Transcript Recent Observations on the Performance of Optical Gas Imaging Cameras for Visualizing Fugitive Hydrocarbon Gas Emissions Standards Certification Education & Training Publishing Conferences & Exhibits Tracey Footer, ERG Jason DeWees, EPA.

Recent Observations on the
Performance of Optical Gas
Imaging Cameras for
Visualizing Fugitive
Hydrocarbon Gas Emissions
Standards
Certification
Education & Training
Publishing
Conferences & Exhibits
Tracey Footer, ERG
Jason DeWees, EPA
Presenter
• Tracey Footer is an Environmental Scientist and Project Manager at
Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) who specializes in atmospheric
chemistry and measurements/monitoring technology applications,
evaluations, and development. She completed her B.S. at Johnson
State College in Environmental Science: Integrated Sciences in
2004 and her M.Sc. at the University of New Hampshire in Earth
Science: Geochemical Systems Specialization in 2010.
2
Overview
•
•
•
•
Background
Technology
Evaluations
Future Plans
FLIR GF320
Opgal EyeCGas
3
Background
• Thermographic cameras with narrow band-pass filters in
the region of 3.2 to 3.4 μm can visualize fugitive
hydrocarbon leaks.
• “That’s great! Can we use it at facility X for application Y?”
4
How OGI Cameras Work
Everything emits
IR radiation
Spectral Filter
HC gas absorbs IR radiation in
the 3.2 to 3.4 μm region
5
High Sensitivity/Enhanced Modes
Normal Mode
High Sensitivity/Enhanced Mode
6
Questions Regarding LDAR Applications
• Do cameras from different manufacturers vary in LDAR
survey performance?
• Is there a consistent limit of detection?
• Does the camera quantify emissions?
• Does the camera operate in all weather conditions?
• What type and how much training is necessary before
being proficient in LDAR OGI surveys?
• How much faster is an OGI LDAR survey?
7
Technology Evaluations Performed to Date
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Feasibility Study
Spectral Window Test
Gas Sensitivity Study
Repeat Feasibility Study w/ 2 Different Models
Wind Shear Sensitivity
Reynolds Number Effects
Visual Plume Intensity
Operator Influence
8
Feasibility Study Setup
9
Feasibility Study
FLIR GF320 study with 50/50 propane+butane mixture
Background ~ 7°C
ΔT ~15°C
Background ~ 21°C
ΔT ~3°C
10
Spectral Window and Gas Sensitivity Setup
11
Spectral Window Test:
Intra-model Comparison
Normalized Values for All Spectral Curves
1.0
Normalized Value of Maximum Apparent Temperature
0.9
44401313
44400816
44400816 QA
0.8
44400966
44400966 QA
0.7
44401085
44401085 QA
44401204
0.6
44401204 QA
44401135
0.5
44401135 QA
44400819
44400819 QA
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
Wavelength (μm)
Spectral window curves for 7 FLIR GF320 cameras using a monochromator
Opgal EyeCGas and FLIR GasFindIR were also tested, data not shown
12
Gas Sensitivity Study:
Intra-model Comparison
1% Propane
Normalized Temperature Differential (Control – Test, °C)
3.3
-1000
Propane Response Curve
2.8
2.3
1.8
1.3
All Cameras
0.8
Average
Poly. ( Average)
0.3
-0.2
1000
3000
5000
7000
9000
11000
Concentration (ppmV)
13
Gas Sensitivity Study:
Detection Capability
Compound
Normalized to Propane
1,3-butadiene
0.26
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene
0.95
Acetic Acid
0.08
Acetaldehyde
0.12
Acetone
0.21
Acetylene
0.01
Benzene
0.36
Butane
1.21
Butene
0.70
Carbon tetrachloride
0.00
ETBE
1.35
Ethylbenzene
0.84
Ethylene
0.17
Formaldehyde
0.18
Heptane
1.80
Hexane
1.61
Isoprene
0.45
MEK
0.47
Methane
0.30
Methanol
0.44
Methyl chloride
0.15
Methylene chloride
0.03
MTBE
1.25
m-Xylene
0.76
Octane
2.00
o-Xylene
0.76
Pentane
1.43
Pentene
0.68
Propane
1.00
Propene
0.42
p-Xylene
0.80
Styrene
0.42
Toluene
0.56
Vinyl chloride
0.03
Calculated OGI response factors normalized to Propane from
Gas Sensitivity Studies
OGI Camera Window
Propane
Methane
14
Repeat Feasibility w/ 2 Camera Models
Images of Leaks @ 127 g/hr
FLIR GF320
Opgal EyeCGas
15
Wind Shear Sensitivity
Mass Rate
m/s
g/hr
0
1
2
5
9
12
127
D
D
D
HSM
ND
ND
“D”/Green = Detect, “HSM”/Yellow = Special Mode, “ND”/Red = Non-detect
1m/s
2m/s
5 m/s
9 m/s
1 m/s = 2.2 mph
For this mass rate, lose detection at ~15 mph
127 g/hr = 1.23 tons per year
16
Reynolds Number Effects
2"
1"
1/2"
1/4"
1/8"
25 g/hr
3-1A
3-2A
3-3A
3-4A
3-5A
50g/hr
3-1B
3-2B
3-3B
3-4B
3-5B
75g/hr
3-1C
3-2C
3-3C
3-4C
3-5C
100g/hr
3-1D
3-2D
3-3D
3-4D
3-5D
125g/hr
3-1E
3-2E
3-3E
3-4E
3-5E
150 g/hr
3-1F
3-2F
3-3F
3-4F
3-5F
175 g/hr
3-1G
3-2G
3-3G
3-4G
3-5G
200g/hr
3-1H
3-2H
3-3H
3-4H
3-5H
2”
Images of Leaks @ 200 g/hr
1/2”
1/8”
Green=Detect, Yellow=Special Mode, Red=Non Detect
200 g/hr = 1.93 tons per year
17
Reynolds Number Effects
2"
1"
1/2"
1/4"
1/8"
25 g/hr
3-1A
3-2A
3-3A
3-4A
3-5A
50g/hr
3-1B
3-2B
3-3B
3-4B
3-5B
75g/hr
3-1C
3-2C
3-3C
3-4C
3-5C
100g/hr
3-1D
3-2D
3-3D
3-4D
3-5D
125g/hr
3-1E
3-2E
3-3E
3-4E
3-5E
150 g/hr
3-1F
3-2F
3-3F
3-4F
3-5F
175 g/hr
3-1G
3-2G
3-3G
3-4G
3-5G
200g/hr
3-1H
3-2H
3-3H
3-4H
3-5H
2”
Images of Leaks @ 200 g/hr
1/2”
1/8”
Green=Detect, Yellow=Special Mode, Red=Non Detect
200 g/hr = 1.93 tons per year
18
Visual Plume Intensity:
By Apparent Temperature in °C
19
Visual Plume Intensity:
By Apparent Temperature in °C
Or one 20,000 ppm plume may look 7 times bigger at a different angle
20
Operator Influence
Operator/Camera
Leak Type
A/1 B/1 C/1 C/2 D/1 D/2 E/1 E/2 F/2 G/2 H/1
Y
N
N
-
Y
-
Y
-
-
-
-
Flange - Gasket Y
N
N
-
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Hatch
Flange Attachment
N
Y
N
N
Y
-
Y
-
-
-
-
Pop-off
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Stem Valve
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
QD - Deform
Y
Y
-
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
QD - Gasket
Y
N
-
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Pump
Y
Y
Y
-
N
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
N
1 = FLIR GF320, 2 = Opgal EyeCGas
Green = Leak was detected at least 1 time, Red = Leak was
not detected, Gray = Not Tested
21
Future Plans
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
More ΔT research
Further characterize wind effects
Repeat Reynolds study with larger background
Empirically verify gas response factors
Repeat feasibility study with recognizable hot source
Sky background conditions research
Explore further operator influence studies
Systems check preparatory procedure/annual verification
22
Thank You!
Any Questions?
Tracey Footer
Environmental Scientist
Helping
preserve
improve
ensure
plan
achieve
601 Keystone Park Drive, Suite 700
Morrisville, NC 27560
Office:
Fax:
919-468-7952
919-468-7803
[email protected]
www.erg.com
23