No-fire level

No-Fire Level. The max level of electric energy input that will in no case, within a specified time, initiate an expl-actuated device Ref K.O. Brauer, Handbook of Pyrotechnics , Chemical Publishing Co, NY (1974), 387... 

Refs 1) J.C. Kenyon, "No-Fire Level Test of TADM Electro-Explosive Devices , Ordnance Mission Data Rept (1962), White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico (DA Project 512-15-009) 2) C.T. Davey, "FILUP,... 

NAVORD Rept 6628 (1959), Evaluation of Explosive Switches MK66 Mod O, and Mk 67 Mod O, White Oak, Maryland 5) J.C.Kenyon, Ordnance Mission Data Rept 4, DA Project 512-1 5-009 (1962), No- Fire Level Test of TADM Electro-Explosive Devices, White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico 6) S Odierno, Information Pertaining to Fuzes , Pamphlet, pub-lished by Picatinny Arsenal in 1964, Vol 4, pp XVA XVB 7) DuPont Blasters Hdb (1966), 94—5 (Electric Squibs)... 

No-fire level Low fire level Onset Peak... 

Some other results of KDNP investigations were summarized by Fronabarger et al. [49]. The report unfortunately does not specify the crystal form of the material. Nevertheless, the reported properties are as follows impact sensitivity by ball drop method—51 22 mJ, friction sensitivity by BAM 175 g (no-fire level) 200 g (low fire level), thermal properties by DSC at 20 °C min —small endo at 145 °C, decomposition onset 278 °C, solubility in water—moderately soluble at normal temperature. Reactivity with aluminum, stainless steel, brass, and cadmium was not observed. Output measured as an impetus is reported better than LS in a closed bomb test. 

Compound (mJ) Low fire levei/no fire level (g) Average dent (mm) ... 

Impact sensitivity ball drop (mJ) No-fire level... 

Compound Impact sensitivity Bali drop (ml) Friction sensitivity Small BAM (g) No-fire level Low fire level Onset DSC, 20 °C min- (°C)... 

The effect of fire exposure is predictable for pressure vessels, such as, spheres, spheroids or horizontal vessels. If no fire protection is provided or is not adequate or inoperative, the vessel will probably fail catastrophically in a prolonged fire. Vessel failure typically results from excessive metal temperature weakening the tank wall above the liquid level of its contents. This weakening can occur within a few minutes if the initial liquid level is significantly belowthe maximum flame height and the flames impinge on the shell. 

The control of NO from stationary sources includes techniques of modification of the combustion stage (primary measures) and treatment of the effluent gases (secondary measures). The use oflow-temperature NO,.burners, over fire air (OFA), fiue gas recirculation, fuel reburning, staged combustion and water or steam injection are examples of primary measures they are preliminarily attempted, extensively applied and guarantee NO reduction levels of the order of 50% and more. However, they typically do not fit the most stringent emission standards so that secondary measures or flue gas treatment methods must also be applied. 

Available data indicate that some coal burning wall-fired boilers can meet EPA s presumptive NO, RACT levels by application of low NO, burners at a cost effectiveness as low as 160 per ton. The data also indicate that certain tangentially-fired utility boilers may approach a cost-effectiveness level of 1300 per ton in order to meet the EPA presumptive NO, RACT levels. 

The high temperatures in the MHD combustion system mean that no complex organic compounds should be present in the combustion products. Gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer analysis of radiant furnace slag and ESP/baghouse composite, down to the part per biUion level, confirms this behef (53). With respect to inorganic priority pollutants, except for mercury, concentrations in MHD-derived fly-ash are expected to be lower than from conventional coal-fired plants. More complete discussion of this topic can be found in References 53 and 63. 

Similar to oil-fired plants, either low NO burners, SCR, or SNCR can be appHed for NO control at PC-fired plants. Likewise, fabric filter baghouses or electrostatic precipitators can be used to capture flyash (see Airpollution controlmethods). The collection and removal of significant levels of bottom ash, unbumed matter that drops to the bottom of the furnace, is a unique challenge associated with coal-fired faciUties. Once removed, significant levels of both bottom ash and flyash may require transport for landfilling. Some beneficial reuses of this ash have been identified, such as in the manufacture of Pordand cement. 

NOj Control. NO control limitations are described in both Tide 1 and Tide 4 of the CAAA of 1990. Tide 4 requirements affect only coal-fired boilers and take effect at the same time that the boilers are impacted by CAAA SO2 requirements. As of 1996, EPA had estabHshed Tide 4 NO limits only for tangentially fired and waH-fired, dry-bottom boilers that would be impacted by Phase I of the CAAA SO2 regulations (Tide 4). Limits of 0.22 kg/10 kJ (0.5 lb/10 Btu) and 0.19 kg/10 kJ (0.45 lb/10 Btu) have been set for wall-fired and tangentially fired units, respectively. The EPA based these levels on what was achievable using low NO burners. However, plants can employ a number of different front- or back-end emissions controls, including a combination of options, to achieve these levels. EPA plans to announce Tide 4 NO requirements for 300 additional boilers by late 1996 or eady 1997. 

---