The Effective Collection of Fly Ash At Pulverized Coal-Fired Plants

Electrostatic Precipitation Technology: A Different Viewpoint

“…Katz 47 stated that high sulfur coals could also be associated with poor collection efficiency of fly ash, attributing this to a dust resistivity rendered so low by sulfur trioxide and water absorption that reentrainment of particles was significant. The same phenomenon has since been reported by Oglesby,48 and by Dismukes,49 with some quantitative evidence.…”

“Hot” versus “Enlarged” Electrostatic Precipitation of Fly Ash: A Cost-Effectiveness Study

“…8 Factors which are repeatedly emphasized as being important in the determination of w and hence in explaining precipitator collection efficiency are: electrical power input to the precipitator; 8 ' 10 the particle size distribution of the particles entering the precipitator; 9 ' 10 the sulfur-to-ash ratio of the coal burned in the associated boiler. 12 The sulfur-toash ratio rather than sulfur alone is designated since a number of researchers have indicated that sulfur trioxide conditioning of fly ash surface is the important phenomenon, 1 ' 4 -11 and this phenomenon depends upon both sulfur content (a determinant of sulfur trioxide availability) and ash content (a determinant of ash surface to be conditioned).…”

Experience with Electrostatic Fly-Ash Collection Equipment Serving Steam-Electric Generating Plants

“…Since sulfur content of the fuel burned in the Widows Creek and Colbert boilers ranges from 2.5 -3.5% and the Kingston collectors performed well when burning coal with this sulfur content, it seemed unlikely that sulfur could contribute to the problem. However, Katz 2 indicates that a combination of high sulfur coal and relatively low exit gas temperature could produce subnormal precipitator performance. Exit gas temperatures at Widows Creek and Colbert were some 50°F lower than at Kingston, so experience with collectors at Widows Creek and Colbert did resemble the situation described by Katz.…”