<i>Objective</i>Odor Pollution<i>Control Investigations</i>

Huey, Norman A.; Broering, L. C.; Jutze, George A.; Gruber, Charles W.

doi:10.1080/00022470.1960.10467955

Cited by 30 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1958, 1959, and 1960 the US Public Health Service sponsored the development of an instrument and procedure for field (ambient) odour measurement through Project Grants A-58-541, A-59-541, and A-60-541. The instrument, originally manufactured by Barnebey-Chaney Company and subsequently manufactured by Barnebey Sutcliffe Corporation is known as a "Scentometer" (Huey et al, 1960).…”

Section: Field Olfactometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of field olfactometers in a controlled chamber using hydrogen sulfide as the test odorant

McGinley¹,

McGinley²

2004

Water Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A standard method for measuring and quantifying odour in the ambient air utilizes a portable odour detecting and measuring device known as a field olfactometer (US Public Health Service Project Grant A-58-541). The field olfactometer dynamically dilutes the ambient air with carbon-filtered air in distinct ratios known as "Dilutions-to-Threshold" dilution factors (D/Ts), i.e. 2, 4, 7, 15, etc. Thirteen US states and several cities in North America currently utilize field olfactometry as a key component of determining compliance to odour regulations and ordinances. A controlled environmental chamber was utilized, with hydrogen sulfide as the known test odorant. A hydrogen sulfide environment was created in this controlled chamber using an Advanced Calibration Designs, Inc. Cal2000 Hydrogen Sulfide Generator. The hydrogen sulfide concentration inside the chamber was monitored using an Arizona Instruments, Inc. Jerome Model 631 H2S Analyzer. When the environmental chamber reached a desired test concentration, test operators entered the chamber. The dilution-to-threshold odour concentration was measured using a Nasal Ranger Field Olfactometer (St Croix Sensory, Inc.) and a Barnebey Sutcliffe Corp. Scentometer. The actual hydrogen sulfide concentration was also measured at the location in the room where the operators were standing while using the two types of field olfactometers. This paper presents a correlation between dilution-to-threshold values (D/T) and hydrogen sulfide ambient concentration. For example, a D/T of 7 corresponds to ambient H2S concentrations of 5.7-15.6 microg/m3 (4-11 ppbv). During this study, no significant difference was found between results obtained using the Scentometer or the Nasal Ranger (r = 0.82). Also, no significant difference was found between results of multiple Nasal Ranger users (p = 0.309). The field olfactometers yielded hydrogen sulfide thresholds of 0.7-3.0 microg/m3 (0.5-2.0 ppbv). Laboratory olfactometry yielded comparable thresholds of 0.64-1.3 microg/m3 (0.45-0.9 ppbv). These thresholds are consistent with published values.

show abstract

Section: Field Olfactometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of field olfactometers in a controlled chamber using hydrogen sulfide as the test odorant

McGinley¹,

McGinley²

2004

Water Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The instrument, originally manufactured by Barnebey-Chaney Company and subsequently manufactured by Barnebey Sutcliffe Corporation is known as a "Scentometer" (Huey, et al, 1960).…”

Section: Dilution To Threshold Odor Measurements -Field Olfactometermentioning

confidence: 99%

Land Application Odor Control Case Study

Hamel¹,

Sulerud²,

McGinley³

2004

proc water environ fed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Western Lake Superior Sanitary District (WLSSD) operates a 40 MGD wastewater treatment plant in Duluth, MN which produces 27,000-29,000 wet tons of cake biosolids annually using a temperature phased anaerobic digestion (TPAD) process followed by dewatering with high solids centrifuges. These biosolids are spread on 1800-1900 acres of agricultural land (80-85%) and mine land reclamation sites (15-20%) annually in a year-round land application program.During the spring of 2003, WLSSD received several comments from farmers expressing that biosolids odors were upsetting neighbors surrounding land application sites. To gain a better understanding of biosolids odors in the field, WLSSD conducted a study during the summer of 2003 to document odor strength, extent and duration at 18 agricultural land application sites. The study was conducted using a Nasal Ranger field olfactometer developed by St. Croix Sensory.Biosolids odor strength at and around land application sites was influenced by a variety of factors, including distance, time, weather conditions, and application method. In order to minimize biosolids odor impacts to the people living around land application sites, WLSSD will develop an odor control and response plan based on the data collected and will continue to track the circumstances surrounding odor complaints. KEYWORDS: biosolids odor, olfactometer, land application odor INTRODUCTION BackgroundWLSSD operates a 40 MGD wastewater treatment plant receiving 50% industrial and 50% domestic wastewater. The primary industrial contributor is a kraft paper mill. The treatment process train consists of screening, grit removal, and pure oxygen activated sludge. After clarification, the clean water is filtered and discharged to the St. Louis River Bay. The settled activated sludge is thickened with dissolved air flotation, digested using a temperature phased anaerobic digestion (TPAD) process, and dewatered with high solids centrifuges.

show abstract

“…A number of agencies specify either the use of the Scentometer 5 for measuring the odor concentration in the ambient air or the ASTM syringe dilution technique for measuring the odor concentration or odor dilution ratio of a stack type emission. The basic static syringe method is described by ASTM 6 and has been modified by others 7 ' 8 to eliminate the trial and error feature of the original method.…”

Section: Agency Enforcement Of Current Odor Control Regulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Odor Control Regulations: Guidelines and Considerations

Prokop¹

1978

Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The TT-4 Committee developed a position paper on odor control regulations. Present odor regulatory approaches are considered generally to be unsatisfactory. There are two basic needs: 1. develop sound administrative procedures for establishing the existence of a community odor nuisance, and 2. obtain reliable odor sensory data that can be related to community acceptance or annoyance of a particular odor. Specific issues regarding administrative procedures for odor regulations are presented. These include establishing the validity of odor complaints and the existence of a community odor nuisance, based upon a specified number of valid complaints being received within a fixed time period. The existence of a community odor nuisance should be established before a compliance program is applied to an odor source. Technological needs for odor regulations are discussed. These include the development and testing of improved odor sensory measurement techniques, critical evaluation of atmospheric dispersion models to predict ambient odor concentration and relating ambient odors to annoyance thresholds for different communities or zoned areas. A suggested approach to odor control regulations is detailed. Specific procedures are provided for validating complaints, for establishing the existence of a community odor nuisance, for locating the alleged source (s) causing the odor problem and applying a compliance program to the source.The TT-4 Committee of APCA is primarily concerned with basic odor technology: its measurement, control, and regulation. Many of its members have contributed technical articles on odor regulations in recent years. 1 " 4 At the APCA Annual Meeting held in June 1974, a Critical Review of Regulations for the Control of Odors was conductedin cooperation with the TT-4 Committee. As a result of the discussions of this critical review, the Committee decided it would be helpful to develop a position paper on odor control regulations that would provide guidelines to agencies desiring to adopt such regulations. Initially, voluntary comments were solicited from the Committee members regarding two basic questions: 1. With the present state of the art in odor sensory measurement and other technology including odor control, what specific type of odor regulations would be the most feasible? 2. If the desired odor sensory measurement and other technology is available, what specific type of odor regulation would be the most feasible? For both questions, the respondent was asked to cite specific examples of odor sensory measurement and other technology to support the choice of odor regulations. Many diverse comments were received and a variety of issues was raised. These comments were incorporated into a first draft of the position paper which was circulated among the Committee members for additional comment. A later draft resulted from these comments. Two special meetings of the Committee were held in early 1977 to review the later draft and possibly to reach a consensus on specific issues.The total input towar...

show abstract

ObjectiveOdor PollutionControl Investigations

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of field olfactometers in a controlled chamber using hydrogen sulfide as the test odorant

Comparison of field olfactometers in a controlled chamber using hydrogen sulfide as the test odorant

Land Application Odor Control Case Study

Developing Odor Control Regulations: Guidelines and Considerations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About