valve and attach to purge valve If not already done, turn Teflon tube to the horizontal so that it will not inhibit evacuation Detach sampling tube and cover sampling line inlet on the VAC-U-Chamber Start pump Run pump until bag is empty Reconnect pump tubing to chamber vacuum valve Close and latch chamber Close decompression valve Reattach sampling tube to sampling location Turn on pump for minutes to fill bag to approximately 2/3 of the volume Turn pump off Open VAC-U-Chamber Close the valve on the Tedlar bag completely before removing the bag 100 Request for Odor Evaluation Client Name: Site Name: Sampled By: Project # Send Report to: Sample ID # Send Invoice to: Bag # Date Sampled Time Sampled Sample Location Description 10 11 12 Chain of Custody Relinquished By: Relinquished By: Relinquished By: Received By: Received By: Received By: Date: Date: Date: 101 Time: Time: Time: SOP 12 Odor Evaluation and Intensometry Determination of Odor Concentration Odor concentrations will be determined using a dynamic dilution venturi olfactometer (AC’SCENT International, St Croix Sensory, Inc., St Paul, MN) The olfactometer uses precise airflow rates of odorous air and clean air to control the dilution of the odorous air The olfactometer is capable of creating 14 dilution ratios between and 65,500 The forced-choice ascending concentration series method will be employed Very dilute concentrations are used with the concentration increasing until the odor is perceived by 50% of the odor panelists This is considered the odor threshold value The panelists smell three different air streams, two consisting of clean air and one consisting of the odor The panelists are required to indicate electronically which stream is odorous They must guess if no odor is perceived They indicate if they identified or guessed the odorous stream as well Only a correct response that was perceived and not guessed is considered a “true” response The strength of an odor sample is measured by determining the number of dilutions required to reach the odor detection threshold (ODT) The dilutions to threshold (DT) is defined as the dilution of an odor sample that cannot be distinguished from odorless air by 50% of the members of an odor panel Stated another way, DT is the number of dilutions with odor-free air required for an odor to be just detected by 50% of the odor panel or until the least definitely perceptible odor is achieved Stated still another way (Norén, 1977), DT is given as the dilution factor, expressed as a logarithm, that is needed to dilute the polluted air with fresh air so that the threshold value is reached Dilutions to threshold (DT) is assessed by diluting samples with a known amount of odor-free air and presenting the dilutions to a panel of human subjects using an olfactometer, a dilution apparatus Thus, the mixture at the odor detection threshold is a barely detectable odor The number of times a sample has to be diluted to reach the odor detection threshold is a measure of the odor strength The DT increases with greater odor strength because more odor-free air is needed to dilute the sample to its ODT DTs will be measured with a dynamic dilution forced-choice olfactometer (a dilution apparatus) This olfactometer (AC’SCENT International Olfactometer, St Croix Sensory, Stillwater, MN) meets the olfactometry standards in the United States (ASTM, 1991) and Europe (CEN, 1999) The odor panel consists of eight people that have been screened to determine their odor sensing ability (ASTM, 1986) The olfactometer continuously delivers a precise mixture of sample and dilution air to a panelist through a Teflon-coated presentation mask The dilution ratio of the mixture is the ratio of total diluted sample flow volume to the odor sample flow volume For example, a dilution ratio of 10,000 is achieved with cc/min of sample flow and 20 L/min of total flow Olfactometer airflow rates are calibrated prior to and after each odor evaluation session using a precision airflow calibration device (GILIBRATOR-2, Sensidyne, Clearwater, FL) Starting with an extremely high dilution ratio, a step-by-step series of ascending concentrations (step factor = 2) is presented to each panelist The olfactometer can create 14 dilution ratios, ranging from 23 to 216 A triangular forced-choice test is conducted whereby the panelist sniffs 102 three sequential sample coded gas streams at each dilution step One gas stream is randomly assigned to have the odor while the other two gas streams are odor-free The three gas streams are directed one at a time to the mask The panelist selects which of the three presentations is “different” (even if no difference is perceived) and thus contains the odor (ASTM, 1991) The panelist declares by pressing a button whether the selection is a “guess” (no perceived difference), “detection” (selection is different from the other two), or “recognition” (selection smells like something) Initial samples are so dilute that they cannot be distinguished from odor-free air Higher and higher odor concentrations (2-fold increases) are presented to the panelist until the sample is correctly detected and recognized An individual best-estimate DT estimate is calculated by taking the geometric mean of the last nondetectable dilution ratio and the first detectable dilution ratio The panel DT is calculated as the geometric mean of the individual DTs and is sometimes reported as the log DT Retrospective screening of each panelist threshold is applied to the panel DT (CEN, 1999) to remove outlying individual results (van Harreveld et al., 1999) All averages of odor concentrations and emission rates are reported as geometric means because they typically exhibit lognormal distributions (Verdoes and Ogink, 1997) The sensitivity of different dynamic olfactometers to reference odorants has varied by a factor of 10 or more in interlaboratory comparison tests Similar variance can occur within laboratories, thus citation of panel dilutions to thresholds for a reference odorant, e.g n-butanol, is strongly recommended so that results can be compared and related to current standards (Smith and Dalton, 1999; Watts, 1999) Therefore, a reference odorant, n-butanol gas (certified at a concentration around 60 ppm) is normally included in each odor session and is evaluated like the other samples, and is used to trace and archive panel sensitivity by calculating its odor detection concentration (ODC) The ODC is the concentration of a chemical at its ODT To improve repeatability, accuracy and transferability of results of olfactometry, the CEN TC264 draft standard (CEN, 1999) will require that the mean ODC for the last 20 samples of n-butanol to be somewhere between 20 and 80 ppb for each panelist and that the odor panel’s ODC for n-butanol be around 40 ppb (van Harreveld et al., 1999) An odor unit (OU) is defined as the amount of odorant(s) in 1.0 m3 of odorous gas at the panel ODT (Thièle, 1986; VDI, 1986) Even though the DT is really a dimensionless number, it is expressed as OU/m3 in order to calculate odor emission rate, thus the panel DT is an abstract measure of odor concentration The product of odor concentration and volumetric airflow (e.g from ventilation exhausts of buildings, or across land) gives the rate of odor emission in OU/s The odor emission rate can be regarded as the total odor load per unit of time leaving a particular process Odor emission values are used in atmospheric dispersion models to calculate odor nuisance distances The gross odor emission rate (OU/s) from a livestock building is the product of the ventilation airflow rate (m3/s) and the odor concentration (OU/m3) in the exhaust air Since incoming air may be odorous, the difference between ventilation inlet and outlet odor concentrations is used to calculate the net odor emission or only the odor generated in the room (Miller et al., 2001; Smith 103 and Dalton, 1999; Watts, 1999) To allow comparison with other research results, odor and gas emission rates are normalized to the number and weight of animals by dividing the total emission rate by the number of animal units (AU=500 kg live weight) (Ni et al., 2000; Oldenburg, 1990; Wathes et al., 1997) Area-specific building emission rates are determined by dividing the total emission rate by the floor area (Groop Koerkamp et al., 1998) When calculating statistical parameters for DTs, one has to take care that the data are processed in such a manner that the normal frequency distribution applies The frequency distribution for DTs for odorants is log-normal Therefore, when calculating statistical parameters, the decimal logarithms of the measured DTs shall be used To obtain a value in non-logarithmic units, the outcome can be re-converted into its antilog Olfactometer Operation The laboratory manager will operate the olfactometer using the procedure in Exhibit 6-1 Connect sample bag via a line filter (St Croix #AC1999-35004) Press [Prime/Purge] Press [Start] Enter panelist number, press [Enter] Enter starting dilution level (1-14), press [Enter] Have a panelist evaluate the sample Enter the panelist’s response: [1] Guess [2] Detect [3] Recognize [4] Allow panelist to correct an error Repeat Steps 6-7 for each successive dilution level until the panelist finishes Press [Stop] 10 Repeat Steps 4-9 until all the panelists finish 11 Disconnect the sample 12 Press the [Prime/Purge] button 13 Repeat process (Steps to 12) until all samples are evaluated 14 Calibrate airflows 15 Turn off the air system, wait 30 min, and turn off power The Data Sense files with the data will be saved often to prevent the loss of any data Hard copies of data will be stored in the laboratory Panelists Eight people will serve on the evaluation panel during each session Every attempt will be made to select a heterogeneous panel in terms of gender, socioeconomic class, etc The panelists must agree to abide by the following rules which mean they must: be free of colds or other physical conditions affecting the sense of smell, 104 not smoke or use smokeless tobacco, not chew gum; eat; or drink anything other than water for at least one hour prior to odor panel work, not eat spicy foods prior to odor panel work, be "fragrance-free", not use perfume, cologne, aftershave, or hand lotion the day of the odor evaluation session Also must not use scented shampoos, scented deodorants or wear clothes dried with scented laundry treatments on the day of the odor evaluation session not consume alcohol for at least three hours prior to panel work, drink only water during odor evaluation sessions, not discuss their odor selections and answers with other panel members, keep the odor panel work confidential, 10 not have been fasting, 11 not be pregnant, and 12 not be involved in substance abuse Determination of Odor Intensity Odor intensity is the relative perceived psychological strength of an odor that is above its detection threshold and is independent of the knowledge of the odor concentration (McGinley and McGinley, 2000) For a single chemical odorant, odor intensity increases as a power function of its concentration Intensity can only be used to describe an odor at suprathreshold concentrations or concentrations above its ODT Intensity can be assessed using either category or reference scaling Because category scale numbers not reference equivalent odorant concentrations and different category scales are used by different researchers, data cannot be compared between studies Thus, it is preferred to use reference odorant concentrations as a referencing scale to improve reproducibility and to allow direct comparisons between research studies (Harssema, 1991) Intensity using referencing scales is assessed by either dynamic or static scale methods (ASTM, 1999) The dynamic scale method utilizes a special olfactometer that presents a series of specific concentrations of a reference odorant (e.g n-butanol) in a continuous flow of air to each panelist The static scale method utilizes a set of bottles with increasing concentrations of a reference odorant in water We currently use the static scale and an n-butanol reference scale The scales used with the dynamic and static scale methods are referred to as the Dynamic Odor Intensity Referencing Scale and the Static Odor Intensity Referencing Scale, respectively The Dynamic Odor Intensity Referencing Scale is based on the ppm of n-butanol in air (BIA) whereas the Static Odor Intensity Referencing Scale is based on the ppm of n-butanol in water (BIW) The observed intensity values, either the scale number or the equivalent butanol concentration, are used along with other data in the interpretation of odor dispersion models Field odor inspectors, monitors, plant operators and citizens commonly use the static scale referencing method The static scale method is used with five concentrations of n-butanol in water (table 1) to assure a geometric interval (3X progression) between each value Word descriptors assigned to these concentrations are: no odor, very faint, faint, moderate, strong, and 105 very strong After familiarizing themselves with the various dilutions of n-butanol, the odor panel judges the intensity of a sample by objectively matching it to the intensities they sense from the n-butanol dilutions in water (ASTM, 1999) A small glass funnel is used to present the odorous mixture from the sample bag to the panelist while the bag is manually compressed The intensity is reported in ppm equivalent to n-butanol in water (ASTM, 1999) or BIW Odor intensity grows as a power function of the stimulus odor (Stevens, 1960) and follows the equation: BIW = kCn where BIW is the odor intensity (equivalent ppm of n-butanol in water), C is the mass concentration of the odorant in ppm, and k and n are constants that are different for every odorant The odor intensity can be transformed as follows: log BIW = log k + n log C Table Concentrations of n-butanol in water BIW = 83.33x100.477 I = 83.33e1.098 I Reference n-butanol in water n-butanol in air Odor intensity categories scale #, I BIW (ppm) log BIW BIA (ppm) Strength Annoyance 0 0.00 No odor Not annoying 250 2.40 24 Very faint Not annoying 750 2.88 72 Faint A little annoying 2250 3.35 216 Moderate Annoying 6750 3.83 649 Strong Very annoying 20250 4.31 1948 Very strong Extremely annoying The category estimation technique is sometimes used to measure intensity (Misselbrook et al., 1993) Panelists give their perception of intensity according to the following scale: No odor Very faint odor Faint odor Distinct odor Strong odor Very strong odor Extremely strong odor Generally, data generated from category scales are not of equal geometric intervals (Cain and Moskowitz, 1974), interpretation of the scales varies between individuals, and panelists tend to distort the intervals during an odor evaluation session (Nicolai et al., 2000) Thus, geometric means obtained from category scales should be used with great caution 106 Procedure at Purdue Panelists assess intensity of a sample by objectively matching it to one of a series of n-butanol solutions in water contained in 120-mL wide-necked bottles This procedure follows the reference scale method (ASTM, 1992) Reference scale solutions are prepared prior to each session using AR-grade n-butanol (Mallinckrodt Baker, Paris, Kentucky, USA), and odor-free deionized water, with concentrations ranging from 250 to 20,250 ppm in geometric series with a factor of Sample air is manually compressed, forcing the sample to flow through a Teflon PTFE tube to a glass funnel (6 cm face diameter) Panelists are instructed to sniff the unknown air sample from the glass funnel and then to sniff the reference solutions beginning with the weakest end of the scale, and to match the unknown to the scale, ignoring differences in odor quality Panelists are trained to shake reference solutions gently before sniffing them and to recheck the unknown against the reference scale any number of times Odor intensity is reported as concentration (ppm) of n-butanol in water (BIW) Intensity values are geometric means of panel members’ ratings Persistence The relationship between dilutions to threshold and intensity is important and has several applications It is used to verify odor dispersion models and to evaluate faint odors whose detection threshold is less than the measuring capability of an olfactometer The Weber-Fechner Law is more appropriate for predicting intensity from concentration when using category scales whereas the Steven’s Law is more appropriate for ratio scaling or reference scaling (Wagenaar, 1975) Sample Evaluation Dilutions to Threshold: The procedure to measure dilutions to threshold is given in Exhibit 6-1 Persistence: Persistence or the slope of the intensity vs threshold curve will be made possible by intensity rankings by each panelist at one additional dilution above the odor detection 107 Procedure to Determine Odor Threshold Each panelist will follow these steps when analyzing a sample: Position the air stream selection dial Wait for the beginning signal of the panel leader This is shown by a green light Place mask over nose, but not touching face (upper lip touches the mask) Press sample activation button Sniff first air stream from the mask Rotate selection dial 1/3 turn Press sample activation button Sniff second air stream from the mask Rotate selection dial 1/3 turn 10 Press sample activation button 11 Sniff third air stream from the mask 12 Review any of the air streams if necessary 13 Select the air stream that contains odor by rotating the dial 14 Press one of the buttons: [Guess] [Detect] [Recognize] 15 Repeat 2-7 if panel leader asks you to evaluate the next level 108 SOP 13 Gravimetric TSP samplers Location Sampling location: Upstream of the exhaust fan, 2-3 fan diameters away from the fan or at a distance having an air velocity U < 0.5 m/s Sampling points: Three points in vertical array, one at the height of fan center, and one each at the top and bottom fan edges Equipment Sampling rate at each point: Q = 20 l/min Flow control: recommend using critical flow venturi controller One pump for three sampling locations; Otherwise individual mass flow controller or other acceptable flow controller Filter specs: 90-124 mm Borosilicate glass filters (probably Pall-Gelman filters) Filter holders: reusable filter holders with removable caps that can be used for transporting and to minimize dust mass loss during handling Pump specification: 60 l/min (3x20 l/min) at up to 20 kPa pressure Procedures: Pre-dry (or equilibrate) the filters for at least 24 hrs, weigh the filters three times and use the average (discuss the availability of facilities with the group) Place and store the filter in a filter holder with a sealed cap; Install the filter holder assembly at the proper sampling point, each filter will face up and tilted away from the fans at a ??? angle and remove the cap Start the air pump and record the starting time Recommend collecting weekly samples to allow sufficient mass for accurate gravimetric analysis More frequent (and possibly less frequent) filter changes may be required depending on the dust concentrations at each site At the end of sampling period, replace the cap and remove the filter holder assembly Dry (or equilibrate) the exposed filters for at least 24 hrs, then weigh the samples again Data analysis – TSP concentration QA/QC ?% Blanks: precondition, weigh, place in filter holder with cap, remove, recondition, and reweigh ?% Field blanks: Go through the same process as the other filters, including placing on the sampler and removing the cap The cap is then replaced and treated as an exposed filter 109 SOP 14 Particle size distribution Instrumentation: TSI Aerodynamic Particle Sizer 3320: 0.5 - 20 m TSI Dynamic Particle Sizer: 0.3 - 200 m Cascade Impactor: 0.4 – 10 m Climet Laser Particle Counter: 0.3 – 10> m ? Coulter Multisizer: 0.6 – 20 m (up to 120 m) Procedure: All samplers will be located as close together and around the location discussed for the filter sampling above All inlet heights will be approximately the same Filter samples will be handled similarly to above Samples requiring filters (impactor and Coulter) will be run continuously for a period of time (>8 hrs) sufficient to get accurate gravimetric results The continuous counting instruments will collect samples periodically during the same time period At least two time periods will be tested at each location, one at night and one during the day Conversion to necessary standard units (e.g., aerodynamic diameter) and corrections will be made as required for each instrument Site Visits: Site visits will be scheduled with each site coordinator One visit per site, two days on-site measurements for each visit QA/QC ?% Blanks will be collected similar to the filter blanks discussed previously Appropriate calibration of the equipment will be conducted prior to the beginning of measurement, as recommended by the manufacturers Appropriate cleaning and maintenance of the equipment will be done as necessary, as recommended by the manufacturers 110 SOP 15 Methane and NMOC analyzer SOP 17 Instrument shelter Instrument Placement Instrument racks should be constructed of steel and be able to accept sliding trays or rails Open racks help to keep instrument temperature down and allow air to circulate through easily Shelter Maintenance The following should be conducted on a regular basis:        Floor cleaning Air conditioner cleaning and testing AC filter replacement Supply air filter replacement General cleaning Weed abatement Roof inspection and repair Site Log A site log should be kept at the instrument shelter Whereas technical details belong in the instrument logs, the site log is a chronology of events that occur at the monitoring site and a narrative of problems and solutions to problems Items in this log should include:       Date, time and initials of person(s) who have arrived at the site Brief description of weather Brief description of exterior of site, e.g anything unusual Brief description of the barns, e.g anything unusual, production status Description of work accomplished at the site Detailed information about the instruments needed for repairs or troubleshooting Routine Operations A table of routine operations should be prepared These are duties that must be performed in order to operating a monitoring site most efficiently Each item should have a frequency associated with it   Check exterior Weekly Leak tests Weekly 111    Calibrate gas analyzers Weekly Inspect tubing Monthly Change filters Biweekly Environmental Control The shelter should be ventilated with outside air The outside air of 50 to 300 cfm must flow through a dust filter to remove particulate matter and an activated carbon filter to remove odor and gases before it enters the shelter The blower forcing air through these filters will also create a positive pressure in the shelter with respect to the air outside the shelter, thus preventing contaminated air from entering the shelter via cracks The electric-powered air conditioner and heater must be able to maintain the shelter temperature within the highest minimum temperature and the lowest maximum temperature of the instruments The temperature of the shelter must be kept above the dew point of the air being sampled This will prevent condensation in the gas sampling system Cool air from the air conditioner will be directed away from unheated gas sampling lines The shelter temperature must be monitored on a 24-h basis and recorded along with the other measurement variables Electrical Service The environmental shelter must have sufficient electric power for the instruments in the shelter It should be sufficiently grounded for proper operation of all equipment The neutral to earth voltage should be tested during monitoring to determine whether it meets the requirements of the electric code If not, corrective actions will be taken Other Services A small refrigerator to store lunches, samples and certain supplies is recommended A microwave for heating refreshments and a lavatory for washing hands are desirable Worker comfort is important for assuring quality work at the site 112 SOP 17 Weather Station Set-Up and Operation Introduction This SOP describes the procedures to follow for the continuous determination of weather patterns surrounding a monitored housing unit This SOP describes the set-up and sensors required Equipment Needed 10m tri-bar radio tower or equivalent R.M Young Wind Sentry anemometer and vane Model 03001 or equivalent Vaisala relative humidity and temperature sensor Model HMD60YO Shielded enclosure for RH/T sensor LI-COR Model LI200X pyrometer or equivalent Procedures The standard tower height for recording wind speed and direction is 10 m (32.8 ft) The tower plus extension arm should be placed such that the anemometer and wind vane are at this height above the ground, in an obstruction-free area of 50 feet in all directions Solar and RH/T measurements should be installed at a height of approximately 1.5 m An example set-up is shown below R.M Young Wind Sentry Set Model 03001 Shielded T/RH Pyrometer (solar) Terminal Connections 113 The tower should be supported with a concrete footing of 30 inch diameter and 42 inch depth or secured with three guy-wires The wind vane must be positioned for true north using the following directional requirements (with a dead-band of no more than degrees): Wind From North East South West Degrees (or 355 to 360 with a degree dead-band) 90 180 270 All weather station data will be permanently stored at 10-minute averaged periods Wind direction data will include standard deviation of wind as per U.S Weather Bureau Standards All data will be stored with the following conventional units: Component Wind Speed Wind Direction Units m/s degrees as per convention listed above Temperature C Relative Humidity Solar % W/m2 114 ... are to: 1.3.2 Quantify aerial pollutant emissions from confined animal buildings Provide valid baseline data on aerial emissions from typical U.S livestock and poultry buildings to regulators,... QAPP SLG SOP RH TEOM TSP Aerial Pollutant Emissions from Confined Animal Buildings Bioenvironmental Systems and Simulations Lab at the University of Illinois Confined animal buildings Center-ceiling... pre- and post-weighing, and weighed using standard protocol for gravimetric analysis (Carlton and Teitz, 19??) 18 Odor, dust, manure and water samples, Table 1, will be labeled and logged on standard